FBI Leaders Seek to Rebuild Trust After Previous Undermining Actions

Kash Patel and Dan Bongino’s Turnaround: Leading the FBI After Years of Criticism

In a remarkable shift, Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, once fierce critics of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), now find themselves in leadership roles within the agency they spent years denouncing. Their arrival at the helm has raised eyebrows as they attempt to leverage the agency’s tarnished reputation—a reputation they have significantly contributed to—by advocating for reforms aimed at restoring public trust.

In a recent email to the FBI’s 38,000 employees, Patel acknowledged the damage done to the FBI’s reputation, stating, "Over the past few years, the F.B.I.’s reputation has been damaged in the eyes of our employers, the American people." He attempted to commend the efforts of agents across the country, emphasizing their commitment to improving their communities. Patel’s communications encapsulate a broader strategy, as he asserted that “business as usual is no longer business as usual,” suggesting a departure from how the agency has traditionally operated.

However, Patel’s messages are notably silent regarding the persistent attacks he has directed toward the FBI in the past. Just prior to taking his position as FBI director, he was known for distorting facts related to the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential campaign and promoting conspiracy theories, including accusations that FBI agents instigated the Capitol riots on January 6, 2021.

This discourse isn’t unfamiliar in political landscapes dominated by rhetoric similar to that used by former President Donald Trump and his allies. Following the 2020 election, Trump and his supporters propagated false claims of widespread voter fraud, using these fabrications as a basis to challenge the election results. Patel’s recent mail to agents echoed sentiments of restoring faith in an institution that many already believe is flawed.

Despite Patel’s reassurances, many FBI agents feel a sense of apprehension surrounding the agency’s current leadership. Agents express concerns about political interference that might obstruct investigations, particularly those that could conflict with the White House’s interests. This environment, rife with skepticism, necessitates that Patel not only acknowledges the agents’ prior hard work but also actively seeks their trust and loyalty, a task complicated by his previous criticisms of the bureau.

Bongino, appointed as deputy director, similarly sought to create distance from his past criticisms of the FBI. Just days after Patel’s email, he reiterated his commitment to setting aside personal politics and refraining from serving as a “partisan political figure.” His attempt to reshape his public persona as a nonpartisan leader is met with skepticism from observers, particularly those who remember his long history of anti-Democrat statements as a successful podcaster.

Critics, including Luke William Hunt, a professor and former FBI agent, have dismissed Bongino’s claims as implausible. Hunt remarked that Bongino’s attempts to distance himself from his past comments seem disingenuous, stating, "It would be foolish or naïve to believe a statement like that."

In the weeks since assuming leadership, Patel has made several senior executive moves, which have drawn mixed reviews. Some have praised certain appointments, while others see contradictions between Patel’s past criticisms of the FBI and his current choices for leadership roles. For instance, his decision to appoint Steven J. Jensen, previously in charge of the bureau’s domestic terrorism operations on January 6, to lead the Washington field office has raised eyebrows. Jensen played a significant role in addressing the Capitol attack and had been involved in surveilling incidents of violence at school board meetings—a practice Patel previously condemned as targeting concerned parents as "domestic terrorists."

Despite the complexities of his message, Patel appeared nostalgic in his communications, reminiscing about an FBI that he claimed had once lost its way. He referenced special agents who exemplified integrity in their investigations, echoing sentiments expressed by former FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, who emphasized the importance of conducting investigations "the right way, every time."

Inquiry into Patel and Bongino’s credibility is underscored by their previous remarks concerning controversial investigations, including their criticisms about the FBI’s handling of the Mar-a-Lago search. Patel, who alleged there was no justification for the search, paradoxically failed to mention that the FBI sought the warrant only after Trump refused to return classified documents.

Meanwhile, while some of Patel’s reforms remain undefined, it appears they seek to address criticisms of past investigations, particularly those involving Russian interference in the 2016 election. Although mistakes were made in that investigation, the Justice Department’s inspector general found reasonable justification for its initiation.

While critics acknowledge that the FBI is not without fault, they stress the importance of examining how political narratives from figures like Patel and Bongino contribute to an atmosphere of distrust. The ongoing scrutiny of their leadership marks a watershed moment for the FBI, as agents begin to navigate a new landscape defined by the very figures who once undermined it. As Patel and Bongino strive to lead the agency toward reconciliation and reform, they will need to confront the contradictions of their past; only then can they hope to genuinely restore faith in an institution that carries immense responsibility within American society.