The FBI Briefing On The Congressional Shooter

is bizarre:

The FBI admits that Hodgkinson:

•vociferously raged against Republicans in online forums,
•had a piece of paper bearing the names of six members of Congress,
•was reported for doing target practice outside his home in recent months before moving to Alexandria,
•had mapped out a trip to the DC area,
•took multiple photos of the baseball field he would later shoot up, three days after the New York Times mentioned that Republicans practiced baseball at an Alexandria baseball field with little security,
•lived out of his van at the YMCA directly next door to the baseball field he shot up,
•legally purchased a rifle in March 2003 and 9 mm handgun “in November 2016,”
•modified the rifle at some point to accept a detachable magazine and replaced the original stock with a folding stock,
•rented a storage facility to hide hundreds of rounds of ammunition and additional rifle components,
asked “Is this the Republican or Democrat baseball team?” before firing on the Republicans,
ran a Google search for information on the “2017 Republican Convention” hours before the shooting,
and took photos at high-profile Washington locations, including the east front plaza of the U.S. Capitol and the Dirksen Senate Office.
•We know from other reporting that the list was of six Republican Freedom Caucus members, including Rep. Mo Brooks, who was present at the practice.

So what does the FBI decide this information means? Well, the takeaway of the briefing was characterized well by the Associated Press headline about it: “FBI: Gunman who shot congressman had no target in mind.”

If they don’t want to call it terrorism because it was an attempted political assassination, then fine, but this is insane. If they want to continue to drain away the last vestiges of confidence in their competence, this is the way to do it.

[Update Friday morning]

Who does the FBI work for?

There’s no reason to beat around the bush here: what the FBI is claiming is mind-boggling when they claim the shooter had no target in mind. Consider the number of accidents of circumstance you would have to believe were going on here to not have the shooter doing what seems obvious from every piece of evidence we have: researching and planning for an attack on Republicans of some kind, particularly looking for an opportunity when security will be low and vulnerability will be high. This was an attack, not an “anger management” problem.

Step back, though, and think on the institutional conclusions here. Considering how ludicrous the FBI’s conclusions are as it relates to an attack on the third ranking member of the House of Representatives, you might reconsider whether to trust the FBI’s conclusions in other areas, as well. And this is how our faith in institutions is degraded: steadily, gradually, with incident after incident where men in suits stand in front of microphones and make claims we know are not the whole truth.

This is how you get more Trump. Despite the fact that Trump doesn’t seem inclined to do anything about it.

[Update a couple minutes later]

Related: Hey, Trump, how about firing Avner Shapiro? Your administration is full of people sabotaging your agenda. What are you going to do about it?

11 thoughts on “The FBI Briefing On The Congressional Shooter”

  1. “Gentlemen, congratulations. You’re everything we’ve come to expect from years of government training.”

  2. Insane is not realizing what this means about the FBI. Fire them all and start over.

    We are acting like a guy being beaten. Instead of protecting ourselves we ask for an explanation when none is required.

    1. This is an example of widespread and serious incompetence. This can be documented from many such incidents.

      But after reviewing this case, it does not rise to the level of firing any of the agents involved. This is a high level of incompetence, but since the Supreme Court ruling of Marbury vs Madison in the early 19th Century, I cannot think of any instance where a Federal employee was ever fired for exhibiting this level of incompetence. Therefore I am recommending to the Assistant AG that no one be fired for being this stoopid or lame.

      1. This is worse than incompetence. Given the evidence, Forest Gump could be expected to correctly conclude the motive. This is an active ideology dismissing a sound conclusion because it challenges a Narrative.

      2. Bull shit Paul, this is malfeasance not incompetence.

        Incompetence happens randomly. There is no randomness to this.

  3. “FBI: Gunman who shot congressman had no target in mind.”

    He had targets in mind not a target.

    How much of this is the FBI and how much is the AP? The DNC media has grown very good these past months at reporting things differently than they occurred. The DNC media has a vested interest in preventing the attempted mass assassination of congresspeople, potentially the worst assassination in our country’s history, from being portrayed as such or tied to the DNC.

  4. modified the rifle at some point to accept a detachable magazine and replaced the original stock with a folding stock,

    So, like over half the people who buy an SKS, pretty much?

    That tells us nothing much, honestly.

    (Except that he was cost-conscious and didn’t want to just buy an AR.)

    1. Ya, some of the stuff listed isn’t indicative of planning an assassination.

      Well, it wouldn’t be to normal people but Democrats would consider them evidence of planning in other situations. Maybe they were included to appeal to the gun banning crowd.

  5. Seems clear enough this fellow was the American equivalent of a Jihadi — someone out to kill religious or political opponents, basically for the sure pleasure of killing. We should recognize the fact. we should surround his grave by leak-proof concrete and make the site a public urinal, we ought to describe him in history texts as a terrorist.

    But …. we’ve got a lot of people in this country who would find that just too complicated. Terrorists are Moslems, right? People who were born in this country, people who aren’t Moslems or Buddhists or whatever, people with really white skins — they can’t be terrorists!

    Oh, you want to point to that Tim McVeigh character who blew up a federal office building? He wasn’t a terrorist! I watched Fox News so I know! And I listened to all the things the FBI said back then. He wasn’t a terrorist! He was an extremist! And that’s completely different!

    Get the idea? The news isn’t for bright people these days. It’s for idiots. If you want subtlety, hit the internet. And even then ….

Comments are closed.