Is the FBI salvageable? Here's what bureau insiders have to say



Americans sent a clear message to the swamp after President Donald Trump swept all seven swing states and secured the popular vote in November. Since then, the MAGA base was promised an administration staffed with change agents eager to uproot the political establishment in Washington, D.C.

The winning streak continued after Kash Patel was successfully confirmed to head the Federal Bureau of Investigation alongside Deputy Director Dan Bongino, both of whom have been allies to the president. Patel and Bongino also shared a common mission going into the FBI: The status quo isn't working.

'If you embarrass that community, you will be ostracized.'

Now five months into Patel's tenure, several former agents and FBI whistleblowers described how their optimism has faded into disappointment.

"Kash Patel and Dan Bongino both used to consistently call for dismantling the FBI, or at minimum, for a massive restructuring of it," one FBI whistleblower told Blaze News. "The latest revelations only bolster the position that the FBI has become a secret police organization. Yet, there has been no mention of the criminal charges against FBI employees involved in this gross miscarriage of truth and justice. There has been no mention whatsoever of any form of punishment for those involved."

RELATED: 1,004 days of betrayal for suspended FBI Special Agent Garret O’Boyle

  Photo by Calla Kessler for the Washington Post via Getty Images

"Like most of the FBI's known corruption, cover-ups, and illegal activities in recent years, these revelations began with yet another whistleblower," he added. "Only then did the FBI 'leadership' discover how deep the corruption surrounding this election interference was. Still, no whistleblower has been vindicated, reinstated, promoted, or provided back pay and damages under the 'new' FBI."

Other whistleblowers like Marcus Allen share this sentiment, saying the bureau is beyond help.

"Attempts to salvage the FBI are a fool's errand," Allen told Blaze News. "Its reputation is damaged beyond repair. It has lost the public trust and proven itself to be an enemy of the American people and rightfully elected American governance."

Allen previously worked in the FBI's Charlotte field office before he was abruptly put on unpaid leave for challenging the official narrative surrounding the January 6 protests. After being branded a conspiracy theorist, Allen was eventually given his security clearance back by former President Joe Biden's administration and was awarded back pay as part of a settlement with the FBI. Allen later resigned from the bureau.

"They know when they have been abandoned," Steve Baker, investigative reporter for Blaze News, said. "When they speak out, that goes against the culture of the FBI. It goes against the intelligence community at large. If you embarrass that community, you will be ostracized."

Clint Brown, who worked closely alongside Patel during his Senate confirmation process, pushed back on critics, noting that Kash has been heading the bureau for only five short months.

“Kash is an extremely methodical person and very strategic,” Brown told Blaze News. “He is going to work through everything methodically and in the right way. Not everything is a narrative. Not everything has a quick fix. We’re living in the real world.”

"The former leadership may have tarnished it’s own reputation, but they’re the institution that exists to catch the bad guys, and they still have to do that while fixing the place," Brown added.

RELATED: Kash Patel's surprising appointment of a top J6 inquisitor to head DC FBI office

  Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images

While continuing to "catch the bad guys," Patel has also lead the popular crusade against former Director Christopher Wray, which many current and former agents have championed.

Patel announced Tuesday that the bureau uncovered evidence of Wray lying to Congress about China's involvement in influencing the 2020 election. These findings also detail how the agency "recalled" a report that contradicted Wray's testimony under oath to Congress denying China's involvement.

"There are a dozen other people that we could put in the perp walk parade," Baker told Blaze News. "But the guy that needs to lead the parade is Christopher Wray."

This evidence is just the latest piece of a larger puzzle implicating the former FBI leadership for working to influence the 2020 election. Whether it's coordinating with social media monopolies like Facebook to promote one party over the other or censoring the bombshell Hunter Biden laptop story, all signs suggest the FBI was involved.

