The FBI's Departure from the Mission of Law Enforcement

 1.  You had the experience yesterday of an "autonomous call" being made from your cell phone.

Answer:  Yes, I did.

2.  Can you describe this experience, please?

Answer:  I simply picked up my cell phone, and attempted to access the passcode screensaver.  At that point, an autonomous call was made without my participation or consent.  The line was immediately connected to a prerecorded voice talking about auto insurance.

3.  Were you able to simply hang up?

Answer:  No, the hangup function appeared to have been disabled.  I was able to power off my phone, however.

4.  And how long did it take you to go through that entire sequence?

Answer:  Seven seconds.

5.  Did you immediately fear the manner in which the FBI could utilize an autonomous call for the purposes of falsified law enforcement reporting?

Answer:  Yes.  The disastrous potential present in a third party's ability to direct calls from one's own cell phone was immediately clear to me.  

But I think that this clarifies the fact that Pegasus and similar software allow total control of a "target's" cell phone.  At that point, falsified law enforcement reporting becomes infinitely easier for the far right.  When a "target" is sleeping, a perpetrator may be texting in her stead.  When a "target" is reading a book, a perpetrator may be directing calls from her cell phone, or sending fake messages or emails from her computer.

6.  Is a whistleblower of FBI malfeasance likely to receive special attention from those attempting to fake her communications?

Answer:  It's inevitable, unfortunately.  The FBI is going to utilize all the tools at its disposal to attempt to malign and discredit whistleblowers, and beyond this, to charge them of crimes of which they have no knowledge whatsoever.

This really reflects the machine of totalitarianism, which seeks to scapegoat a blameless segment of the population in order to portray itself as worthy of the control it is exerting over the law-abiding electorate.

7.  Isn't a central part of this problem the question of whether the laws apply to FBI personnel themselves?  Of whether the Constitution applies to FBI personnel?

Answer:  Yes.  The Supreme Court's assertion of qualified immunity must be reviewed carefully in light of the "target of interest" program and related initiatives.

If law enforcement officers believe that there is no accountability for them when they lie, falsify records, steal, and physically harm the public in a gratuitous or unjustified manner, there is a near certainty that corruption will result.

Beyond this, we need to worry about a fundamental departure from the mission of law enforcement to protect and serve the public.  We are beginning to see circumstances in which the members of the public are in peril and law enforcement, though nearby, elects not to assist them on an urgent basis.

8.  Are you speaking of Uvalde?

Answer:  There are actually a number of incidents that follow the paradigm of Uvalde's tragedy of seemingly paralyzed law enforcement personnel failing to act on behalf of an endangered public.

But this is an entirely new issue, and I think it's important for us to understand its significance.

9.  What is its significance in your view?

Answer:  Law enforcement, in failing to defend an endangered public on an immediate basis, is saying that it holds itself separate from the interests of the public.

In the case of Uvalde, one or several commanders were counting police officers' lives as more valuable than the lives of imperiled school children.

The police, in such a scenario, have become a protected class within the society, in effect.

They may see themselves as competing with the public in order to have their material needs met.  They may see themselves as experiencing a "war-like" environment in which the priorities of a "brotherhood of officers" takes precedence over the public's needs for safety.  They may see themselves as occupying a position which opposes that of the public.

This type of opposition is reflective of autocratic societies, not democratic ones.

So, we all need to be paying close attention.

10.  Despite your experience in being targeted by falsified law enforcement reporting, you believe that law enforcement officers likely need to be paid more.

Answer:  I do.  But I also believe that law enforcement officers should be disallowed from owning cryptocurrency accounts.

11.  Why?

Answer:  The public needs to be able to easily review the flow of funds into the accounts of law enforcement officers due to the fact that bribes and graft toward those with such a profound level of responsibility toward the society represent a danger to everyone.

12.  Is it possible for the FBI's scheme of falsified law enforcement reporting -- and related harms -- toward the law-abiding American public to be exposed?

Answer:  It is necessary.  Without this exposure, ours would be a failed nation.  With it, we can defend our own democracy and countless others.

13.  You sound very certain.

Answer:  There are many uncertainties in life.  But this is what I know.

Lane MacWilliams