A Summary of Kash Patel’s Disqualifications to Lead FBI
I expect Kash Patel will be confirmed; I even expect that Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee will be utterly feckless in Kash’s confirmation hearing tomorrow.
Nevertheless I wanted to summarize his disqualifications.
Kash got where he is by substituting the Steele dossier for the real Russian investigation, which was instrumental in Trump’s success at minimizing the damage of one after another Trump associate lying about what really happened in 2016.
Kash gets a lot of credit for the Nunes Memo, with many right wingers claiming that the Horowitz Report vindicated it.
It didn’t. As I showed, both the Nunes Memo and the Schiff Memo got things right and got things wrong; mostly they just spoke past each other, which was fundamentally based on that substitution of the Steele dossier for the real Russian investigation.
Nevertheless, one of Kash’s lasting gripes (against Robert Hur) has to do with efforts to limit how much Kash was releasing at the time.
Kash did more than that as a House staffer, though. He continued to chase his conspiracy theories as Congress turned to criminalizing Hillary Clinton. He’s actually the staffer who asked the question that set up Michael Sussmann for a failed prosecution years later. He set up what would later become the Durham investigation — a four year effort to criminalize being victimized by a hostile nation-state.
And then, after Durham filed a wildly misleading court filing misrepresenting the discovery by some Georgia Tech researchers that someone was using a YotaPhone inside the Executive Office of the Presidency during the Obama term, Kash sent out a letter outright lying about the claims.
The whole thing is riddled with lies, but ultimately it amounts to a conflation of the Obama-era discovery with the discovery of the ties between a marketing server, Alfa Bank, and a Spectrum Health server. Kash’s letter was the final step before Trump jumped on the lies and called for Sussmann’s execution. Kash is a key cog in the way Trump has elicited threats against others.
Kash also paid a lot of former FBI agents who were disgruntled about having to investigate Trump supporters.
And when news of the discovery that boxes of documents that Trump had returned had classified documents in them, Kash invented a claim that Trump had declassified all those documents.
At least one Jack Smith witness — someone with the potty mouth of Eric Herschmann — disputes any claim there was a standing order to declassify documents. That witness described someone “unhinged” and “crazy” who first got access to the White House through the Member of Congress he worked for, who started the “declassified everything” claim when it first started appearing in the media, which is when Kash Patel made the claim.
Jack Smith described what happened next. When investigators subpoenaed Kash to test his claims that Trump had this standing order, Kash tried to delay compliance indefinitely by hiring a lawyer already busy defending a January 6 seditionist. When the aspiring FBI Director did first testify, Kash pled the Fifth repeatedly.
On Monday, September 19, 2022, the FBI personally served witness Kashyap “Kash” Patel with a grand jury subpoena, commanding him to appear on September 29, 2022. Prior to engaging with counsel, Patel contacted government counsel on Friday, September 23, 2022, to request a two-week extension. The government agreed to that extension and set his appearance for October 13, 2022. Thereafter, [Stan] Woodward contacted government counsel on September 27, 2022, explaining that he had just begun a lengthy jury trial–United States v. Rhodes et a., No. 22-cr-15 (D.D.C.)–but that Patel had retained him. On September 30, 2022, Woodward request an addition indefinite extension of Patel’s grand jury appearance until some point after the Rhodes trial concluded. (Ultimately, the verdict in the trial was not returned until November 29, 2022, approximately six weeks after Patel’s already-postponed appearance date of October 13, 2022.) The government was unwilling to consent to the indefinite extension that Woodward sought. Woodward, for his part, declined various alternatives offered by the government, including scheduling Patel’s grand jury appearance for Friday afternoons, when the Rhodes trial was not sitting, and a voluntary interview by prosecutors and agents over a weekend.
