MAGA Allies SLAM Kash Patel’s Failures at the FBI

Summary

---

Bulwark Takes: MAGA Allies SLAM Kash Patel’s Failures at the FBI

Host: Tim Miller
Guest: Mike Feinberg (former FBI agent, Lawfare fellow)
Date: September 13, 2025

---

Episode Overview

This episode centers on widespread bipartisan criticism of Kash Patel’s leadership as FBI Director following a highly publicized assassination in Utah. Host Tim Miller interviews former FBI agent Mike Feinberg to unpack Patel's recent missteps, the systemic issues at the Bureau, and ramifications of internal shake-ups. Notably, even MAGA-aligned pundits and former supporters have turned on Patel, raising urgent questions about the stability, integrity, and effectiveness of the FBI under his tenure.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Mike Feinberg’s Background & Experience at FBI

Timestamps: [00:00–01:49]

• Feinberg recounts his forced resignation from the FBI after being linked (via Dan Bongino) to Peter Strzok, a known Trump critic.
• He highlights career impacts: lost promotions, looming demotion, and invasive polygraphs about his personal connections.
• Feinberg expresses still-raw heartbreak about leaving important China-focused counterintelligence work, noting the broader Bureau exodus under Patel and Bongino.

“As much as I love the fiction of Orwell and the films of Terry Gilliam, this was not something I wanted to put myself through.” — Mike Feinberg [00:35]

---

2. The Cost of Lost Expertise

Timestamps: [01:49–03:17]

• Tim Miller points out Feinberg’s critical China expertise as the kind of loss the FBI can’t afford.
• The discussion pivots to May Syed (“May”), a Pakistani-American counterterrorism specialist, ousted from a crucial Utah post.
• Feinberg vouches for May’s stellar reputation and unique skills, emphasizing the value of diversity and deep cultural knowledge in national security roles.

“She had language abilities that most FBI agents don't... She had experience in the culture because she had actually immigrated here from Pakistan, which I would suspect played a part in why she was ousted.” — Mike Feinberg [02:26]

---

3. Kash Patel’s Performance in Utah Crisis

Timestamps: [03:17–04:44]

• Discussion turns to recent criticism of Patel, specifically in the wake of the Utah assassination case.
• Miller admits discomfort critiquing FBI operational matters versus campaign strategy, but frames Patel’s performance as “objectively clownish.”

“It just seems like objectively though, he was clownish.” — Tim Miller [04:08]

---

4. Patel’s Unprofessional Crisis Leadership

Timestamps: [04:44–06:31]

• Feinberg dissects Patel’s errors:
  • Mistaken tweets about suspect custody status.
  • Breaking protocol by commenting on an active investigation.
  • Failing to recuse himself despite a personal relationship with the victim (Charlie Kirk).
• Emphasizes that such behaviors undermine public trust and potentially compromise investigative integrity.

“The FBI is supposed to speak through indictments and complaints and arrests. It is not supposed to be opining mid investigation about ongoing matters...it taints the investigation.” — Mike Feinberg [05:25]

• Both joke about Patel's demeanor and appearance, noting how nonverbals (“always looks scared with his big eyes” and “the amount of hair gel he uses…”) don’t project confidence (light-hearted, but illustrating broader issues of perceived competence) [06:31–06:59].

---

5. Inappropriate Public Statements & Symbolism

Timestamps: [06:59–08:10]

• Patel concludes Utah presser with, “‘Rest now, brother. We have the watch and I’ll see you in Valhalla.’”
• Feinberg takes issue with invoking Valhalla, noting its warrior ethos contrasted with Patel’s own lack of risk-taking.
• Asserts this kind of performative symbolism is both “not appropriate” and reveals a disconnect from the realities of law enforcement sacrifice.

“Kash Patel has never risked his own livelihood or body for any other human being. And the chances of him ever making it into somewhere like Valhalla are probably pretty slim.” — Mike Feinberg [07:22]

---

6. MAGA & Conservative Allies Join the Backlash

Timestamps: [08:10–09:59]

• Miller reads damning criticism of Patel from key MAGA voices:
  • Steve Bannon: “I don’t know why Kash flew out there...In the future, the public assumes you’re working together as partnerships. There’s certain assumptions when you walk to the microphone of information we don’t need.” [08:32]
  • Chris Ruffo: “I think it’s time for Republicans to assess whether Kash Patel is the right man to run the FBI.”
  • Kyle Seraphin: “Screw up moron. Most embarrassing thing I’ve ever seen from an FBI director.”
  • Joe Biggs (Proud Boys): Similar negative comments.
• Even dedicated Trump/MAGA loyalists see Patel’s performance as beyond the pale, suggesting loss of operational trust and political capital.