"To date, this is unequivocally the worst example of FBI election interference," Steve Friend, another FBI whistleblower, told Blaze News. "The Steele dossier and censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop were abhorrent attempts to smear Donald Trump's reputation and deter voters from his camp. However, this latest revelation that the FBI covered for a foreign adversary to stuff ballots for Joe Biden strains all bounds of credulity and requires an honest conversation about whether the FBI should be dissolved."

"Disgraced FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate knew this," Phil Kennedy, a whistleblower and former FBI agent, said in a post on X. "He was the executive who allegedly said, 'FBI employees who question the bureau's handling of January 6-related cases can seek employment elsewhere.' He helped hide the crime and then imprisoned Americans demanding answers."

Patel has also led a broader effort to decentralize D.C.'s influence in the bureau and empower local field offices to continue doing the day-to-day work that impacts communities.

“As far as reforms in the FBI, there’s been a restructuring in the organization, and it’s still ongoing," Brown told Blaze News. "Agents have been moved out to the field, and this is all part of reorganizing the FBI over the long term and doing it methodically.”

RELATED: Exclusive: Oversight Project refers former FBI Director Wray to DOJ for criminal charges

  Photo credit should read MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images

While some former agents believe that the new leadership is a step in the right direction, other whistleblowers say the bureau remains unchanged, forever being driven by the status quo.

"The FBI has demonstrated an unwillingness and inability to understand the complexities of corruption within the FBI writ large and the simplicities of emergent national security and public safety threats," one whistleblower and former DHS employee told Blaze News.

"The new FBI deputy director has told Americans this is 'our FBI,'" Kyle Seraphin, another FBI whistleblower, told Blaze News. "It turns out, 'our FBI' is the same FBI it was last year: deceptive, duplicitous, and functioning on operational morality. The FBI serves the FBI, polishes the reputation of the FBI, and exists to prop up the legend of the FBI. Americans can see the results — promises without production, press releases instead of probable cause to arrest, and backroom document deals instead of disinfecting sunshine. The status quo is 'cutesy time,' and it is unquestionably continuing."

Although critics insist the culture remains unchanged, Brown says Patel was the right choice to push for a change. In order to successfully restore integrity to the bureau, Brown argues that Patel needs both time and trust from the rank-and-file agents.

"Kash is the guy that exposed the 'Russia, Russia, Russia' hoax," Brown told Blaze News. "He did it methodically, and the president knows that."

"The other thing is he picked the guy who’s going to relate to the brick agents," Brown added. "Trump’s philosophy, whether it’s FBI or DOD, he said the same thing about Pete Hegseth, is that he wants people who are doing the job to feel like they have a leader who understands them. So Kash has to earn trust within the FBI, while having to expose, methodically, while also having to catch bad guys, in order to reform the FBI. Without their trust, they’re not going to follow your leadership to fix things.”

The FBI did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Exclusive: Why Chip Roy can't support the 'big, beautiful bill': 'The swamp does what the swamp does'



As reconciliation talks ramp up, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is doing what he can to reel in Republican defectors.

Johnson can afford to lose only three Republican votes and still get reconciliation out the door, which is shaping up to be a tall task as more and more Republicans take issue with different aspects of the "big, beautiful bill." Among them is Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, who outlined his grievances in an exclusive interview with Blaze News.

'I didn't come here to perpetuate a broken system. I understand that we have a thin majority, but we should deliver.'

"Reconciliation is all about balancing our current priorities to make sure that our spending and our tax policy results in something that could be remotely described as deficit-neutral or reducing the deficit," Roy told Blaze News. "So that's kind of the first, you know, measure of whether you're going to do something successfully or not."

  Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

RELATED: Big, beautiful bill advances after 18-hour markup marathon while SALT talks go south

As Roy noted, codifying President Donald Trump's campaign promises is the unofficial measure of success on the Hill. While Trump himself has greenlit 151 executive orders as of this writing, only five bills from Congress have actually been signed into law.