On October 7, 2022, Patel (through Woodward) filed a motion to quash his grand jury appearance, arguing that requiring Patel to appeal pursuant to the grand jury’s subpoena would violate his constitutional rights by depriving him of his counsel of choice, i.e., Woodward, who was occupied with a jury trial elsewhere in the courthouse. The Court denied the motion to quash on October 11, 2022, see In re Grand Jury No. 22-03 Subpoena 63-13, No. 22-gj-41, Minute Order (Oct. 11, 2022), and required Patel to appear as scheduled on October 13. See id. (“Mr Patel requests a delay of some unspecified time period in his testimony because his counsel, Stanley Woodward, will be engaged in the United States v. Rhodes trial, Case No. 22-cr-15, scheduled to last several weeks, with no promises as to when his counsel will still have time available. Mr. Patel retained Mr. Woodward on the attorney’s first day of jury selection in Rhodes when such circumstance made fully apparent that counsel would be unavailable during Mr. Patel’s scheduled grand jury testimony. In addition, the government has already demonstrated flexibility in meeting Patel’s scheduling needs . . . . Testifying before a grand jury is not a game of find-or-seek-a-better-time or catch-me-if-you-can, and a witness cannot indefinitely delay a proceeding based on his counsel’s convenience. . . .”).
Patel appeared before the grand jury on October 13, 2022, where he repeatedly declined to answer questions on the basis of the rights afforded to him by the Fifth Amendment. Thereafter, the government moved to compel Patel’s testimony. The Court granted the government’s motion to compel, contingent on the government offering statutory immunity. [my emphasis]
Aileen Cannon has buried any description of what Kash said when compelled to testify. This nomination should be held until any discussion of Patel in the Jack Smith report is released (but thus far Dick Durbin has shown no interest in doing so; DOJ just dropped their appeal).
But it should never be passed, because Kash is a menace. In his repeated efforts to falsely claim that January 6 defendants were treated any worse than any other mostly-violent pretrial detainees during the COVID period, he suggested that the people detained for assaulting cops were being mistreated.
As I have shown (and Bulwark did before me) Kash’s cheerleading for January 6 defendants amounts to arguing that someone accused of assaulting cops who grabs a gun when his probation officers show up should not then be jailed, nor should someone who directly threatened members of Congress, called on a mob to grab their weapons, and then assaulted cops.
Kash Patel will do and say anything to protect Trump and his flunkies — up to and including risking the safety of members of Congress.
Such a person would not serve as Director of FBI. He would serve as a means to turn government against Trump’s adversaries.
I feel a desire to quote your closing paragraphs in email to my congresspeople. Yea or nay?
Always good to ask. But if you identify her and the quote, do it accurately, and provide a cite to your source, you don’t need her permission to quote a few sentences of her work. It would be considered “fair use.”
https://case.edu/library/research-tools/digital-scholarship/publishing-and-copyright/fair-use-exception-copyright
Sure, quote it–and point to the case of Ryan Nichols.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2025/01/28/confirming-kash-patel-will-get-senators-drug-through-the-streets/
The phrase “Kash’s cheerleading for January 6 defendants” brought to mind my senator, Josh Hawley, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee. I shudder to think what Hawley might ask.
But I would not be surprised if he once again blithely followed the “investigating the investigators” route he took with Christopher Wray’s appearance before the SJC in March 2021, and would not be surprised if that route was as fact-free today as it was back then.
I used to think taking the Fifth was a disqualifier for a position at that level. But my home state, Florida, elected Rick Scott as governor and then US Senator. Floridians didn’t seem to mind that he took the Fifth at least 75 times in a deposition addressing Medicare fraud.
But Patel’s taking the Fifth is still worth raising hell about. If nothing else, the people deciding his nomination may not all be as crazy as Floridians.
If he does take the fifth in the hearing, I hope a Dem Senator points out that this isn’t a criminal trial, it’s a job interview — and any employer who hires someone who refuses to respond with accurate specificity to specific allegations of wrongdoing deserves the catastrophes that will result from hiring said punk.
An admission against interest by Kash Patel could be used against him in another forum. But since most of his alleged wrongdoing would seem to violate federal laws, accountability would depend on the statute of limitations, who wins the presidency in 2028, and what their priorities are. Trump will have left mountains of wrongdoing in his wake for a Democratic president and their AG to attend to.
Just gonna leave this here for now . . .
The stack of pardons waiting to be signed on the morning of January 20, 2029 will be at least as large as the stack of executive orders that were waiting to be signed on the afternoon of January 20, 2025.
All that is true, but I still have trouble wrapping my head around the fact that taking the Fifth doesn’t per se disqualify you from being FBI Director. It is, after all, the highest “police officer” position in the United States.
