1. Klobuchar GRILLS Patel: “You Can’t Run the FBI If You Can’t Remember Your Own Words!”

Senator Amy Klobuchar wasn't having it. She sat down, opened the receipts, and Kosh Patel suddenly discovered that every statement he ever made somehow wasn't in front of him. What we saw today was a case study in radicalization meeting reality. Klobuchar pressed Patel on lies about elections,

smears against law enforcement, conspiracy theories about satellites changing votes from space, attacks on the media, claims that January 6th wasn't an insurrection, law enforcement, conspiracy theories about satellites changing votes from space, attacks on the media, claims that January 6 wasn't an insurrection, and even promoting fake COVID detox supplements. And every single time, he dodged, he danced, he denied. This wasn't a confirmation hearing. This was a political stress test. And Thetel cracked under the

pressure. Let's break down how Klobuchar dismantled him, why this matters for the integrity of the FBI, and what it reveals about what a second Trump presidency would try to do to American democracy. Buckle up because this one was jaw-dropping. Thank you very much Mr.

Chairman. Mr. Patel, I think you know that I have great respect for the men and women of the FBI, their mission, fidelity, bravery, integrity. I believe they deserve a director who respects their work and sacrifices and they deserve a director who is focused on their mission. This is not about bingo cards or games. This is not about revenge. This is about the safety of our country and the people that work in the FBI and the FBI runs on facts, it runs on truth, truth matters, and without truth the whole system

breaks down. You said that Donald Trump has every right to tell the world that in 2020, 2016, and every other election in between was rigged by our government because they were. Yes or no, did you say that? I don't have that statement in front of me. Okay, that was from August 27th's 2023 Thrived Times show. I'll put it on the record. These claims made in that statement were rejected by courts, including by Republican judges, is that correct? I don't have enough of the facts in front

of me to make that assessment. I will put that statement on the record, but I think everyone in this committee, including the Republican members, knows that these statements were rejected by court. You were asked about the police officers in the Capitol who testified in the January 6th hearings, and you accused them of lying. Is that correct or not correct?

I don't think that's accurate.

Okay, Joe Peck's podcast, March 2024, will put it on the record. I was there. The police officers were heroes that day. Yes. I was there, the police officers were heroes that day. Did you post on your personal social media account in May of 2024, January 6th, never an insurrection, cowards in uniforms exposed,

they broke the chain of command?

I believe you're referencing a post that was shown in part earlier. I don't have it in front of me.

You posted it and it was on your account and we will again put that out there once more as we go on. I don't want to lose any more time on this but every one of these there's a record of it and you haven't answered. You promoted a COVID vaccine reversal or detox supplement. One scientist said, I quote, none of these substances in any form would minimize side effects from a COVID-19 vaccine. That is preying on innocent people.

Did you perform clinical trials before you made that claim?

I'm not a doctor, so no.

But you did promote this supplement and told people that it would reverse or mitigate the side effects from COVID vaccine.

Did I give people an opportunity to make an independent choice for what's best for their families?

Yes. You did that last year, correct? I don't have it in front of me again, Senator. Mr. Patel, the FBI tackles some of the most complex threats that we face. Terrorists, hostile foreign powers, violent gangs, fentanyl, criminal organizations. Your mission though has been to go after people. I've looked at it. I've read this stuff. Yes or no, when Trump wins, did you say this? When Trump wins in 2024 and is in power in 2025, we can prosecute them, referring to Justice Department officials for an actual RICO statute violation,

for criminally organizing the United States government to break the law to rig presidential elections. Did you say that? Yes or no?

And Senator, you're reading a partial statement, so I'm unable to fully respond.

Okay, again, we'll put it on the record. X22 report podcast 20 that is from I'll get you the date about a year ago. One of the names on your list was Bill Barr. Chairman Grassley has called him one of the most capable cabinet officials I've ever been able to vote for. Senator Graham has said I have nothing but total respect and admiration for the job done by William Barr as Attorney General of the United States. Is Bill Barr on your list of whatever you want to call them,

you know, been referred to as an enemy's list, you called them deep state after serving his country as the Attorney General of the United States, is he on your list because of a personal vendetta? Well it's not whatever we want to call it Senator, with all due respect it it's not an enemies list. That is a total mischaracterization. I ask you, I actually use the words you use for the list, which was deep state, right? That's what you put at the time. It is a glossary in the fact. Against the Attorney General of the United States. Is it because of a personal vendetta

that he's on the list, you're under in writing in his book. He had virtually about you no experience that would qualify you to serve at the highest level of the world's preeminent law enforcement agency and that your appointment as noted by Senator Durbin as deputy director to the FBI would happen over his dead body. Is it yes or no why you would put him on the list of deep state as a former Attorney General Trump, Attorney General of the United States, because he wouldn't break the law for Donald Trump. Is that why? Absolutely not. As you know, he repeatedly told the President

in no uncertain terms that he did not see evidence of fraud that would have affected the outcome of the election. Did you say in February of 2021 that the election stuff was never my job and I stayed all of it all, I stayed out of that stuff? Again, I don't know what comment you're referring to, but I'm sure you're reading a piece of something. You said it on pushback on a podcast. Is it true though that in December of 2020, you reached out to the Trump acting deputy attorney general and asked him to investigate a conspiracy theory claiming that people in Italy had used military technology and satellites to remotely tamper with voting machines in

the US and switch votes for Trump from Biden to from Trump to Biden is that true? What was the date? That was out of December of 2020. I was Chief of Staff

to the Department of Defense so I don't believe that's accurate anyway. That came

out of testimony before Congress I will give it to you. Have you referred to the media as the most powerful enemy of the United States that they have ever seen is that right? Again you're reading a quote. I take that you're reading an act of... H2C PAC 22324. You said we're going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig the elections. We're going to come after you whether it's criminally or civilly. Is that something you said?