"We need to deliver on the tax policy that President Trump ran on, and that would extend what he did in 2017," Roy added. "We need to deliver on spending restraint. We need to deliver on the priorities that the American people sent us here to deliver on."

"The problem is the swamp does what the swamp does," Roy told Blaze News.

Although reconciliation covers some of the MAGA mandate, Roy says it is still too flawed in its current state for him to throw his support behind the bill.

'It's a broken system, and this bill doesn't make it better,' Roy added. 'It frankly, arguably, makes it worse.'

"The problem is we've got a flawed bill. That's the bottom line," Roy added. "It has some good tax policy and some not-so-good tax policy. Some of it is not extended as it should be. We've got some good spending restraint and some bad spending policy."

  Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

RELATED: SALT sellouts: GOP dumps red-state voters for New York Democrats

Roy used the proposed Medicaid reforms as a case study. One tool Republicans have used to trim down Medicaid costs and uproot fraud has been to enforce work requirements so that fewer people are able to take advantage of the system, allowing vulnerable and disabled people Medicaid was intended for to have access to the resources they need.

But as Roy pointed out, these so-called reforms have flaws of their own.

"They put the work requirements in, and they said, 'Oh, we've got work requirements,' but they don't take place until 2029, after the Trump presidency," Roy told Blaze News. "They have waivers to the work requirements even when they kick in in 2029. They do not address all the ridiculous federal funding of certain states at the expense of other states."

"It's a broken system, and this bill doesn't make it better," Roy added. "It frankly, arguably, makes it worse."

  Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

RELATED: House Republicans to hike up Harvard endowment tax in reconciliation

Roy said that unless the bill was significantly amended to rein in spending and actually reform Medicaid, he wouldn't be able to support it.

"It has to be amended," Roy told Blaze News. "I'm not going to be able to support it as it's currently drafted, and those amendments are going to need to be, you know, relatively significant."

"I didn't come here to perpetuate a broken system," Roy added. "I understand that we have a thin majority, but we should deliver."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Disgusting': Did DC outlet take BRIBES for positive coverage?



An alarming development from the depths of the media swamp has been brought to light by UnHerd’s Emily Jashinsky, who dropped a bombshell this week: Leaked documents expose Punchbowl News for offering corporations “editorial influence” — for the right price.

Jashinsky posted a brief overview of the expose on X, writing: “Breaking Points got ahold of a leaked pitch deck from Punchbowl News. The document reveals how they allow corporations to buy influence over editorial decisions.”

“WH told us several subscriptions were canceled by the Trump admin as well. We also have their numbers: They’ve charged corporate sponsors $210,000 for a week of email ads. You can see the pricing sheet, with subscriber numbers and open rates below,” Jashinsky continued.


Christopher Bedford, Blaze Media’s D.C. correspondent and senior editor for politics, isn’t surprised in the slightest.

“It’s the new journalism, same as the old journalism,” Bedford tells Matthew Peterson and Jill Savage on “Blaze News Tonight.”

“Punchbowl are essentially unregistered lobbyists,” he continues. “If Punchbowl was good at its job, then corporations wouldn’t actually need to hire lobbyists, they would be able to read that newsletter, maybe pay a premium.”

“What they often do, they push these different issues, advocacy things, they push their agenda, they spread Capitol Hill gossip, which is, you know, fun, but not necessarily that helpful, and they create all these false cliffs and these false deadlines,” he adds.

But that’s not all.

“Their reporting has been suffering,” Bedford explains. “Pedaling influence, selling influence, it’s kind of the game. And for so much of Washington, it’s really disgusting.”

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Exclusive: Hundreds of conservative Texans rally behind Paxton's effort to primary Cornyn



Over 250 conservative leaders across Texas are backing Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) in his bid to unseat Republican Sen. John Cornyn (Texas), Blaze News first learned.

Texan leaders, lawmakers, and grassroots activists alike rallied behind Paxton as he prepares to primary Cornyn, who he says is relying too much on the establishment. Cornyn has held the Senate seat since 2002 and will be up for re-election in 2026.

