What conclusions can one draw that they had to have another set of eyes to take a look at this? That the most significant, most powerful law enforcement organization in the history of the world, the FBI, couldn’t figure it out until just now. Well, one conclusion that some people are drawing, and I’m not in a position to shoot it down, but I’m raising it. I’m not necessarily endorsing it, but I’m raising it, is that they had the information. They knew who it likely was, but there was no interest in pursuing it because the person was seen to be a Democrat and might have been a leftist.

And they didn’t want to arrest them because it would have undermined the narrative that January 6 was all about destroying our democracy by Trump supporters. And quickly, the other big news story this week was the arrest of the alleged January 6 bomber, someone who allegedly placed bombs on or about January 6. And five years later, they finally figured out who the suspect is, and there’s been an arrest. And supposedly, it’s because the leadership of the FBI, supposedly, the break in the case came because the FBI brought in new sets of eyes, investigators, to look at evidence they’ve had for years.

Now, I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t sound right to me. And I kind of tweeted out my analysis here. It’s worth reflecting on because I don’t think I’ll improve upon it talking off the cuff here. Let me bring up the tweet so you can look at it. And I kind of summarized—a nice thing about tweets sometimes forces you to kind of make the point succinctly, and this is the point succinctly. The arrest of a January 6 pipe bomb subject nearly five years after his alleged crimes, based on evidence already long available to the government, is curious and disconcerting.

Assuming this is the guy, one wonders how clues and evidence pointing to the suspect were supposedly missed by the FBI for years. So there are a few conclusions here that one might draw based on the late apprehension of this individual. And they have all this detail. You can look at the details and provide links to the information provided to the court justifying the arrest and how they have all these receipts and such showing his purchase of components that could be used to create such details. How he was potentially in the area at the time, how he had maybe the same sneaker as the person in the video that has been put out there, all of which they’ve had.

And so what conclusions can one draw that they had to have another set of eyes to take a look at this? That the most significant, most powerful law enforcement organization in the history of the world, the FBI, couldn’t figure it out until just now. Well, one conclusion that some people are drawing, and I’m not in a position to shoot it down, but I’m raising it. I’m not necessarily endorsing it, but I’m raising it, is that they had the information. They knew who it likely was, but there was no interest in pursuing it because the person was seen to be a Democrat and might have been a leftist.

And they didn’t want to arrest them because it would have undermined the narrative that January 6th was all about destroying our democracy by Trump supporters. The other conclusion that I think is more likely is that the FBI is a disaster. It’s keystone cops at best. I don’t think it was ignorance. I don’t think it was willful ignorance. I think generally it’s incompetence. The simplest explanation generally is the most likely one, and I think it’s true in this case. And so rather than – I don’t necessarily – I’m not necessarily complaining about celebrating that they caught the guy finally.

But if I were the FBI director, if I were the attorney general, if I were the president of the United States, I would see this as more evidence that the FBI needs to be shattered and scattered. They can’t be trusted to investigate anything. They were able to obtain data in a way that was quite invasive. You know, they got credit card data for purchases all over the area, nationally. Think of all the bank data they got related to January 6th that I thought was an outrageous fishing expedition violating the privacy and civil liberties of countless Americans.

And they couldn’t find this guy? That’s not acceptable. At an organization that fails repeatedly on issues like this, forget about the politicization. Forget about it being used like a political police against conservatives and Donald Trump. Forget about all that. They just don’t do their job well. Now, are there individual agents who do their job well? I suppose so. But all that’s irrelevant. Institutionally, the FBI is a failure. To a degree, it’s still around. It’s because of the inertia of the deep state and big government. Is that agencies are just around forever. Their efficacy, their success, whether they waste or abuse tax dollars, it’s irrelevant.

It’s absolutely irrelevant. So yes, if this is the guy, I’m glad they picked him up. I’m interested to know if the evidence is strong. Given the way the investigation progressed, I’m sure defense attorneys for this individual are going to be very aggressive in wondering why if they had the evidence already. Was he already a suspect? Why did they not arrest him earlier? Is the evidence any different? Or maybe they were just reading the evidence in a way that is inappropriate and presenting it in a way that’s inappropriate in terms of justifying an arrest? I don’t know.

But assuming all that aside, this FBI is a disaster, and I’ve said it many times before, and it’s worth repeating, I don’t trust the FBI. And the fact that it took nearly five years to find this gentleman, even though they had allegedly, by their own admission, the evidence to do so beforehand, just is what an indictment of that agency. So you can be sure that Judicial Watch will be using FOIA to investigate this disaster of an investigation. It’s no victory for the rule of law for an agency to be floundering for five years, unable to analyze the evidence they had until its time has passed so much that the final arrest is seen with suspicion by countless Americans.

So that’s my take on that. [tr:trw].

See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.