---

7. Internal Pushback & Wrongful Termination Lawsuit

Timestamps: [09:59–12:31]

• Three former high-level agents, including Brian Driscoll (acting director post-Chris Wray), sue for wrongful termination.
• Lawsuit details reveal refusal to fire subordinates who were targeted for political reasons; their subsequent firing demonstrates exacting political purges.
• Feinberg feels vindicated yet saddened: admiration for whistleblowers, but personal pain at his own leadership’s failure to show such integrity.

“Nothing but admiration for Steve Jensen and Brian Driscoll and Spencer Evans and just sort of a renewed distaste for how my own field office treated me.” — Mike Feinberg [11:45]

---

8. Scope of FBI Purge & Systemic Risks

Timestamps: [12:31–13:54]

• Based on patterns, any senior executive appointed by Chris Wray has likely been quietly ousted—often through forced retirements to mask the scale.
• Staggers the firings to minimize public attention and backlash.
• Net result is devastating: “loss of leadership, loss of subject matter expertise,” with consequences for U.S. security that outsiders don't yet fully grasp.

“I still even now don't think people outside the government realize how bad it actually is and how long it's going to take us to repair things if and when we get the chance.” — Mike Feinberg [13:41]

---

9. Operational Consequences: Domestic Terrorism Downplayed

Timestamps: [13:54–16:45]

• Core risk is deprioritizing domestic terrorism and political extremism: 20% of FBI workforce diverted to helping ICE with immigration, at expense of monitoring and combating extremist threats.
• Fewer resources for source development, investigations stall or slow; administrative burden increases.
• The recent Utah assassination and Minnesota church shooting both spotlight these vulnerabilities: lack of attention, insufficient social media monitoring, and critical resources redirected.

“If they instead are writing targeting packages for ICE to arrest grandmothers and children and deport them to third world countries, like, they're not able to do what was their previous mission...that opportunity cost is an increased likelihood, and now a realized likelihood of domestic terror attacks.” — Mike Feinberg [15:30]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Being Ousted:
  “While I'm a little bit glib about it now, was and is still pretty heartbreaking for me to leave the organization.” — Mike Feinberg [01:30]

• On Public Comments & Recusal:
  “Anybody who has the slightest experience in law enforcement would know that when that's the case, you should really be recusing yourself.” — Mike Feinberg [05:55]

• On Leadership Loss:
  “I still even now don't think people outside the government realize how bad it actually is and how long it's going to take us to repair things if and when we get the chance.” — Mike Feinberg [13:41]

• On Patriotism & Sacrifice:
  “Just going to point out Kash Patel has never risked his own livelihood or body for any other human being. And the chances of him ever making it into somewhere like Valhalla are probably pretty slim.” — Mike Feinberg [07:40]

• On Long-term Consequences:
  “That opportunity cost is an increased likelihood, and now a realized likelihood of…domestic terror attacks.” — Mike Feinberg [16:44]

---

Key Segment Timestamps

• [00:00] Mike Feinberg’s FBI backstory
• [01:49] May Syed's ousting and FBI loss of expertise
• [04:44] Patel’s investigative mismanagement
• [06:59] “See you in Valhalla” and inappropriate symbolism
• [08:10] MAGA and conservative criticisms of Patel
• [09:50] Wrongful termination lawsuit
• [12:31] Systemic purges and loss of leadership
• [13:54] Prioritizing ICE over domestic terror
• [15:30] Why FBI can’t watch all terrorist chatter
• [16:45] Closing thoughts

---

Final Takeaway

This episode offers a revealing, unsparing look at the cascading consequences of politicizing federal law enforcement. The fallout from Patel’s tenure—marked by public gaffes, internal purges, and misplaced priorities—is drawing fire not just from traditional opponents but former MAGA allies, raising crucial questions about the FBI’s capacity to protect the nation in the face of mounting threats and missed warnings.

