FBI Nominee Kash Patel, Who Vowed To 'Come After' Trump's Enemies, Disclaims 'Retributive Actions'
At his confirmation hearing, the president's pick to run the nation's leading law enforcement agency ran away from his record as a MAGA zealot.
In his 2023 book Government Gangsters, Kash Patel, the president's nominee for FBI director, describes a "deep state" conspiracy against Donald Trump that he equates with a conspiracy to subvert democracy and the Constitution. "The price of rule by the Deep State is high—nothing less than the end of self-government in America," he writes. "The Deep State is a cabal of unelected tyrants who think they should determine who the American people can and cannot elect as president, who think they get to decide what the president can and cannot do, and who believe they have the right to choose what the American people can and cannot know."
The book includes a list of 60 former executive-branch officials who crossed Trump in one way or another, all of whom Patel identifies as members of this cabal. They range from Democrats such as Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton to Trump appointees such as former Attorney General Bill Barr and former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone. The list "is not exhaustive," Patel notes. "It does not, for example, include other corrupt actors of the first order such as Congressmen Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell." Nor does it include "the fake news media," which Patel also portrays as part of this conspiracy.
Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearing last week, Patel insisted that his fingering of deep-state conspirators did not amount to an "enemies list," let alone a litany of suspects he would be inclined to investigate as head of the FBI—a concern that seems plausible in light of Trump's repeated threats to punish his political opponents. "It's not an enemies list," Patel said. "That is a mischaracterization." He promised "the only thing that will matter if I'm confirmed as a director of the FBI is a de-weaponized, de-politicized system of law enforcement completely devoted to rigorous obedience to the Constitution and a singular standard of justice."
Patel sang a different tune during a December 2023 podcast interview with former Trump strategist Steve Bannon, who asked Patel if he could promise there would be "serious prosecutions and accountability" for "these deep-staters" in a second Trump term. Absolutely, Patel said: "We will go out and find the conspirators—not just in government, but in the media. Yes, we're gonna come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections. We're gonna come after you. Whether it's criminally or civilly, we'll figure that out. But yeah, we're putting all of you on notice. And Steve, this is why they hate us. This is why we're tyrannical. This is why we're dictators. Because we're actually gonna use the Constitution to prosecute them for crimes they said we have always been guilty of but never have."
If senators thought Patel would follow through on that commitment, at least a few Republicans, perhaps enough to nix his nomination, might be reluctant to confirm him as head of the federal government's leading law enforcement agency for the next 10 years. So it is not surprising that Patel is keen to pretend that he never said what he said. "I have no interest, no desire, and will not, if confirmed, go backwards," Patel told the committee. "There will be no politicization at the FBI. There will be no retributive actions taken."
Patel's assurances do not necessarily contradict his promise to "come after" the "corrupt actors" (including anti-Trump journalists) and punish them one way or another for their "crimes," since Patel has always portrayed that mission as consistent with the Constitution and his "singular standard of justice." In his view, investigating "deep-staters" would not amount to "politicization" of the FBI or retribution against Trump's enemies; it would be rescuing "self-government" from the "cabal" bent on destroying it.
Patel was similarly slippery when he was asked whether he agrees with Trump that Biden stole the presidency through massive election fraud. Sen. Mazie Hirono (D–Hawaii) noted that "the FBI is the primary agency responsible for investigating election-related crimes," so "being able to separate fact from conspiracy theories around elections is an important thing for an FBI director." Given that, Hirono thought it was worth asking Patel a straightforward question about recent history: "Did Donald Trump lose the 2020 presidential election, yes or no?" Patel refused to commit one way or the other. "President Joe Biden's election was certified, he was sworn in, and he served as the president of the United States," he said.
Along similar lines, senators might prefer not to confirm an FBI director who lends credence to a conspiracy theory that portrays Trump as a savior battling "a secret cabal of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who are abducting, abusing, and ritualistically murdering children by the thousands." Patel has a history of friendly interactions with QAnon followers: He has appeared on their podcasts, praised them, and reached out to them on social media. Patel's coziness with QAnon raises legitimate questions about his judgment, especially since their bizarre narrative overlaps with his own description of Trump's battles with the "deep state."
Sen. Charles Grassley (R–Iowa), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sought to assuage those concerns. "Some people on this committee have accused you of promoting the QAnon movement," Grassley noted, dismissing that charge as "guilt by association" and asking Patel to set the record straight: "Are you a follower or promoter of QAnon?"
No way, Patel said. "In fact," he added, "I have publicly, including in the interviews provided to this committee, rejected outright QAnon baseless conspiracy theories or any other baseless conspiracy theories. They must be addressed head on with the truth, and I will continue to do that."
Does this sound like an outright rejection of QAnon doctrine? "The Q thing is a movement," Patel told podcast host Mary Grace in November 2022. "A lot of people attach themselves to it. I disagree with a lot of what that movement says, but I agree with a lot of what that movement says."
Patel took a similar position during a June 2020 interview with BardsFM. "I agree with some of what he does, and I disagree with some of what he does," he said, referring to "Q," the pseudonymous source of QAnon theories. "If it allows people to gather and focus on the truth and the facts, I'm all for it."
When a Patriot Party News host asserted, during a June 2022 show, that "Q has been so right about so many things," Patel concurred. "I agree with you," he said. "He has. And you've got to harness that following that Q has garnered and just sort of tweak it a little bit. That's all I'm saying. He should get credit for all of the things he has accomplished, because it's hard to establish a movement."
