There Were a Hundred Different Ways
Craig Robertson, a Utah man, was shot and killed during an FBI raid early Wednesday morning. The FBI claim he made posts on social media threatening to Joe Biden. Fake News reports that the investigation began in April and the U.S. Secret Service was notified by the FBI in June: “In addition to threatening posts the man under investigation suggested online he was making plans to take physical action. The threats had been deemed credible.”
Among the posts allegedly made by Robertson was one published on Aug. 6, three days before Biden’s scheduled visit, according to the complaint. “I hear Biden is coming to Utah. Digging out my old ghillie suit and cleaning the dust off the M24 sniper rifle,” the post said, according to the complaint, which referred to the post as a “willful true threat to kill or cause injury to kill President Biden.”
— this is from the state-controlled corporate news.
Every other report from the mainstream identifies the man as “A Trump Supporter” or MAGA. Think about that.
Their column does not mention that it was a pre-dawn raid, used flash-bang grenades while storming the house, and that the old man was halt, walking with difficulty using a cane, caretaking his blind son.
From Twitter, on the other hand, Larry Correia, a longtime friend and fellow author who knows somewhat of guns pointed me to this tweet by an ex-officer. I quote in full.
https://twitter.com/TimOnPoint/status/1690907416492134400
There were a hundred different ways to do this that would NOT result in a loss of life and no need to drag his body out to the sidewalk to show the world. Pull yourself back from your political alignment if possible and consider the following:
1) The FBI had Robertson under investigation for months. His stupid bluster on FB was known for months. An investigation, a real investigation, would establish a pattern of life: when he goes to church, when he goes to the store, etc. A real investigation would interview the people around him. This is 1st-grade detective work. If you determine that the guy is a threat, you follow him to the store, casually wait outside, and wrap him up as he leaves with his hands full of groceries. People present these low-intensity opportunities every day.
2) Why the FBI? Why not local law enforcement? I’m betting a large portion of the local LE is Mormon, same church and same church elders also. IF the guy is such a threat, why not approach him through someone close? Again, why the FBI? This is the same FBI that ran a pre-dawn, tactical raid against Mark Houck and his family for protesting in front of an abortion clinic in Pennsylvania after local and state authorities decided to bring no charges – another demonstration of power – a Catholic conservative that time – another object lesson from the DOJ.
3) Before every tactical action, there should be a point by point risk evaluation. This wasn’t (I hope) an on-the-fly operation, there wasn’t a crime in process. This was planned. What kind of risk is considered? The basics are as follows: the agents, other supporting officers and technical staff, Craig Robertson of-course, and bystanders. When you breach a structure, WHEN YOU BREACH A PRIVATE HOUSE, in the dark with breaching tools, weapons, and flash-crashes, you instantly put the assault team and Craig at maximum risk. You put the neighbors at very high risk also depending on what the house is built out of – bullets go through walls. Even frangible rounds can go through walls and windows. When you plan an op, you’re supposed to pick the lowest risk course of action that still provides success. This was the highest risk course of action, and unless the mission was a kill/capture rather than capture, the mission was a failure also. SOMEBODY MADE THAT RISK DECISION or they had specific orders to execute the mission one way only.
4) Why did they wait so long? His crimes were known months ago. When you wait until the last minute, assuming that there’s a real threat, you remove choices, you remove better courses of action.
5) Why pre-dawn? If you are breaching and entering after a surreptitious approach, there is a chance you can wrap up your target before they blink their eyes, that’s good tactics. It looks like they woke him first, they woke him violently. People make bad decisions when they are scared awake. Why? Because they’re still 90% asleep. If someone smashes through your door at maximum escalation, what’s your first action. What your first instinctive action – RATIONAL ACTIONS DON’T HAPPEN AT O-DARK THIRTY. A good cop knows this. A bad cop knows this also. If they f-d up their approach (a real possibility), it’s the FBI’s responsibility for what happens next.
6) I’ve seen hundreds of comments like, “why didn’t he comply?” First, read (5) again. Second, how much time did they give him to comply? It takes time for a rational thought to work through – especially when you’re mostly asleep, mostly immobile, and you have bright lights in your eyes – a tactical flashlight blinds a person completely. The chances of identifying yourself while someone is blind is zero. Then there’s the flash-crash deployment…
7) A flash crash doesn’t knock someone out (it might if it’s really close). A flash-crash doesn’t make someone drop a weapon either. It stuns them in their tracks for a brief moment – dazzles them. A flash-crash is an offensive tool used to gain a brief advantage. A crash also makes someone completely incapable of complying.
8) What’s the mission of an assault team? Why do we have assault teams, SWAT teams, etc. in American law enforcement? Think about this. It’s a certain kind of guy who goes through the door for a certain type of mission. They like the action, the adrenaline, they’re excited by the thought of putting someone down in the line of duty. Don’t get me wrong, they’re well trained and professional at what they do. I was that guy. What makes it work is wise leadership, someone who knows when it’s time to let the dogs run OR to grab them by the collar and pull them back. Wise leadership doesn’t get enthralled by the action, they stand apart – especially with other Americans at risk, this isn’t AQ. Wise leadership asks questions before going out the door.
9) Was he really a threat? My inclination says no – he’s an obese invalid who was also a caretaker of someone else – had reason to live. Did his profile, built through the excellent “months long” investigation with interviews of the people who know him, his pattern of life, etc., really say that he was a threat? If yes, then why did they wait for months? But let’s say he was for a moment.
10) Was he an immediate threat? Was Craig Robertson an immediate threat to the President of the United States? We know the answer, it’s no.
11) Who ran the immediate post-action investigation, the FBI? Worried about this.
12) What escalated this particular action beyond all of the other daily threats against the president? Either this was different or the criteria were changed. What was it?
13) Why this guy? MAGA, religious, white, loudmouth, very easy for half the country to hate these days… there will be no ANTIFA riots over killing this citizen in his living room.
14) Did the FBI have agents or informants engaging with him? Face-to-face? If so, why did they wait? Possibilities: informants, informants that he has a relationship with (this is the one that could improve the FBI’s position), undercover agents.
15) Did local law enforcement defer to the FBI? What were the conditions and timeline?
16) To go this far, they must of had his communications monitored. It would be stunning to think they went this far over FB posts alone. There’s probably more.
Details will slowly be trickled out, some legit, others suspect. The FBI will be written as the heroes and politicians and their media drones will be “outraged” and “offended” that people like me doubt the need for this killing. Local law enforcement will remain as low profile as possible because they have professional relationships to maintain.
Know this – the FBI killed an American citizen in his own home when they absolutely didn’t need to. Last time I checked this was a non-partisan expectation of all law enforcement.
About John C Wright
John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title.
