| There are several paragraphs that only serve to imply the narrative that the FBI sent him there and are covering it up. > The FBI’s Confidential Human Source Policy Guide said a handler must give “an emergency communication plan” to a source traveling abroad. > As an FBI source, Billy was required to report foreign travel, even vacations. The bureau has the authority to dispatch sources on foreign missions. It is one of the U.S. agencies responsible for disrupting terror cells abroad. Since we're going over the FBI's rules and powers, the article should ask, does the FBI have the authority to block a source's vacations? That would be relevant. There is zero concrete evidence presented that the FBI sent him to Russia. If there is any, that would support the premise that the FBI shares some responsibility for the result. But none has been presented. Also, it's not really the FBI's role to show that they "care". Probably the people involved do care, as individuals and humans. I feel bad for the guy too, he sounds like he was just a bit lost in life. However, in terms of their jobs, they paid an adult to gather information online, which it seems he was pretty good at. Then he got a bee in his bonnet to go to a war zone (at the invitation of the FSB?) How are they supposed to manage that? That's next level. It sounds like they're doing their best to stay professional, considering the circumstances, and not make any public statements about his (apparently very poor) judgement. The statement that the FBI did not direct him to travel abroad says pretty much everything. |