Ahh the optimism that we may have a legit election in 28. Something trump didn’t have in 20, sycophants in all positions of power. Even if dems legitimately win. Trump will cry foul, overturn the election and institute actions he could only dream about in the 2020 election.
Then you’ve got a lot of work to do between now and January 20, 2029, to prevent that from happening. So do a lot of other people.
I honestly think the real odds of us having any type of legit election in 28 is roughly 40/60 against. . A lot depends on the midterms, at which point I’ll (an admitted non-expert) reevaluate.
Like Peterr said, there’s gonna be a floor to ceiling stack of pardons awaiting Trump’s signature at the end of his term, and SCOTUS declared that all “official acts” are legal. Even the illegal ones.
A question… IF the Dems had a majority in House and Senate can they in some fashion impeach the director of the FBI?
Questions about can we impeach so and so, remind me of the definition of insanity: someone who keeps doing the same thing, expecting a different outcome. When the Dems have a 2/3 majority in both houses after 2026, ask your question again.
So that’s “yes” but you need a 2/3rds majority. ;-)
I should’ve looked it up. I appreciate the definition of insanity with regards to the question itself. My bad.
Who the hell believes that Trump and the Republicans will even permit a 2028 election?
Rhymes with Reichstag Fire.
Defeatism is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Here’s some suggested lines of questioning for Kash.
1. Describe your negotiations with Nunes before joining HPSCI about what you would need to accomplish before joining the NSC. Did you communicate directly with Flynn & Grassley? Or only Nunes?
2. When did you become aware of Hunter Biden as a national security concern? Did you monitor Hunter’s activities while you were still with HPSCI? Did you monitor Hunter’s activities after you joined NSC? When did you first become aware there were any FBI or IRS or DE USA investigations into Hunter Biden? When did you first learn Hunter Biden had a relationship with Dr. Keith Ablow?
3. Describe your relationship with John Solomon. When did you first meet Solomon? Did you leak any information to Solomon? What topics? Did you review the “FBI produced” Hunter Biden bank records that were leaked to Solomon?
4. Describe your relationship with Miranda Devine. Have you ever met Devine? When?
5. When did you first learn about Hunter Biden and Burisma appearing in Alexander Smirnov’s 2017 1023? When did you first learn the name Alexander Smirnov? Were you briefed on Brady’s investigation while it was happening? When did you first see the 2020 1023 that Grassley leaked in 2023? Did you discuss with Grassley Hunter Biden or Burisma?
For those unfamiliar
City share bikes are a terrorist’s best friend – Miranda Divine
She’s just one of the people I’d hoped to NEVER hear of again. It’s a long list.
Yes, and that type of article is a perfect example of why I keep pointing out how puzzling it is that her new book is full of intelligence analysis.
Her lane is clearly culture war, tabloid nonsense. For her to write a book with analysis, she is likely a propaganda front for someone telling her what to write.
Her new book about the Hunter Biden scandal somehow leaves out Parnas, Harvey, Nunes, Patel, the Ablow laptop, Pruss, Firtash, and barely mentions Solomon.
The analytical nature of the book, along with cleaning up or leaving out minor errors that she previously reported, is puzzling to me as it’s a deviation from her mean.
sort of OT:
Robert Menendez has been sentenced to 11 years. The judge reminded him of what he’s lost. Menendez whined about how unfair it was to him.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/politics/article/judge-set-to-sentence-former-sen-bob-menendez-20062673.php
The two main reasons for these insane EOs, imo, is first to break the government, and second, test the GOP Congresspeoples’ level of blind obedience and imperviousness to humiliation.
Borowitz just posted a great RFK joke: the worm that ate his brain testifies to Congress that RFK is worthless at math as a result of his (the worm’s) eating habits, to which Tommy Tuberville replies, “He still has more brains than I got!”
And the beat goes on
And the bear goes on
worms keep hounding schisms in the brain
La di da di di
La di da di do
How do people become such lickspittle toads to Donald Trump, like Kash Patel? He ‘writes’ a children’s book proclaiming his unceasing fealty to a king who resembles Trump except for the king not being morbidly obese, without hideous pits and rosacea on his face and valgus knees that make Trump walk like a penguin in real life? This is sick, infantile stuff but Trump and his army of sycophants lick it up like it was honey. Repulsive hero worship you usually don’t see in people older than adolescents.