I'm not exactly sure what the FBI would gain here, and it may be nothing, but distrusting them by default seems rational given their long history of corruption.

Again, this communication from the FBI is specifically targeted at victims of a particular scam. The victims have already lost more than what the FBI could hypothetically maybe do to them.

Unless we live in Scooby Doo-verse and the FBI agent removes his mask to reveal that he was the IRS all along and this was all a ploy to get people to pay their taxes.

I guess if you used crypto to trade in heroin you could lose quite a bit more.

Do you get to write off rug pulls like any other capital loss?

For that matter, what are the tax implications of getting mugged?

Losses from theft are generally tax deductible.

https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc515

I think the real fear is that you never know what the FBI really wants. So unless you feel confident that you've covered all of the possible angles that an intelligence agency with 10000x the information you have could only be seeking exactly what they claim to be seeking, then sure, answering their call is fine.

But the general rule is to never ever talk with them unless you have a lawyer present. You have no clue whether you're the target of an investigation. You have no clue whether the FBI knows some percentage of their targets were victims of this scam, and are using it to get an in with them (you). You just don't know anything going on behind the scenes.

By corruption I assume you mean "a 100yr history doing nasty things that benefit the agency and/or the political goals of specific agency leaders and/or the political goals of specific people close to those leaders in direct or near direct contradiction of the organization's mandate and/or law.

Basically they're evil, not corrupt.

Their long history of corruption compared to all the non-corrupt things they have done?

When considering which corporate bodies to trust, I consider their public statements and policies, their historical behaviors, and reports from other users of their services. The FBI’s official policy is to harasses individuals they place on secret watchlists. Historically, the agency has been one of the most corrupt from the beginning, especially the Hoover era, and has never gone through a period of substantive reform to resolve these issues. Additionally, multiple victims of crimes who have reported their situation to the FBI have either seen no positive actions or have even been harassed themselves by FBI employees. Currently there’s a severe shortage of reputable cybercrime security providers that also have enough capabilities to enforce the result of investigations, but the FBI is such a poor organization that it would be foolish to even consider requesting their services.

"Historically, the agency has been one of the most corrupt from the beginning,"

What proof do you that the FBI is more corrupt than other government agencies?

Most USG agencies did not have programs similar to COINTELPRO. The FBI is the USG secret police and as such share they same set of problems other secret police have in other countries - since secret police suppress internal dissent with tactics veiled in secrecy, they are able to violate human rights much more easily than agencies that have more openness and less political valence.

" they are able to violate human rights much more easily than agencies that have more openness and less political valence."

I asked you to show evidence for this statement ""Historically, the agency has been one of the most corrupt from the beginning". Not if it's easier for them to violate human rights.

"Most USG agencies did not have programs similar to COINTELPRO."

COINTELPRO is a secret surveillance program. There's been similar secret surveillance programs from the CIA and NSA, many discussed here regarding internet surveillance. [1][2]

You also claim the FBI is the US secret police, similar to other countries secret police. What makes them like other countries secret police? What makes them more secret than the NSA or CIA?

"since secret police suppress internal dissent with tactics veiled in secrecy,"

How is the FBI suppressing internal dissent?

[1] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-... [2]https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying

>How is the FBI suppressing internal dissent? COINTELPRO was more than just a surveillance program, unlike the other agencies you mention. It involved disrupting perceived communists many of whom were not in fact communist but did dissent against the various elites within the USG’s domestic regions. This was a stated goal of Hoover. Today these practices continue with known evidence of FBI activity purposed towards suppressing dissent. within both right and left wing activists. I would agree that the CIA has an even more miserable track record than the FBI, but putting the NSA in the same category is strange. The NSA did not, as far as is publicly known, plant agents with the intent to disrupt dissenting groups or spread pro state ideology. Instead they seem to have mostly passed illegally collected info to other agencies to act on. While that is wrong, it is not as wrong as what activities the FBI (and of course the CIA) have. To take your logic a step further, it’s unlikely that agencies such as the US Department of Energy are planting agents to disrupt dissent.

Give the Minneapolis FBI whistleblower account a read and then think for a second

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/01/magazine/fbi-terrorism-te...

Thank you for sharing this.