Trump nominates Kash Patel for FBI director

[KCfromNC]

Isn't this sort of just "defund the police" at a federal level?

Not unless there's talk about replacing FBI agents with people better trained to defuse domestic disputes and mental health issues.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Not unless there's talk about replacing FBI agents with people better trained to defuse domestic disputes and mental health issues.

While the reasons may be different, the methodology and thought process is the same.

"Cut the people my base doesn't like, and eliminate their positions and/or replace them with the types of people my base does like"

Both happen at the expense of actually enforcing the law.


If you look at what Kash Patel said:
“I’d shut down the FBI Hoover building on Day One and reopen it the next day as a museum of the deep state. And I’d take the 7,000 employees that work in that building and replace them with people to be sent across America to chase down criminals. Go be cops,” Patel said.


It seems as if Patel is employing the same flawed logic as the defund-the-police movement, which is rather than understanding that institutions can both be necessary, but need reforming, simultaneously... instead "let's just divert the resources away from the entities our base doesn't like, to an approach that our base sees as an acceptable approach to solving certain issues"


Kash Patel's notion of replacing 7,000 FBI Special Agents and Investigators with 7,000 additional "cops" to be spread out across the country, is very similar to saying "let's replace 7,000 cops with 7,000 social workers and crisis managers"

Similar, in that, both are ignoring the point of what those positions were originally intended to be for and ignoring the conditions that necessitated them in the first place.

Local cops (and I have nothing against local cops, each facet/level of law enforcement has its purpose) aren't equipped to take on things like high level organized crime, cybercrime, inter-state coordination to bust up things like drug and human trafficking rings, and intelligence gathering in the way the FBI is.

Much like a social worker isn't going to be equipped to do a local cop's job in many situations.

 

[Vambram]

While the reasons may be different, the methodology and thought process is the same.

"Cut the people my base doesn't like, and eliminate their positions and/or replace them with the types of people my base does like"

Both happen at the expense of actually enforcing the law.


If you look at what Kash Patel said:
“I’d shut down the FBI Hoover building on Day One and reopen it the next day as a museum of the deep state. And I’d take the 7,000 employees that work in that building and replace them with people to be sent across America to chase down criminals. Go be cops,” Patel said.


It seems as if Patel is employing the same flawed logic as the defund-the-police movement, which is rather than understanding that institutions can both be necessary, but need reforming, simultaneously... instead "let's just divert the resources away from the entities our base doesn't like, to an approach that our base sees as an acceptable approach to solving certain issues"


Kash Patel's notion of replacing 7,000 FBI Special Agents and Investigators with 7,000 additional "cops" to be spread out across the country, is very similar to saying "let's replace 7,000 cops with 7,000 social workers and crisis managers"

Similar, in that, both are ignoring the point of what those positions were originally intended to be for and ignoring the conditions that necessitated them in the first place.

Local cops (and I have nothing against local cops, each facet/level of law enforcement has its purpose) aren't equipped to take on things like high level organized crime, cybercrime, inter-state coordination to bust up things like drug and human trafficking rings, and intelligence gathering in the way the FBI is.

Much like a social worker isn't going to be equipped to do a local cop's job in many situations.

I am fairly certain that, in the different interviews where Kash Patel has talked about those 7,000 FBI agents in the Hoover building, he has said that as FBI Director he would have those agents constantly deployed out into our nation in order to fight against crimes by going after criminals who are breaking federal laws. I agree with him in acknowledging that is a much better & more productive usage of those 7,000 agents instead of them spending most of their time in the Hoover building and/or the Washington DC area.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I am fairly certain that, in the different interviews where Kash Patel has talked about those 7,000 FBI agents in the Hoover building, he has said that as FBI Director he would have those agents constantly deployed out into our nation in order to fight against crimes by going after criminals who are breaking federal laws. I agree with him in acknowledging that is a much better & more productive usage of those 7,000 agents instead of them spending most of their time in the Hoover building and/or the Washington DC area.

Most of the FBI agents in question (apart from the FBI swat teams), aren't equipped to be out "busting heads" so to speak.

That's why they'll partner with local law enforcement to actually do the (for lack of a better term) "grunt work" when it comes time to actually take some action.

Different facets of different kinds of law enforcement have different specialties.

You wouldn't call a SWAT member in to do CSI work, for the exact same reason you wouldn't send the traffic enforcement officer over to do interrogations or data forensics.

