OPINION — “I have discussed, as a general matter, with Elon Musk the need for reforms and effective use of the FBI’s greatest asset, its personnel.”
That was a written answer from Kash Patel, nominee to be FBI Director, to a written question, “Have you ever discussed FBI personnel or staffing with Elon Musk?” It was posed by Sen. Corey Booker (D-N.J.) and part of a recently released 147-page package of Patel’s written answers to Senate Judiciary Committee member questions that were sent to Patel following his January 30 public confirmation hearing.
New information, some of it conflicting, that Patel supplied in the written answers has led some Senators to call for him to appear again for further questioning.
I agree.
For example, there were few questions raised at the public hearing about the sources of Patel’s multi-million-dollar income over the past four years, after his time in the first Trump administration.
Patel’s financial statement, released publicly after the January 30, hearing, raises questions about Patel’s financial involvement with a major Chinese clothing company, a pro-Russian filmmaker, the Embassy of Qatar, a Czech weapons manufacturer, and his role as a board member of Trump Media and Technology Group Corp.
Evasive answers
I will discuss the implications of Patel’s written answers below, but first, his post-hearing package of answers contained evasive or conflicting answers to some questions, including the one Patel gave about his discussions with Musk.
According to the 147-page package, after Patel’s initial answer, Sen. Booker asked follow-up questions: “How many times have you spoken with Elon Musk since your nomination in November 2024? What was the nature of those conversations? At any point, did you discuss the FBI or matters related to the FBI, including personnel matters? Did you ever discuss demotions, reassignments, or terminations of personnel, whether specific individuals or generally? Did you ever discuss potential personnel to be hired or appointed in any capacity at the Bureau, or potential consultants?”
This time Patel’s written response was, “To the best of my knowledge, since my nomination in November 2024, I have spoken with Mr. Musk twice, during which he generally offered congratulations and encouragement in my focus on, if confirmed, supporting the exemplary law enforcement officers in our communities as well as supporting aggressive constitutional oversight from Congress.”
Notice that Patel began with the legalese phrase, “To the best of my knowledge,” and went on to ignore the broader question. He ends by saying, “During these two conversations, we did not speak about other matters related to the FBI, including personnel matters,” apparently ignoring or forgetting that earlier he had answered that he had spoken to Musk about FBI personnel.
Patel should be brought back to explain his conversations with Musk and to provide more details about his repeated reassurance during the public hearing.
The termination of FBI personnel
During Patel’s public confirmation hearing, Booker also asked, “If there are actions against FBI employees that do not follow those standard process[es] that happen before you get in, will you commit to reversing any decision prior to your arrival, so that those standard processes and the standard review by the FBI inspections division will take place?”
Back on January 30, Patel responded, “I don’t know what’s going on right now over there.” He also said, “Every FBI employee will be held to the absolute same standard, and no one will be terminated for cases…All FBI employees will be protected against political retribution…I will honor the internal review process of the F.B.I.”
The firing of FBI personnel and forced retirements have now happened.
On the day after the confirmation hearing, Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, one of Trump’s former private attorneys, made public an order that called for the immediate retirement or firing of eight senior FBI officials by February 3.
After that news became public, Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) asked Patel, in a written question, “Shortly after you finished testifying, it was reported that several senior FBI leaders were told to either resign or retire…or they would be fired. Did you know of these potential firings prior to testifying before our committee?”
Patel responded again with a legalese written answer, “Not that I recall.”
Welch then asked, “Were you consulted about these potential firings in any way?” and Patel again answered, “Not that I recall.”
It is not that Patel was not talking to people in the Trump world during this period; he was. But in his written answers, when the question was asked, “When did you first learn of any potential personnel changes related to Senior FBI Officials?” Patel answered, “On Thursday, January 30th.” He added, “I learned about this when I was asked about this in the hearing before this Committee.”
Booker asked in a written question, “Has anyone on the presidential transition team ever spoken to you about, or mentioned, these terminations, forced resignations, or other adverse personnel changes?”
Patel’s written response: “I have discussed these matters with the transition team for the purposes of providing answers to these questions for the record.” But that leaves open exactly who he discussed it with and when, and whether he had discussed the firings with others earlier.
The January 6 list
Another new area that Patel should be asked about involves Bove’s demand for a list of every FBI employee who ever worked on a January 6th case, to determine whether “any additional personnel actions are necessary.”
