No Federal Agents Were Involved or they would have to identify themselves when acting in an official capacity. Saying I think they were is clearly misrepresentation, here say and designed to mislead - unless of course it can be independently verified?
Otherwise they would have been named in the article and which field office they were from would have been stated - wouldn't it? After all the "reporter" would have then gone to these "Federal Agents" for comment wouldn't they?
Doesn't all that kind of information supplied to a "reporter" give strong credibility to the other person's account? Don't you think? Maybe? Possibly? Perhaps?
But as they weren't there I guess it's hard to name them! So funny how nobody can tell us which office they were from either.
I keep saying - give me the name and number of these "Federal Agents", which field office they were from and I will happily call up and verify everything for myself.
Good luck with that.
By the way Watergate was better researched than that article!
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