'He has an excellent record fighting for Texans and their rights, which is needed now more than ever.'

"I'm incredibly grateful to have the support of over 250 conservative leaders from across our great state," Paxton told Blaze News. "While John Cornyn is relying on the Washington establishment to save him, I'm proud that my campaign is powered by the grassroots and the people of Texas."

Paxton characterized Cornyn as a career politician who has previously come into conflict with President Donald Trump's priorities.

"Our momentum grows every single day because there are millions of patriots who know what I know: It's time for a change," Paxton told Blaze News. "John Cornyn has been in Washington for over two decades, and in that time all he's done is work with Joe Biden to pass radical gun control, attack President Trump, and call the border wall 'naive.'"

"He's failed our state," Paxton continued, "and I'm running to ensure that Cornyn is replaced by a strong conservative warrior who will always stand with President Trump."

Political allies echoed Paxton, saying he is a necessary change agent for Washington, D.C.

"Paxton is the perfect person to replace the RINO that is John Cornyn," BlazeTV contributor and Paxton endorser Matthew Mardsen told Blaze News. "He has an excellent record fighting for Texans and their rights, which is needed now more than ever. The contrast can't be starker."

"For far too long, John Cornyn has sold Texans out and voted against the will of his constituents," Sara Gonzales, host of BlazeTV's "Sara Gonzales Unfiltered," told Blaze News. "He seems far more interested in funding forever wars than helping his own citizens. Frankly, he is an embarrassment to the state of Texas."

"Attorney General Paxton has a long track record of fighting for Texans, even when the battle is tough, and even when the establishment is after him," Gonzales added. "At times, he’s been the only statewide elected official willing to do what’s right. I look forward to Paxton giving Texans real representation in the United States Senate."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump’s spending war begins, but the swamp won’t go quietly



The Department of Government Efficiency launched aggressive efforts to rein in federal bureaucracy. But limited-government conservatives should not assume fiscal responsibility is within reach.

The reality of America’s financial situation remains dire. In fiscal 2024, the federal government spent $6.8 trillion but collected only $4.9 trillion in taxes. That left a deficit of $1.9 trillion, pushing the national debt to $35.5 trillion by year’s end.

How did our constitutional republic end up in this mess?

To balance the budget, the DOGE must eliminate nearly $2 trillion in annual spending. Until then, the national debt will continue to rise.

So far, the Trump administration’s crackdown on waste, fraud, and abuse has saved about $100 billion. But that’s a fraction of what’s needed, and the challenge ahead remains enormous.

The executive orders and DOGE actions are weak by nature and not built to last. Without legislative backing, they can be reversed by the next administration. Meanwhile, entrenched bureaucrats will resist implementation, requiring strict enforcement from the administration.

Legal challenges are already moving through the courts, and civil service regulations will be used to slow progress. The left-leaning media, still reeling from Trump’s early moves, is preparing for a full-scale counteroffensive of disinformation and manufactured outrage. As temperatures rise across the country, expect the media’s rhetoric to heat up, fueling protests that will likely lead to violence and destruction.

When that happens, Republican legislators will waver, as they always do. As spending battles unfold — through continuing resolutions, omnibus bills, debt-ceiling fights, or an elusive budget proposal — uniparty politicians will band together to protect the bureaucratic status quo.

They will do so for three reasons. First, many are entrenched in the system and benefit from it — they’re swamp-dwellers. Second, Republicans hold only a narrow majority in both chambers of Congress, and those facing re-election in battleground districts will avoid controversial legislation. Third, Democrats could retake the House or Senate in the midterms, eliminating any appetite for shrinking the federal bureaucracy.

