The vehicular massacre on Bourbon Street is still sending shockwaves throughout the nation, and there are still a lot of questions left to be answered.

I won’t necessarily say that the one I’m about to ask is the biggest, but it’s right up there.

Why did the FBI lie about it?

See, it seems they started off by trying to tell the media that no, this wasn’t terrorism, when in fact it was. Now, I’m always willing to allow for the possibility that things changed since the FBI made that statement, but as my colleague over at RedState, Bonchie, they had all the information before they said a thing.

The man who carried out the terrorist attack on Bourbon Street in New Orleans has been identified as Shamsud Din Jabbar, and he is being investigated for having ties to ISIS. 

As RedState reported previously, the truck used to mow down dozens of people went through a border crossing at Eagle Pass, TX in November. It is not clear whether that fact is connected to the attacker because the truck was a rental. Regardless, the assailant exited the vehicle after ramming through the crowd and started shooting. He was eventually killed by police after a firefight. CPR failed to revive him.

Notably and inexcusably, the FBI initially proclaimed this was not a terrorist attack, with the FBI Special Agent in Charge making that statement after New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell had already confirmed it was one. 

FBI ASSISTANT SPECIAL AGENT: This is not a terrorist event. What it is right now is there improvised explosive devices that was found, and we are working on confirming if this is a viable device or not.

It wasn’t immediately clear if the spokeswoman (that was the role she was operating in for the moment) didn’t realize the mayor had already let the cat out of the bag or if the FBI simply wanted to keep things under wraps for the time being, but it was another example of why the bureau has lost so much trust among the American public.

 …

Returning to the attacker, I had seen a picture of him post-mortem before his identity was revealed. He had a darker complexion with a beard. He was also wearing combat fatigues. I can’t post it due to its graphic nature. Couple that with the jihadi flag that appeared to be attached to the back of the truck, and there’s just no excuse for the FBI to have not been more upfront with the public initially. 

Even CNN is acknowledging that the dude had an ISIS flag in the truck. This information was right there available for anyone in the FBI to examine. Had the agent not said it wasn’t a terrorist attack and simply said the situation was developing or some other kind of non-answer, at least people could understand that.

No, she literally told the entire world it wasn’t terrorism.

The dude driving a rented truck plows into a crowd, intentionally trying to injure and kill as many people as possible, with an ISIS flag hanging like a gun rack in the back window, and someone in the FBI saw all of that and thought, “I don’t know, it sure doesn’t look like terrorism to me,” and told the media just that? Yeah, I’m not buying it.

It’s one thing not to tell the media everything you know. On some level, we all understand there are reasons not to do that.

What you don’t do is lie. You can be wrong, but you need to be wrong about something that people can’t see for themselves. You can be wrong, but not about what’s plain as day for anyone who cares to look and has the view far too many people have.

As Bonchie notes, this is why trust in the FBI is at an all-time low. I won’t say it’s the only reason, but it’s certainly a big one and as an American taxpayer, we’re all kind of sick of it.