Here is a discussion of how FBI agents may seem to be your friend when they actually are digging your grave:
The interrogations of Winner and Papadopoulos were what the FBI likes to call “noncustodial,” so they were not read their Miranda rights — because, the FBI claims, they were not arrested or detained at the time of the interrogation. (Winner’s lawyers have argued in court filings that she was effectively detained and should have been Mirandized.) By avoiding the obligation to inform suspects of their right to a lawyer and the right to stay silent, the FBI makes it easier to get Americans to say things — whether truths or lies — that will be used against them. The Fifth Amendment protects people from testifying against themselves, of course, and the Sixth Amendment provides the right to legal counsel, but law enforcement authorities get around these constitutional protections by contending that some interrogations are noncustodial. The result is that suspects are enticed into talking before they realize the jeopardy they face and the rights they possess.
You can read the rest @
Does this sound like "justice" to you? I'm not certain what to call it.
Of course since we all "know what Winner did", this kind of tactic may seem reasonable ... but HOW do we know what she did; and WHY were such ideas planted in our heads; and BY WHOM?
By the way, why weren't such "tricks" used during the so-called interrogations of Hillary Clinton and her coterie?