Trump's loyalists only have the FBI in their crosshairs because that happens to be the law enforcement entity that was giving him a "rough time".


When you boil it down, both are ways of manipulating the system so that it's "go heavy and bust the types of crimes we think are the really bad ones, and go light on the ones we think should be ignored or treated with kid gloves"

Both are done through partisan lenses.

"We want to defund the local PDs and replace them counselors, but the FBI is a sacred institution" translates to "Our ideology dictates that people committing crimes of a drug and shoplifting nature are really just victims of systemic bias, so we need to go lighter on them, but we like the Federal ones that really gave our political rival what for"

"We love local PD, but don't like the FBI" translates to "Local PD busts the types of people we want to keep in-line, the FBI has targeted some of our allies"

 

[Vambram]

Most of the FBI agents in question (apart from the FBI swat teams), aren't equipped to be out "busting heads" so to speak.

That's why they'll partner with local law enforcement to actually do the (for lack of a better term) "grunt work" when it comes time to actually take some action.

Different facets of different kinds of law enforcement have different specialties.

You wouldn't call a SWAT member in to do CSI work, for the exact same reason you wouldn't send the traffic enforcement officer over to do interrogations or data forensics.

Trump's loyalists only have the FBI in their crosshairs because that happens to be the law enforcement entity that was giving him a "rough time".


When you boil it down, both are ways of manipulating the system so that it's "go heavy and bust the types of crimes we think are the really bad ones, and go light on the ones we think should be ignored or treated with kid gloves"

Both are done through partisan lenses.

"We want to defund the local PDs and replace them counselors, but the FBI is a sacred institution" translates to "Our ideology dictates that people committing crimes of a drug and shoplifting nature are really just victims of systemic bias, so we need to go lighter on them, but we like the Federal ones that really gave our political rival what for"

"We love local PD, but don't like the FBI" translates to "Local PD busts the types of people we want to keep in-line, the FBI has targeted some of our allies"

May I ask what your response is recent polling from Gallup indicating that less than half of the American public have a fair amount of trust in the FBI?

Also, if a team of FBI agents cannot successfully apprehend a criminal accused of breaking federal laws such as human trafficking and/or kidnapping across state lines, then that is something which must be Changed via training and other methods. FBI agents should not have to be part of an FBI SWAT team in order to apprehend federal lawbreakers.

 

[rjs330]

We love local PD, but don't like the FBI" translates to "Local PD busts the types of people we want to keep in-line, the FBI has targeted some of our allies"

It seems odd though when the FBI does target the allies that people complain that we are upset about it. Why wouldn't we be? Especially when the other side is treated with kid gloves and excused. It just points how the FBI has some severe corruption problems rhat need to be rooted out. As rhe premier LE agency in the US it should be above politics. And it's not.

 

[KCfromNC]

While the reasons may be different, the methodology and thought process is the same.

"Cut the people my base doesn't like, and eliminate their positions and/or replace them with the types of people my base does like"

Who are you quoting here? Or is this just something made up to try and compare a policy designed to reallocate funds to make policing more effective and make some sort of false equivalence to Trump's promises to weaponize federal law enforcement and the military against his political rivals?

 

[KCfromNC]

May I ask what your response is recent polling from Gallup indicating that less than half of the American public have a fair amount of trust in the FBI?

Might be correlated to the nearly half which voted for a convicted felon, in that they have motives other than upholding the rule of law in the US.

 

[KCfromNC]

It seems odd though when the FBI does target the allies that people complain that we are upset about it.

Given past experience, I'd say it is more pointing out the facts don't line up with the claims rather than complaining.

 

[Arcangl86]

I am fairly certain that, in the different interviews where Kash Patel has talked about those 7,000 FBI agents in the Hoover building, he has said that as FBI Director he would have those agents constantly deployed out into our nation in order to fight against crimes by going after criminals who are breaking federal laws. I agree with him in acknowledging that is a much better & more productive usage of those 7,000 agents instead of them spending most of their time in the Hoover building and/or the Washington DC area.

I seriously doubt it's 7,000 agents at FBI HQ. It's probably 7,000 employees, of a wide variety of fields. You're not going to send a payroll specialist for instance into the field to investigate crimes. Him thinking that FBI headquarters is all or mostly special agents is enough reason to be skeptical of his appointment.