Even if lawmakers find the will to act, another major obstacle remains: entitlement spending. Congress has already approved massive and popular programs like Social Security and Medicare. As more Baby Boomers retire, these programs will automatically cost more. Social Security has been paying out more than it collects in taxes since 2010, depleting its trust fund. Worse, the federal government borrowed $1.7 trillion from that trust fund to cover other expenses. This means the DOGE must not only cut $2 trillion annually to balance the budget but also figure out how to repay that $1.7 trillion while continuing to fund retiree benefits.

A larger crisis looms. The federal government spent $900 billion on interest payments in fiscal year 2024, making it the second-largest budget item after Social Security. As the national debt grows and interest rates rise, interest payments will soon surpass Social Security costs. With a $40 trillion debt and 5% interest rates, annual interest payments could hit $2 trillion — another financial mountain for the DOGE to climb.

How did our constitutional republic end up in this mess?

The problem lies in the legislative branch’s unchecked ability to expand the bureaucracy and increase spending. The only real restraint is the willingness of voters to hold lawmakers accountable at the ballot box. But that never happens. Power shifts between parties, yet the federal government keeps growing, no matter who is in charge.

At some point, the American people must summon the political will to amend the Constitution and impose limits on the legislature. Potential safeguards include capping government spending (for example, limiting current-year spending to 10% of the prior year’s GDP), imposing term limits to reduce the influence of lobbyists, requiring single-issue bills to prevent pork-barrel spending, granting the president a line-item veto, and mandating a balanced budget.

America’s founders miscalculated. They never envisioned that a nation that fought a revolution against government overreach would allow another oppressive system to take its place. They could not have imagined that a country built by rugged individualists — who produced the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution — would become a society captivated by collectivist ideologies.

The DOGE’s initial efforts are a promising start, but they are not enough. The fight for fiscal sanity will span multiple administrations and possibly generations. Limited-government conservatives must prepare for a long battle. The DOGE is just the first step on a much longer journey.

Mark Levin finds the PERFECT quote to capture the swamp



The left, crying about democracy being at stake, is doing whatever it can to thwart Donald Trump’s agenda by attacking Elon Musk and the DOGE.

Liberals may say that what Trump is doing is unconstitutional, but Mark Levin knows the truth: Donald Trump “has a right to run the executive branch,” including matters of employees and spending, however he sees fit.

“He doesn't have an obligation to give a rubber stamp to what the prior administration did with discretionary spending; he doesn't have an obligation to keep every single employee that he inherits when he comes into office,” he says.

Regardless, the swamp is employing lower courts to wage lawfare against President Trump in an effort to tangle his MAGA agenda up in lawsuits, thereby stopping, or at least slowing, the mandate.

However, “The courts don't have the power to run the executive branch,” says Levin, calling the notion “a clear violation of separation of powers.”

So if these “unelected judges, who are all lawyers,” can’t constitutionally stop the president from fulfilling his fundamental duties, what’s this all about?

Well, what it really comes down to is survival. The swamp is not going down without a fight.

 

Donald Trump ran on the promise to shrink the size of government and to root out bureaucratic corruption. While the people cheer (this is what they’ve long wanted), Democrats spiral into panic, Levin explains.

“This fraudulent spending, these missing monies, the corruption, the grift — this is what they've created,” he says.

Nothing captures the Democrats better, he says, than the following quote from French economist Frédéric Bastiat: “When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.”

Levin then explains how the deep-state politicians and bureaucrats have made plunder their way of life. They’ve created a legal system for it via radically left-wing activist judges and a moral code that glorifies it via the government-subsidized media.

So the swamp may cry that “democracy is at stake,” but in truth, the only thing that’s at stake is the swamp’s way of life.

To hear more of Levin’s analysis, watch the clip above.

Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Mitch McConnell’s birthday present to America: Bowing out of the Senate



Republican Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is 83 years old, and he has finally decided – after 18 years — that he will not be running for re-election in 2026.

"Seven times my fellow Kentuckians have sent me to the Senate. Every day in between, I have been humbled by the trust they place in me to do their business, right here," he said in a speech on the Senate floor. "Representing our commonwealth has been the honor of a lifetime."

