A fierce clash erupted this week as Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino publicly condemned a New York Post column, labeling it a calculated attack orchestrated by those resistant to change within the Bureau. The article, penned by Miranda Devine, painted a critical portrait of FBI Director Kash Patel and Bongino himself, relying heavily on anonymous sources.
Devine’s piece alleged a chaotic environment under Patel’s leadership, describing the FBI as a “rudderless ship” and questioning the Director’s experience. Sources, many identified as current and former agents, leveled accusations ranging from excessive social media use to a preoccupation with personal advancement. The claims were delivered with pointed language, even resorting to personal insults.
The core of the criticism stemmed from a 115-page assessment compiled by a group of agents who openly acknowledged their presence during a previous administration, a period they characterized by divisive policies and a decline in public trust. This assessment served as the foundation for Devine’s accusations, highlighting a deep-seated resistance to the current leadership’s reform efforts.
Among the grievances detailed in the report was a seemingly minor detail – Patel’s preference for wearing a raid jacket with Velcro patches still attached during travel. This, along with an accusation of taking undue credit for an arrest, was presented as evidence of a broader pattern of questionable judgment. Even a routine inquiry into a security leak was framed as “punitive” behavior.
However, buried within the article was a startling admission: the continued presence of strong political bias within the FBI itself. Sources revealed that “Trump Derangement Syndrome” remained prevalent, with agents openly expressing contempt for the current president and favoring left-leaning news outlets within Bureau facilities.
The report also suggested a deliberate effort to recruit individuals with specific political leanings, prioritizing candidates from educational backgrounds known for their progressive viewpoints. This revelation underscored the depth of the cultural challenges facing the new leadership team.
The FBI swiftly responded, with Assistant Director for Public Affairs Ben Williamson defending Patel and Bongino’s disruptive approach. He acknowledged the criticism was inevitable, given their commitment to overhauling an agency with historically low public approval. Williamson challenged the New York Post’s reliance on anonymous complaints, framing it as an elevation of unsubstantiated accusations.
Williamson then presented a compelling counter-narrative, citing significant increases in key performance indicators. Violent crime arrests had risen by 100%, espionage arrests by 40%, and the homicide rate was experiencing a double-digit decline. The Bureau had also dramatically increased its efforts to protect children and combat violent extremism.
Furthermore, the FBI had released a record number of documents to Congress – nearly 40,000 in just nine months – demonstrating a commitment to transparency and accountability. These statistics, Williamson argued, spoke for themselves, proving the effectiveness of the new leadership’s unconventional methods despite the resistance.
The unfolding situation reveals a stark divide within the FBI, a battle between those clinging to the past and those determined to forge a new path. It’s a conflict fueled by deeply held beliefs and a struggle for the very soul of the nation’s premier law enforcement agency.