 

[wing2000]

The truth is Kash has exemplary experience. Kash was a Deputy DNI, a National Security Council member, a public defender and also a federal prosecutor, the House Intelligence Committee counsel, a National Security Council member and a Pentagon chief of staff. The Biden administration, with their lawfare and dishonesty, has put our nation in great danger. Patel needs to set things right so never again will there be such massive abuses of power.

“I gotta say, all of the weeping and gnashing of teeth, people pulling their hair out, are the people dismayed about having a real reformer come into the FBI and clean out the corrupted partisans who sadly have burrowed into senior career positions at the FBI,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told CBS News’ “Face The Nation” on Sunday.

Trump’s choice of Kash Patel to lead the FBI is already causing glee on the right and panic on the left

But there is already some skepticism emerging. “Kash Patel must prove to Congress he will reform & restore public trust in FBI,” Sen. Chuck Grassley said on X.

nypost.com

Ah, so you would have us believe that you know better than William Barr?
And Ted Cruz? pffft.

 

[wing2000]

It's not about ideology.

It's about loyalty to the ideology of one man: Donald Trump.
That is what drives Kash Patel.

 

[wing2000]

Is this the United States of America? Purge? Do you really believe the nation's chief law enforcement agency should be purging employees based on a political ideology?

Isn't this sort of just "defund the police" at a federal level?

I will re-state the question again:
Do you believe the Director of the FBI should be purging FBI eployees based on a political ideology?
Or maybe a better question: Should FBI employees be fired if they are not perceived to be loyal to Donald Trump?

 

[wing2000]

Patel's former supervisor from Trump's first term:

“He’s absolutely unqualified for this job. He’s untrustworthy,” his supervisor in the first Trump administration, Charles Kupperman, told The Wall Street Journal. “It’s an absolute disgrace to American citizens to even consider an individual of this nature.”

Why should we ignore his warnings?

Opinion | What Kash Patel Could Do to the F.B.I.

The true danger is almost less about the pick and more about what it says of Trump’s approach to his second term.

www.nytimes.com

 

[rjs330]

Given past experience, I'd say it is more pointing out the facts don't line up with the claims rather than complaining.

The FBI provided false information in order to go after a political candidate. Thats pretty serious. Then they failed to do thier job on others. They've been politicized and you can't be like that in a LE position. It's unjust. Kash is going to unpolitisize it and set it on the right course again. Fair and equal justice. I know people are worried he's goingvto shut down the FBI building in Washington. I dint think thats going to happen. Correct me if I'm wrong, but a great deal of the evidence processing and crime analysis goes on there. As well the higher administration. I think gutting the administration and replacing them good LE people who are for fair and equal justice would be the right move. Not everyone in the FBI is politicized.

 

[rjs330]

There are people who completely support this choice.

"Kash Patel served a Snr. Director for counterterrorism when I was National Security Advisor. I was able to count on him to get any job done no matter how complex or difficult the task. He handled some of the nation’s most sensitive issues with care and discretion,” former National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien said.

There were others as well. The fact is the left is very upset over this because Kash won't go along with the status quo of a polical FBI who will go after Republican leaders while ignoring or excusing Democratic ones. They don't really want a fair and equal FBI.

 

[rjs330]

Ah, so you would have us believe that you know better than William Barr?
And Ted Cruz? pffft.

Ted Cruz supports the pick.

 

[wing2000]

Ted Cruz supports the pick.

Of course he does ( I would expect no more from Sen Cruz).

OTH, Patel's former supervisor:

“He’s absolutely unqualified for this job. He’s untrustworthy,” his supervisor in the first Trump administration, Charles Kupperman, told The Wall Street Journal. “It’s an absolute disgrace to American citizens to even consider an individual of this nature.”

 

[rjs330]

Why should we ignore his warnings?

Why should we accept them when another said this .

"Kash Patel was my deputy Director of National Intelligence when I was Acting. I can’t tell you how many people said to me ‘wow.’ He’s nothing like the media portrays him. I love him,” former acting Director of National Intelligence Ric Grenell posted on X.

"Kash Patel served a Snr. Director for counterterrorism when I was National Security Advisor. I was able to count on him to get any job done no matter how complex or difficult the task. He handled some of the nation’s most sensitive issues with care and discretion,” former National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien said.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Do you believe the Director of the FBI should be purging FBI eployees based on a political ideology?

No

Or maybe a better question: Should FBI employees be fired if they are not perceived to be loyal to Donald Trump?

No