The comment about the FBI's interrogation technique and the 'official record' is well taken. LEO's routinely commit perjury to 'get the bad guy' (in their mind).
A lawyer and a tape recorder is moot as any decent attorney will advise you to say nothing--it's not like they're trying to help you or are going to give you a break. But, just so you, et ux, know, EVERY phone call to the federal building, especially the FBI in Seattle is recorded, even though no message announces this. One good reason (legally) is the feds only require single party consent to recording a conversation (phone) while Washington law generally requires two/all. The federal building is governed by exclusive federal jurisdiction (different rules), even though (technically) a legal analysis indicates the laws on BOTH ends of the call must be honored. But the State of Washington isn't going to go after the FBI (it wouldn't do any good) on this one.
What's important for everyone to know is, if a party (such as the FBI) *KNOWS* the call is being recorded/monitored (as they do for calls to that office), there is NO expectation of privacy. Thus, you are not breaking Washington's Privacy Act law if *you* record the call (even without telling them). Still, it's almost always a bad idea to speak with them in the first place. Just hang up if they call, or refuse to talk if they contact you personally.
As to the 'informant', that's a mixed bag...like two scorpions in a bottle: the hate group (@narchists) and the informant for a state sponsored terrorist organization (the FBI). Given the choice (if it is a choice) between a hate group and state sponsored terrorist organizations, we're probably better off (if you can call it that) with the latter. Because of the violence, assaults, thefts, vandalism, and myriad other crimes promoted by black bloc co-conspirators, their anonymity needs to be stripped from them at every opportunity. Anonymity has a long tradition as a shield for pure speech--it inappropriate for it to be used as a cloak for criminal conduct. (A)narchists are terrified (even as they, themselves, attempt to inspire terror in the public/officials) of having that anonymity stripped because it will force them to be responsible and be held accountable for their ACTS. Thus, anyone/everyone who would strip them of that anonymity which they choose to use as a weapon, is labeled a 'snitch'. They often assault and/or label photojournalists (if they don't allow the violent street radicals to have editorial control of the reporting) as 'snitches'. But today, WE are the media.
So, take your pick: Rubbing shoulders with a pervert in the service of a state sponsored terrorist organization (FBI), or characters indistinguishable from those in Lord Of The Flies (@narchists). Is this a great country, or what?!