The minor tweaks that Patel had in mind presumably would include ditching claims such as the fictitious video that supposedly showed Hillary Clinton and her aide Huma Abedin "ripping off a child's face and wearing it as a mask before drinking the child's blood in a Satanic ritual sacrifice." Patel might also want to excise the belief that Trump, by sipping from a water bottle during a speech in his first year as president, was displaying "a secret sign that he [was] about to bring down an elite child sex-trafficking ring." Come to think of it, that whole idea of an "elite child sex-trafficking ring" run by progressive Satanists, which is central to QAnon teachings, might have to go.
Such quibbles did not stop Patel from effusively praising his hosts during a September 2022 appearance on The MG Show, a QAnon podcast. "You guys are the best," Patel said. "I love being on your program." What makes them "the best," it seems clear, is that they have the right enemies, who are for the most part the same nemeses that Patel identifies in Government Gangsters.
This is Patel's idea of challenging "baseless conspiracy theories…head on with the truth." Given the supposedly minor differences to which Patel has alluded, it would be inaccurate to describe him as a QAnon "follower." But anyone who genuinely thinks the movement is just a "tweak" away from credibility should not be entrusted with the FBI's vast investigative powers. More likely, Patel was cynically embracing a group with manifestly loony ideas about the way the world works because he saw it as an important part of Trump's constituency. QAnon's dedication to Trump was enough to overlook its divorce from reality.
The overriding priority of loyalty to Trump may also explain why Patel is reluctant to reject the president's stolen-election fantasy. That's assuming Patel does not sincerely believe Trump actually won reelection in 2020. Either way, Patel's obeisance to Trump does not bode well for his avowed commitment to follow the law rather than his boss's vendettas.
Patel did create some daylight between him and Trump when he was asked about the president's blanket clemency for Capitol rioters, which provoked criticism even from Trump's reliable supporters at the Fraternal Order of Police. Sen. Richard Durbin (D–Ill.) noted several examples of defendants who benefited from Trump's pardons even though they had been convicted of violent crimes. Then he asked, "Was President Donald Trump wrong to give blanket clemency for January 6 defendants?"
Yes, Patel implied: "I have always rejected any violence against law enforcement," including "any violence against law enforcement on January 6, and I do not agree with the commutation of any sentence for any individual who committed violence against law enforcement." While "I have not looked at all 1,600 individual cases," he said, "I have always advocated for imprisoning those that cause harm to our law enforcement and civilian communities."
That is consistent with what Patel says in Government Gangsters. "January 6th was a national tragedy, and those who broke the law should be prosecuted swiftly for the crimes they committed," he writes. "As a former public defender and federal prosecutor, I am unwaveringly in favor of upholding the law fairly and equally in all circumstances."
That seemingly clear position, however, is complicated by Patel's indiscriminate support for the January 6 defendants, whom he has called "political prisoners," echoing Trump. By his own account, Patel helped produce "Justice for All," a recording featured at Trump's rallies in which Trump recites the Pledge of Allegiance against a background of the national anthem sung by a choir of jailed Capitol riot defendants recorded over a phone line. "I did not have anything to do with that recording," Patel said at his hearing when Durbin asked him about it. But as Sen. Adam Schiff (D–Calif.) later noted, that disavowal contradicted what Patel had told Bannon on the latter's podcast.
"What we thought would be cool is if we captured that audio" and "had the greatest president, Donald J. Trump, recite the Pledge of Allegiance," Patel told Bannon. "Then we went to a studio and recorded it, mastered it, digitized it, and put it out as a song….We were able to capture that recording thanks to their courageous singing, and we were able to take it to a studio. It's an actual song. 'Justice for All' is now available on every music site."
Why does any of this matter? During his exchange with Durbin, Patel described the song as part of an effort to "raise funds" for the families of "nonviolent offenders" who were "in need." But the choir included people charged with assaulting police officers, thereby blurring the distinction that Patel drew when he implicitly criticized Trump's clemency for such defendants. "I did not know about the violent offenders," he told Schiff, "and I did not participate in any of the violence in and around January 6."
That last part was a bit weird, since no one was accusing Patel of assaulting police officers. But as Schiff suggested, Patel showed a lack of "due diligence" when he promoted a recording called "Justice for All" that featured the very sort of violent offenders he now says were rightly imprisoned. That contradiction reflects Patel's broader attempt to transform himself now that his more outré views have become a liability.
Until recently, Patel was a zealous Trump hatchet man who vowed to "come after" the president's opponents, glossed over violent crimes committed in response to Trump's phony election grievance, and cozied up with Trump supporters whose conspiracy theories were too wild even for MAGA Republicans who live in an alternate universe where Trump beat Biden in 2020. Patel was a Trump toady who wrote children's books detailing the travails of the wise and just "King Donald," who was able to triumph over his evil enemies with the help of "a wizard called Kash the Distinguished Discoverer."
Describing his alter ego, Patel explains that he "was known far and wide as the one person who could discover anything about anything." That might sound like an asset for an FBI director—until you consider that Patel, without the benefit of any such inquiry, has already identified his targets.
Now Patel presents himself as a sober and dedicated public servant committed to upholding justice and the rule of law. Judging from the apparent credulousness of Republican committee members, they either buy that reinvention or are willing to pretend they do.