---

Transcript

[A]

Hey, everybody. Tim oh, from the Bulwark here, welcoming back. Mike Feinberg is a former FBI agent, currently a fellow at Lawfare, and wanted to talk to him about. It's been a rough 48 hours for cash Patel, our current FBI director. I wanted to get his perspective on that. Mike, you were on the podcast after. How should we say, you got resigned, Gently pushed towards resignation anyway, a couple of months ago, and we talked about that. Folks can go listen to that full interview. We'll put a link in the show notes here. But for people who missed it, maybe just give them the elevator pitch on your story and how you ended up outside the FBI and on this here YouTube channel.

[B]

Of course, it's not really a unique story at this point in the administration, but essentially Dan Bongino somehow discovered that I was friends with a former FBI counterintelligence official, Pete Struck, who, as most people know, ended up inadvertently becoming a very public critic of Donald Trump once this was discovered. In short order, it was relayed to me by my special agent in charge, Dominique Evans, that I would not be receiving a number of promotions I was in for that I should probably steal myself to actually get demoted. And at the very least, that would be subject to polygraphs probing the nature of my relationship with Pete. As much as I love the fiction of Orwell and the films of Terry Gilliam, this was not something I wanted to put myself through. And I was, in all candor, pretty concerned about a lot of the changes that were happening at the FBI under Patel and Bongino to begin with. So I made the decision that, while I'm a little bit glib about it now, was and is still pretty heartbreaking for me to leave the organization.

[A]

Yeah. And one of the things we talked about when we first talked is like, you know, the loss of expertise and. You're not going to gas yourself up. I'll gas you up. You were working on China and, you know, counterterrori issues around that feels like the kind of person you'd want to have, given the threats we face from China. Bunch of other threats. The example that we've seen now in Utah, where cash has. Has started to take a lot of heat. And I'm getting into that in a second. But I'm curious more just what you think about. About what has happened there and the performance and the potential risks. There was a report, Metab Syed, who's a Pakistani American, she's a counterterror expert.

[B]

Yeah, she goes by May.

[A]

May. Okay. So, you know, May casually.

[B]

We never worked together, but we knew a lot of the same people in common. We overlapped quarters briefly. And I actually almost went to go work for her at one point, but got another job before that happened. So I don't know her incredibly well. I know her professional reputation, and it was, quite frankly, sterling. She did a lot of counterterrorism operations both in the northeast United States and overseas in Pakistan, where she was stationed for some time. She had language abilities that most FBI agents don't. She had experience in the culture because she had actually immigrated here from Pakistan, which I would suspect played a part in why she was ousted. But, yeah, like, look, I like the.

[A]

Type of person, I guess, point being, she was supposed to be. She would have been the special Agent in charge in Utah overseeing this investigation. Yeah, the Charlie Kirk assassination seems like kind of person you'd rather have. You'd want to have in there.

[B]

Yeah. And to be clear, I worked for quite some time with the current Special Agent in charge. We overlapped in the D.C. field office. And he is somebody for whom I have nothing but respect in terms of his experience both in crisis management and his integrity and empathy for other employees. So, like, I don't want my criticism what's going on to reflected him, but, like, yeah, may you counterterrorism better than almost any other SAC I could think of in the Bureau. And she's exactly the sort of person you would normally want in a situation like the horrific one we just saw over the past few days.

[A]

Well, Cash has been taking a lot of heat, even from allies, which I think is the most interesting part. And I know it's telling about how bad it is. I'm going to read some of those in a second. But I'm just curious for you because some of the stuff. Look, occasionally on these sort of situations, I feel like I'm throwing spitballs from the sidelines. But, you know, this isn't my area of expertise. I feel a lot better criticizing somebody's campaign strategy. You know, that's my area of expertise. Then, yeah. Then. Then their leadership over a crisis situation such as this law enforcement operation. It just seems like objectively though, he was clownish. But I'm curious as somebody who knows this stuff better, how you assess what we've seen from Cash.

[B]

Yeah, look, I don't think he actively screwed anything up. The investigation in general looks like it was pretty above board. They got the subject relatively quickly. I think it was in hours or so, which, you know, is pretty good. What. What I think we should point out, though, is that the way Patel Handled. Being the director of the FBI at this time was a bit of a clown show. You know, he tweeted that the subject was in custody. Then he tweeted that that was a mistake. The subject is not in custody. The person they were questioning was let go.

[A]

Have you ever seen anything like that?

