The statement questions the silence around the alleged destruction of Epstein files by the FBI, suggesting a lack of transparency and accountability. It challenges the integrity of the FBI, as mentioned in the conversation by Kash Patel, and implies a contradiction between the stated goals of the FBI and their actions.
- The statement does not directly harm others but implies wrongdoing by the FBI, which could be seen as harmful if unfounded.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement engages in criticism of the FBI's actions, which is constructive if based on facts, but lacks specific evidence, potentially leading to personal attacks on the institution. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement uses influence to question accountability, which can be seen as an attempt to better society by demanding transparency. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement exercises free speech by questioning public institutions, which is responsible if done with integrity and factual basis. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.