"I will not seek this honor for an eighth time," he continued. "My current term in the Senate will be my last."


His colleagues rose to their feet in a standing ovation, and Sara Gonzales of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered” is having a hard time hiding her excitement as well.

“Donald Trump said he was eliminating DEI from all government agencies, so there will be no more turtle inclusion in the Senate,” Gonzales jokes.

“He was seven times elected longest-serving Senate party leader in United States history,” she continues. “He decided, you know, to celebrate his birthday, he would announce to the world that he would not be running for re-election. Which, honestly, was more of a present for us.”

“Lectern Guy” Adam Johnson isn’t convinced.

“Did he announce this himself? Or was this one of his staffers on Twitter. Does he know he’s retiring?” Johnson jokes.

“That’s a good question, because maybe it was like the Joe Biden coup where it wasn’t him that endorsed Kamala, it was like a random 20-year-old staffer who was in charge of his Twitter account,” Gonzales says, adding, “I like that theory.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Leftist Wisconsin Senator Confuses ‘Coup’ With Will Of The People

Sen. Tammy Baldwin claims the opening weeks of President Trump's second term are looking more like a coup.' A duly elected coup?

Kash Patel is the leader the FBI needs



“It’s not OK for the government to break the law,” Kash Patel explained. As President Trump’s nominee for FBI director, Patel’s words to me carry significant weight. His career proves his unwavering commitment to the rule of law, accountability, and, above all, the American people.

We were talking on a Friday evening in July 2018, just as we wrapped up a long week in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building next to the White House. At the time, I was the special assistant to the president for counterterrorism and transnational threats on the National Security Council. Patel was my deputy. We had worked together closely since his hiring by National Security Adviser John Bolton.

Patel represents the American dream. Most importantly, Patel delivers when it matters.

We were deep in the Russiagate investigation, and new evidence had just emerged from the Justice Department inspector general. The findings confirmed severe FBI misconduct in handling the “election interference” probe. At the center of uncovering this scandal stood Patel.

More than anyone, Patel sought the truth. He remained committed to his work, driven not by politics or ambition but by integrity and good faith. As senior counsel for the House Intelligence Committee, he led one of the most consequential investigations in modern political history. He never sought self-promotion, career advancement, or approval from Washington’s entrenched bureaucracy.

That kind of dedication is rare in Washington, D.C. Many enter public service only to advance their own ambitions, putting political gains above the facts and the fair application of the law. Patel, however, remains focused on preserving the rule of law and holding power centers accountable.

Ironically, this mission makes him a threat to the political establishment — including within the FBI.

His commitment to restoring the FBI’s true purpose makes his nomination more important than ever. On that evening in July 2018, his words were not complex, but they were powerful. They embodied everything he stood for.

A skeptic becomes an advocate

I admit I was skeptical of Patel when we first met. Our paths crossed when he took over oversight of international counterterrorism organizations at the NSC. As a former Army Green Beret and mid-level government bureaucrat on loan from the Department of Defense, I prided myself on being aggressively apolitical.

Before working with him, I had only seen Patel through the lens of internet coverage, which painted him as a divisive partisan figure. The media labeled him a “right-wing operative,” accusing him of trying to “punish” the FBI with the infamous “Nunes Memo.”

But those claims were false.

Patel represents the American dream. His sharp legal acumen and relentless work ethic propelled him to nearly every corner of the legal landscape. That tenacity quickly earned him the trust of President Trump, his closest advisers, and even career national security officials.

Most importantly, Patel delivers when it matters.

Leadership under pressure

During the Trump administration, we had an opportunity to dismantle al-Qaeda’s remaining leadership, an achievement once thought impossible. I made it my top priority. However, my efforts faced resistance from Pentagon and CIA leadership. Their reluctance — whether due to bureaucracy or outright hostility — stood in the way.