[B]

Now, that question is pretty simple, but there's actually, like, a couple points to unpack. First of all, the FBI is supposed to speak through indictments and complaints and arrests. It is not supposed to be opining mid investigation about ongoing matters. You know, it taints the investigation. It colors the way witnesses who may not have been interviewed yet are going to respond to things. And it's just sort of unprofessional. The second thing about his commenting is, like, it's important to remember he had a personal relationship with the victim. And I'm not saying that as a value judgment. I'm pointing it out because anybody who has the slightest experience in law enforcement would know that when that's the case, you should really be recusing yourself. You should not be taking a heavier hand on the tiller, because it's going to call into question why you did certain things and if it was personally motivated versus operationally necessitated.

[A]

Yeah. So you don't have any thoughts just about how he always looks scared with his big eyes?

[B]

Look, I.

[A]

It just doesn't. It just doesn't bring confidence to me. Maybe that's not the most important thing. I wear sunglasses. Maybe if you can't.

[B]

It's not just that. It's also. And I realize I came on this show with my hair wet, so I made this. Maybe the pot calling the kettle black.

[A]

But, like, it's a podcast.

[B]

The amount of hair GE he uses, like, really hasn't been socially acceptable since the mid-80s. Yeah, that's my biggest.

[A]

Also, the other goofy thing again, is, like, he's given out the challenge coins with his name on it. He says at the end of the press conference today, I don't have it right in front of it. Something to the effect of, like, to your point about his relationship with Charlie, like, oh, I've got a watch. I'll see you in Valhalla.

[B]

To my friend Charlie Kirk. Rest now, brother. We have the watch and I'll see you in Valhalla.

[A]

That's just not appropriate.

[B]

It's not just not appropriate. Like, if I could go off on a sort of tangent for a second, and here's where I'll throw a spitball, you know, like, you don't know this. I spent most of undergrad studying German history and literature. And I'm quite familiar with the concept of Valhalla. It is where warriors in central and northern European mythology went after they were killed in battle. It was a place for people of a martial spirit who gave their lives in defense of their country or their countrymen or their tribe or some sort of ideal. Just going to point out Kash Patel has never risked his own livelihood or body for any other human being. And the chances of him ever making it into somewhere like Valhalla are probably pretty slim.

[A]

Kind of the opposite of times. Okay. So just to prove that it's just not us who are, you know, and I have Trump derangement syndrome. I self identify. You've obviously left. The FBI said some issues maybe. So in case people are wondering if it's personal, I want to read you a couple quotes from the last 24 hours. Here's Steve Bannon, close ally of Cash pushed Cash for this job. I don't know why Cash flew out there.

[C]

I don't know why cash flew out there, you know, thousands of miles to give us, hey, working partnerships and our great partnership in Utah. Okay, got that. No offense to the law enforcement guys. In the future, this the public assumes that you're working together as partnerships. There's certain assumptions when you walk to the microphone of information we don't need. Time and time and time again, Chris Ruffo.

[B]

This is the one that surprised me.

[A]

Yeah, Chris Ruffo, very influential, close to Ron Desantis, right wing activist, anti woke. Anti DEI is kind of his claim to fame. He wrote this. I think it's time for Republicans to assess whether Cash Patel is the right man to run the FBI. He performed terribly in the last few days and it's not clear whether he has the operational expertise to investigate, infiltrate and disrupt the violent movements of whatever ideology threatened the peace in the United States. Do you know Kyle Seraphin?

[B]

I don't personally know him, but he was on the squad that I ended up supervising. We missed each other by a few months. But I have heard a lot of stories, some of which have made it to the public, some of which have not.

[A]

He said that he self identifies as MAGA and supporters. The president, he said this screw up moron. Most embarrassing thing I've ever seen from an FBI director. I could go on, but yeah, Joe.

[B]

Biggs, a member of the proud Boys made a very similar comment. This. There's been a real conservative circular firing squad on this.

[A]

Yeah. And to me, I mean, I just think that that speaks to look in this crowd, you've got to really display either a lack of loyalty or a lack of incompetence outside of the couple. Standard deviations of acceptability. Yeah. To get to have this kind of treatment. Okay. The other thing about cash I want to get you to weigh in on. I did a video on this yesterday. Once again, it was kind of based on reporting. Interesting. In your view, having known these guys. There were three agents that have sued for, I guess, wrongful termination, essentially including Brian Driscoll, the Drizz, who is the temporary acting director for a while. Thank you. Acting director after. After the resignation of Chris Wray. Just. I guess I'd just like to hear you cook on their lawsuit. What you think about it, whether you learned anything that you didn't expect.

