Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there’s a big difference between “random FBI field agent decides to murder someone” and “FBI director asks his deputy to murder someone”. Attributing the murder to the FBI as an institution makes a lot more sense in the second case than in the first
Personally, I agree with you. We have semantic problem. *If the director asked, and we know that he asked, then it is on the record. *If the director asked off the record, then it's called classified. *If there is a conviction then it was a rogue cell. The agency is clear in all cases whether we like it or not. Same as a corporation, but worse.
Legally, a government agency like the FBI is immune to criminal prosecution. Its officials can commit crimes as individuals, but it can’t commit a crime as a government agency because government agencies are excluded by legal definition.
But, it still can be judged guilty or innocent in the court of public opinion and the accounts of future historians