Bolstering the sentiment that establishment media commits sins of omission as well as of commission, a curious void exists in the media narrative of the oft-deported illegal alien felon who allegedly shot a woman to death with a gun stolen from a BLM agent: The identity of the agent.

A search shows no press sources have revealed that information at this writing, 20 days after Kathyn Steinle was killed. Not nationally and not locally, and not with the media having access to sources and resources unavailable to #justablogger activists interested in truths the public has every right to know.

“Land agency: Agent’s stolen service gun used in pier slaying,” the Boston Herald headlined in a featured Associated Press report. “BLM spokeswoman Dan Wilson said the service weapon was issued to an agency ranger, and was stolen from the agent’s car while he was in San Francisco on business.”

“Pier 14 Shooting: BLM agent’s gun used in killing, was reported stolen in June,” KRON 4 affirmed in its version of events. Three reporters were assigned to the story, but evidently pressing BLM for details as to exactly who was involved and what their employee actually did (or did not do) was beyond their joint capabilities.

Ditto, we find the information has thus far eluded the San Jose Mercury News, the Bay City News, ABC News, and even the UK’s Daily Mail. The Chicago Tribune at least let readers know it was getting its information from an “official — who was not authorized to speak publicly about the case and spoke on condition of anonymity — declined to elaborate.” So much for “the most transparent administration in history.”

It’s not like there’s no legitimate public interest in identifying the agent or ranger (depending on the story you read). Who is this person, what were the circumstances that led to a gun being left in his/her car and stolen, and are there any prior indicators in this individual’s employment record? Oversight seems especially relevant in an anti-gun town like San Francisco, where aside from a handful of connected elites, traveling around the “sanctuary” with a gun is the exclusive province of “Only Ones.”

So what’s with the universal lack of progress — if the Google News feed is any indicator — on our intrepid watchdog journalists providing the public with a bit more depth on this? Just how did a gun “transfer” from a federal agent to a career criminal, and one who took advantage of government’s blind eye to even be here in the first place? After all, it’s not like guns being stolen from agents, most of the time due to improper retention and storage, isn’t a widely known and publicized problem.

Do you doubt, had a gun been stolen from your car and then used in a murder, that not only would your name be widely spread (and smeared by gleeful antis painting you as a typical, irresponsible ammosexual), but that you’d be lucky to escape serious criminal charges, and crippling civil ones as well?

Seeing as how the media evidently has no interest in pursuing this further, if you’d like to join me, why not demand an answer from BLM at their Twitter feed (@BLMNational) and Facebook Account? It would be nice if enough TTAG readers created the public pressure to get information the press, for reasons of its own, seems to not want to explore and share.