I knew the only way to get the job done required direct presidential intervention, something beyond my reach. Patel stepped in without hesitation. “I got it,” he said. “I’ll talk to the president.”

That was Patel’s strength — he knew how to cut through bureaucracy and drive real action. We became close confidants. When I needed a deputy, I knew Patel was the right person to step up.

He was a leader — professional, polite, and decent to everyone around him. But he never sacrificed his core beliefs or love for the country just to maintain the status quo. He complemented my often haphazard approach with sharp discernment, cutting through complex situations to offer clear, concise guidance.

Though his detractors labeled him a “heartless, sycophantic fundamentalist,” Patel proved to be the exact opposite. He understood government intricacies and navigated them with empathy, a sharp mind, and total professionalism.

And let’s be clear — our work was not political. Patel and I were part of a 20-person team, all career civil servants or military officers from both parties. The exception was Patel. Yet his effectiveness and integrity earned him the respect of those around him.

A defining moment: The Philip Walton rescue

Patel’s leadership extended beyond policy and intelligence work. One of the greatest displays of moral courage I ever witnessed was his commitment to rescuing Philip Walton.

On October 26, 2020, militants kidnapped Walton from his farm in Niger, intending to sell him to a regional terrorist group. The captors made a fatal mistake by staying in the same location for three nights in a row. Intelligence reports confirmed their whereabouts, but time was running out.

Patel was with President Trump at a hostage rescue operations unit when the intelligence came in. He understood the kidnappers’ strategy, recalling the 2016 case of American missionary Jeffrey Woodke, who was kidnapped in Niger and sold to an al-Qaeda faction. Woodke remained in captivity for years before French commandos finally rescued him.

Patel knew immediate action was necessary. If the kidnappers moved, Walton could disappear into a terror network, possibly forever. Patel briefed the president, who immediately ordered military forces to act.

U.S. Navy SEALs, supported by Air Force special operations teams, launched one of the most complex hostage rescue missions in history. Patel and I monitored the operation from the White House Situation Room.

This was not his first time leading in high-pressure situations. Just months earlier, we had advised President Trump during the operation to eliminate ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Yet unlike that mission, where top officials — including Mike Pompeo and Gina Haspel — actively participated, they sent lower-level staffers this time. Pentagon officials Mark Esper and General Mark Milley resisted Patel’s request to conduct the briefing at the Pentagon, despite the logistical advantages.

Nevertheless, the operation succeeded. Walton was rescued, and three of his four captors were killed.

The mission underscored Patel’s moral clarity and operational expertise. When America needed action, he delivered. Meanwhile, career bureaucrats in Washington prioritized politics over results.

The right choice for the FBI

A few days later, on Nov. 9, 2020, President Trump fired Esper, and I stepped in as acting secretary of defense. I accepted the role only because Patel agreed to serve as my chief of staff. Together, we executed Trump’s directives, winding down the War on Terror, bringing troops home from unnecessary conflicts, and ensuring that service members and their families had a voice.

In December 2020, Patel and I visited the Navy SEALs who rescued Philip Walton. As we stood among those heroes, I was reminded why America remains the ultimate meritocracy. Patel, the son of immigrants, rose through the ranks by studying, working hard, and making difficult decisions. He demonstrated that integrity and courage still have a place in public service.

Now, as Trump’s nominee for FBI director, Patel represents exactly what the American people need. The rank-and-file agents of the FBI deserve leadership that empowers them to carry out their mission — protecting the country, not serving political interests.

Patel will demand the highest standards of conduct while treating FBI agents with respect and dignity. He will enforce the Constitution without bias, something the agency desperately needs.

America needs a strong, principled FBI director. Kash Patel is the right man for the job.

GOP Sen. Markwayne Mullin Decries Social Media For Giving Americans Insight Into Congress’s Backdoor Dealmaking

The Sooner State Republican decried how social media has hampered lawmakers' ability to negotiate on legislation behind closed doors.