Acting FBI Director Brian Driscoll delayed responding to Bove’s order, and FBI agents and their outside-government associations went to court to try to stop the naming of these FBI agents and employees publicly. In the end, an agreement was reached that the names would be turned over to the Justice Department, but individuals on the list would be informed two days before if their names were to be publicly released.
Patel should be asked about this because back on January 30, during his public hearing, he had said, “All FBI employees, every FBI employee will be held to the absolute same standard. No FBI employee should face adverse action based on partisan politics.”
And in one of his written answers in the 147-page package, Patel wrote, “As I said in the hearing before this committee, every FBI employee will be held to the absolute same standard. No FBI employee should face adverse action based on partisan politics.”
Financial matters
Another area which requires additional Patel testimony arises from his financial disclosure statement, which became public after the January 30 hearing.
For example, in public on January 30, Patel had said, “I have never accepted compensation for serving as a board member for Trump Media and Technology Group, and as such, I do not have any ownership or stake in this company.”
Notice, he appeared to limit receiving compensation for “serving as a board member,” which he became in April 2022. However, as his financial statement showed, Patel’s consulting company, Trishul LLC, had a Consulting Services Agreement beginning in June 2022 which terminated on March 25, 2024. In 2022, Trishul received $50,000 from Trump Media, and another $131,700 in 2023, according to SEC records.
Why did Patel want to hide Trump Media payments to his consulting firm at his confirmation hearing?
Also, two days before his public hearing to be Trump’s FBI Director, Patel was awarded 25,946 shares of Trump Media stock. According to the Trump Media report to the SEC, the stock was “as consideration for services provided…from March 25, 2024 to December 25, 2024.”
Notice the award for services to Patel starts on the same day that the Trishul relationship with Trump Media ended. At the time of award, the stock was worth some $770,000, but there was a limit that only 25 percent could be sold immediately.
In the 147-page package, Patel was asked, “Do you think that your financial entanglements with President Trump present a potential conflict of interest if you are confirmed as FBI Director? Patel responded, “To the best of my knowledge, I do not have any financial entanglements with President Trump. I have never accepted compensation for serving as a board member for Trump Media and Technology Group.”
Patel was then asked a more specific question by Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.): “Have you ever received shares or other financial gifts or compensation from Trump Media and Technology Group (DJT) or other companies tied to President Trump or his family members?”
This time, after initially saying he had given the Justice Department and the Office of Government Ethics a list of his assets, Patel wrote that the Trump Media board “convened without my presence or participation” and awarded him “compensation for past services…including a monetary award and shares.”
Patel continued, “Even though this represented compensation for past services I had provided, out of an abundance of caution and to avoid any appearance of any conflict, I did not and will not accept that compensation.”
Schiff followed up with another question, “Will you step down as from the Board of Directors of Trump Media and Technology Group if confirmed as FBI Director?” and Patel responded, “Yes.”
Why Patel dealt with his Trump Media relationship in such a way needs further explanation, as do other clients of Patel’s firms.
For example, there is the Chinese fashion management company, Elite Depot Ltd., which controls Internet clothing internet retailer, Shein, which has an estimated 17 million active customers in the U.S.
Patel reported owning between $1 million and $5 million in “unvested stock units” in Elite.
According to WIRED magazine, records show that Patel began consulting for Elite/Shein in April 2024 when the company was seeking regulatory approval to go public with stock in New York. It is not clear what Patel did for Elite/Shein that drew that kind of reward.
Patel, in the 147-page package, said he had been advised “that the duties of the position of Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may involve particular matters affecting the financial interests of Elite Depot, Ltd., but the agency has determined that it is not necessary at this time for me to divest my interests in Elite Depot, Ltd., because the likelihood that my duties will involve any such matter is remote.”
Other Patel clients that need further study include:
*VK Integrated Systems, Inc., a Tennessee defense technology company that made Patel a board member and gave him restricted stock and options worth more than $100,000.
*The Embassy of Qatar, which Patel lists as a client of Trishul, LLC. Although in an ethics agreement Patel said the relationship ended November 2024, there is no information as to what it consisted of, when it began and what Patel was paid. There is no indication that either Patel or Qatar registered the relationship under the Foreign Agent Registration Act.
It’s clear that much more needs to be known about Kash Patel before he is approved for a position with the power and authority of the FBI Director.
The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals. Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.
Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to [email protected] for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
