Bill, a U.S. citizen was reportedly struck by a federal vehicle, tased twice, and left handcuffed in the street screaming that his arm was broken. And your response is that these things wouldn't happen if people just complied? That's quite a legal philosophy you've developed. Apparently, federal agents are entitled to a presumption of innocence, while the people they injure are presumed to have deserved it. And since you apparently skipped that lecture in law school, documenting police activity is protected by the First Amendment. Criticizing government misconduct is not obstruction of justice. Neither is a member of Congress demanding accountability. Actual interference with law enforcement is a different matter. You might appreciate that distinction if you weren't so busy treating criticism as a criminal offense. You're a United States Attorney, Bill. Your job is to uphold the law, not provide public relations services for people accused of violating it. "He should have complied" isn't an investigation. It's an excuse. And a badge isn't a constitutional exemption from accountability.