Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
If the FBI Asks, Do You Answer?
I was a student traveling in an airport when three men with FBI credentials stopped me and asked me about a foreign national I had just spoken to. I explained that he was a professor at my university whom I had happened to run into. I was running a personal server in the late ’90s when I received a call from an FBI agent regarding a fraud complaint related to my domain name. I provided the agent with the details of the DNS features I used to assure that responsible ISPs will block email using my domain name but originating from an unauthorized IP address. The agent took copious notes and I never heard any more about the matter. And then there was the time they called to ask me questions about a coworker who tried to blackmail me using baseless accusations.
While I have never been naive about the FBI, in each of these occasions, I was presented with natural law enforcement concerns and engaged the situation respectfully and constructively. I am not sure I could do that today. The sheer dishonesty of the FBI’s public conduct suggests any trust in the FBI pursuing its law enforcement mission is misplaced.
So, if the FBI asks, do you answer? Do you tell the truth? Do you dummy up? Do you lawyer up?
Published in Policing
Short of preventing a nuclear attack on America, I would tell them nothing.
Hell, if I am ever questioned about something incidental, I will assume that they are assessing me rather than seeking answers — talk to my lawyer.
Naturally, this still depends. If it’s obvious, well then, case by case.
Unless there is a drastic change of coarse the RCMP will someday come for me… My plan is not to engage, lawyer up.
This recent Powerline post speaks to your question.
I agree, but do the Ricochetti believe that that is now the pervasive reality that would color their own expectations in a personal encounter?
You make a reasonable point. Which is horrifying. But reasonable.
I’ve been interviewed before regarding people using me as a reference for security clearances.
I don’t know if I’d agree to do that anymore. The FBI has ceased to be benign to law-abiding citizens.
Keep the technical forensics support. Pink-slip the rest.
Will read later. Long time no see, I think!
For clearance questions, I would say do both of these: tell the whole truth, and support good people. You can put different levels of effort into the truth without omitting or adding to it.
If an FBI agent asks me anything – even directions to the nearest gas station – my response is, “I need to speak to my lawyer and have him present before I answer any questions you ask.” Too much chance of getting sucked into a perjury trap otherwise.
Ten years for identifying the Shell station as being on the east side, not the west side of the street. I’ll send you cookies.
If there were no reasons given for the request I wouldn’t volunteer anything. The reason for contact would likely be information already mentioned publicly or else they wouldn’t have shown up.
That said, if there were a missing person case and I had some relevant info, I’d call them. Even though I’d do this, I’d still reflexively think of Richard Jewell, yet another FBI abuse of power.
Not a word.
I wasn’t even thinking of the Jewell case. Wow. Randy Weaver, yes. Try to force an honest man to break the law so that you can blackmail him into becoming an informant. Then shoot and kill his wife who was carrying a baby in her arms. Our tax dollars at work.
I would ask them for their contact information, and that of their immediate superiors, and tell them my lawyer would be in touch. That’s all.
Trust has been completely broken. I would not trust any Federal employee, if I can help it.
Better not, or they’ll be coming for you next!
Oh, I am completely on their radar, already. I even have a fan or two, here and there.
Remind me to tell you of my experience looking at the Pentagon through binoculars, and seeing a guy looking at me through binoculars. He had a well-armed friend. Now I just call those guys my personal sniper team.
Yeah, Mike Flynn could give a class on that…
I’ve been on the wrong end of a federal barrel myself. Memorable. And all perfectly correct and justified, if a little enthusiastic.
If they called, I’d hang up. If they came to my door for any reason I’d tell them they’re trespassing and they need to get off my property before I call a state trooper on them.
For workplace purposes: certainly. I don’t think that is likely all things considered, as I do not work with FBI related stuff, but still I would be expected to answer.
Outside of work, “I’ll get back to you after consulting with a lawyer.”
I am curious – could an agent ask me a questions about something random without identifying himself as a Fed, then prosecute me for issuing a false statement? That whole law on false statements needs to be torched.
I listened to Mike Lindell describe his encounter with the FBI. I would not say a word, other than I will call my lawyer.
One problem is, they probably wouldn’t let you hold onto the phone until then.
At this point all law enforcement and military has to be considered as hostile to conservatives. Answer no questions, limit any cooperation as much as possible.
It would also be smart to register as Democrat
Tain’t funny McGee.
But see an earlier Gestapo raid where they tricked the victim into unlocking his strongly encrypted phone by letting him make the call to his lawyer, then grabbing the phone before he could lock it again.
I think there are a number of different considerations here. If the FBI agent wanting to speak to you is from DC, I would be reluctant to speak to him or her regardless of the reason.
On the other hand, I don’t see the FBI agents outside DC as being as tainted.
If I were to decide to speak to the agent, I would insist that the conversation be recorded. The FBI hates that. If they say that I may not record the conversation, I don’t speak to them.
If it is obvious that I am not a target of the investigation (although they are good at concealing that), I have a natural inclination to want to help them catch actual criminals. That said, the safest course of action is due on the side of caution and declined to speak. Of course, there are times when not speaking could get you into more trouble than speaking. I’m thinking about the OP’s conversation with the FBI about the false ISP problem. If @Sisyphus had not spoken to the FBI at that time, @Sisyphus probably would have received subpoena and suffered far more inconvenience. Sometimes, it is a tough choice. The default, though, is maintain one’s silence and privacy.
People need to carry a throw-down cell phone. A second line is cheap. Maybe under a different name. Think of it as insurance.