[skissane]

If the FBI had really done it, I doubt they would have left classified records saying they had. Most likely, either the records would have been destroyed long ago, or they never would have created any in the first place

Other possibility: they really didn’t do it, but there’s some classified record which sure makes it sound like they did. e.g. some record of J. Edgar Hoover joking about doing it

[trimethylpurine]

If the FBI did it off the record then technically it's not the FBI it's a rogue actor or cell that happens to work for the government

If a bus driver for a federal prison snapped and shot him we could say the same thing.

Where is the line between agency and private party if it's not drawn on the record?

[skissane]

I think there’s a big difference between “random FBI field agent decides to murder someone” and “FBI director asks his deputy to murder someone”. Attributing the murder to the FBI as an institution makes a lot more sense in the second case than in the first

[trimethylpurine]

Personally, I agree with you. We have semantic problem.

*If the director asked, and we know that he asked, then it is on the record.

*If the director asked off the record, then it's called classified.

*If there is a conviction then it was a rogue cell.

The agency is clear in all cases whether we like it or not. Same as a corporation, but worse.

[skissane]

Legally, a government agency like the FBI is immune to criminal prosecution. Its officials can commit crimes as individuals, but it can’t commit a crime as a government agency because government agencies are excluded by legal definition.

But, it still can be judged guilty or innocent in the court of public opinion and the accounts of future historians

[trimethylpurine]

Absolutely.