[B]

Yeah. I could wax philosophic on this lawsuit for hours. I will not. Out of respect for both of our times. It was really bittersweet for me to see. It was very heartening to realize that there were still leaders in the FBI who were willing to do the right thing by their employees. For those who haven't read the lawsuit, two of the three plaintiffs were fired for refusing to fire subordinates of theirs who had been politically targeted. And the fact that they were willing to do the right thing at the potential loss of their own pensions, livelihood, benefits, so on and so forth, really gave me a renewed shot of faith in a good portion of the FBI workforce. On a more personal level, I sort of felt like stitches were being pulled out of a wound for me, though, because that's exactly what my own SAC chose not to do. So I had this really, like, weird mix of feelings where nothing but admiration for Steve Jensen and Brian Driscoll and Spencer Evans and just sort of a renewed distaste for how my own field office treated me.

[A]

I guess I kind of asked you this last time, but now this lawsuit is out and it's a little more time has passed. You know, if it was not for this horrible assassination, we wouldn't have known about May really being pushed out. I guess we would have it. I was like, in one article, you know what I mean? It did not get a lot of attention. What do you. What is the scope of this? Right. Like, I mean, the picture that.

[B]

Oh, it's huge. It's. It's huge. Look, if you were appointed by Chris Ray to a senior executive position as a division head, whether of a field office or a division in headquarters, chances are, and I don't have the exact percentage, you've already been pushed out you were probably given the option to retire before they fired you, but you're no longer there. And you're no longer there not of your own choosing. And if for some reason you made the cut, your days are numbered. They're not doing it all at once because they real like they learned a lot from the firing of all the US Attorneys during the Bush administration a couple decades ago now. And I think they know that if they cleared the decks in one fell swoop, there would be an outcry, including potentially from their own allies in Congress. But if you do a couple every few weeks, it doesn't really make the news. But like the loss of leadership, loss of subject matter expertise, like I, I still even now don't think people outside the government realize how bad it actually is and how long it's going to take us to repair things if and when we get the chance.

[A]

And for you, like the biggest risks as a result of these changes or what?

[B]

I think we saw one of them this week. The Department of Justice, the FBI has deprioritized domestic terrorism and political extremism in favor of devoting 20% of the workforce to assisting ICE on immigration matters. That means agents are not building sources among political extremists. They're not able to work their investigations on those subjects with as much alacrity. There are less people at headquarters to help them check off the administrative boxes they need to do to authorize operations. Like, you know, I don't think we can draw a causal chain between all of this to what happened, but there's certainly a correlative relationship.

[A]

Yeah. And in the one in Minnesota, I just, for example, actually, let's end with that because I want to ask you, because this is another thing I felt like I was popping off a little bit on, but the shooter at the Catholic church mass shooting in Minnesota a couple weeks ago. School, church at the school, had posted. And now this is where I'm starting to feel. Middle aged. It was, it's not on Discord or on 4chan but like on a spin off version of one of, one of them but posted on one of these sites for a couple months. Like, I'm going to shoot up this church. I'm going to shoot up this church. I don't, I don't know like how that works. Is there a person at the Bureau that's scanning all these fucking message boards? Is that ignored? Is that not, does that matter? But it is noteworthy, yes, yes and no.

[B]

For domestic terrorism cases. There are real legitimate First Amendment concerns about monitoring social media, even when the views are ones that most people would find absolutely reprehensible. But at the same time, there are ways to get around that. And if there is a real threat of violence, you are authorized to do certain things. But in order for analysts to really scrub open source social media and various message boards and the like, they need to have time to do so. They need to have the support of their office to do so. And if they instead are writing targeting packages for ICE to arrest grandmothers and children and deport them to third world countries, like they're not able to do what was their previous mission like? There are opportunity costs to everything. Unfortunately, the way Patel and Bongino have chosen to run the bureau, that opportunity cost is an increased likelihood, and now a realized likelihood of. Of domestic terror attacks.

[A]

I appreciate your expertise as always. Hopefully we don't have to talk to you soon, but I kind of have a feeling we will. So I appreciate it, Mike. And get back to that little baby of yours. All right.

[B]

Thanks, man. Have a good day.