The Silence of the FBI
By 
When Patel first took over the FBI, it looked like he might be too lazy to subvert the organization’s independence and competency. But such hopes were misplaced. According to the New York Times:
Behind the scenes, his vision of an F.B.I. under President Trump is quietly taking shape. Agents have been forced out. Others have been demoted or put on leave with no explanation. And in an effort to hunt down the sources of news leaks, Mr. Patel is forcing employees to take polygraph tests.
Taken together, the moves are causing worrisome upheaval at the F.B.I., eliciting fear and uncertainty as Mr. Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, quickly restock senior ranks with agents and turn the agency’s attention to immigration. Their persistent claims that the bureau was politicized under previous directors, in addition to their swift actions against colleagues, have left employees to wonder whether they, too, will be ousted, either because they worked on an investigation vilified by Trump supporters or had ties to the previous administration.
The article continues:
Former and current F.B.I. officials warned that the attempts by Trump loyalists to mold the bureau to their worldview could ultimately have a chilling effect on agents seeking to open cases that could upset Mr. Trump or his base. They added that they viewed many of the personnel moves as retribution.
Mr. Patel and Mr. Bongino have sent a clear message on previous F.B.I. investigations that focused on Mr. Trump or his allies. In essence, former officials said, nobody is above the law except Mr. Trump.
I expect future historians — perhaps based in Canada or Germany — will have a robust debate about how to allocate blame among Senate Republicans and the Roberts Court.