That's a partial statement of what I said. Steve Bannon's podcast. You also said you would put the entire fake news mafia press corps on your list. Is that correct? Is that what you said?

I don't have that in front of me.

Benny Johnson's podcast 82123. You have said that the FBI, including today, you said that they remain utterly corrupt. This is an agency with agents who have taken down terrorists, taken down bank robbers, taken down crime. And you wrote that the FBI has become so thoroughly compromised that it will remain a threat to the people unless drastic measures are taken.

Do you know that under Chris Wray's leadership, he took over at a very difficult time, we all know that, appointed by President Trump, that during his tenure, the applications to the FBI has, in fact, tripled. Do you think people would be applying to that agency like in those numbers if they

thought it was so corrupt? The American public's trust in it is at 40% that's an all-time low. Did you say that the FBI headquarters should be shut down and reopened as a museum of the Deep State? Mr. Chairman are we allowed to go an extra time? Let's see you got you get a second round before i call on senator you just answer the question if he said that the fbi headquarters where they investigate cybercrime and terrorism mister shut down and open as a

deep state mister museum did he say that the headquarters should be shut down mister jacobs deserve an answer to that question yes i think the head of the fbi any said that their headquarters should be shut

down mister chair parliamentary inquiry.

You got anything you want to say, Mr. Patel, before I go on to Senator Lee?

Simply this. If the best attacks on me are gonna be false accusations and grotesque mischaracterizations, the only thing this body is doing is defeating the credibility of the men and women at the FBI. I stood with them here in this country. In every theater of war we have, I was on the ground in service of this nation. And any accusations leveled against me that I would somehow put political bias before the Constitution are grotesquely unfair. And I will have you reminded that I have been endorsed by over 300,000 law enforcement officers to become the next director of the FBI. Let's ask them.

Mr. Chairman, I am quoting his own words from September of 2024. It is his own words. It is not some conspiracy. It is what Mr. Patel actually said himself. Facts matter.

You forget that you had three minutes in the next round

to say what you just said.

Okay, I'll say him again.

Okay, before I call Lee.

Mr. Chair, just parliamentary inquiry. And it was on time. It wasn't disputing any of the debate, but I intend to keep to my seven minutes and I appreciate you keeping everyone to it if we go over can we have that decrement against the time in the second round if a member goes over that was actually ten minutes mr. chair I'm not sure that I

want to sometimes it's faster to get things done here just letting people shout and and then it does shut him up mr Mr. Chairman. You're a wise man Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman. Before we go to Lee. Mr. Chairman. Yes, what do you want? I love this guy. Mr. Chairman, I'm like Senator Tillis. I mean if we're gonna start this, I don't, I want an extra three minutes. Well. Now my friend Senator Klobuchar, I'm're three minutes over. So, here what you're saying is the chairman wasn't a very good chairman by not shutting her up.

But I've gone through this before and I think I know how to handle it.

I think you're a star spangled awesome chairman. I just wanna say that for the record. But if you're gonna let somebody over there

go three minutes over, I want my extra three minutes. Well let's see let's see if it's abused by anybody else before we make that decision. I'm just telling you I'm gonna abuse it. Well I'm not gonna let you abuse it. You're a good man Mr. Chairman. Before I go to Lee I want to put a record statement in the record from 56 former FBI agents wrote to this committee to support this nominee quote never has the FBI faced such an urgent and compelling need for comprehensive reform as it does today. Mr. Patel has proven he possesses the breadth of experience required

to address these challenges. His leadership, expertise, and vision make him uniquely qualified to guide the FBI through this pivotal moment. For these reasons, we stand in full support of Kash Patel's nomination. Any objection? So ordered.

Senator Amy Klobuchar came prepared, calm, and organized. Kash Patel came with absolutely nothing. No answers, no accountability, and apparently no memory of anything he has publicly said for years. And look, you can disagree with someone's politics,

you can debate policy, but when you're nominated to lead the FBI, the agency tasked with national security, counter-terrorism, cybercrime, and protecting the country's most sensitive intelligence, there is no world where you get to simply say, I don't have that in front of me, on every single documented statement you yourself made. That's not leadership. That's not seriousness.

That's someone trying to outrun their own record. Let's be clear about what this hearing exposed. Patel wants the Senate and the American people to believe he's qualified to lead the FBI. But Klobuchar very smartly pointed out that the FBI's mission is built on facts, truth, integrity, and a director who respects the agency's work. And from the moment she started questioning him, it became painfully obvious that Patel

has spent the last several years attacking those very values. She asked him, straight up, whether he said Donald Trump had every right to claim every election was rigged. His answer? I don't have that statement in front of me. Well, Klobuchar did, and the record does. And every court in America, Republican judges included,

rejected those claims. Facts matter. He couldn't say that. Then she moved on to January 6, asking him whether he had called Capitol police officers, the same officers who were beaten, crushed,

and traumatized defending the Capitol, liars. Again, Patel denied it. And again, the record says otherwise. Klobuchar cited his own podcast statements. She put it right back on the table in front of him. And he still dodged. It was a moment where you realize this isn't about politics. It's about character. If someone is willing to deny even their own recorded words, how can they possibly oversee an agency that

handles national intelligence? Then we get to the COVID detox supplement. This is where things start entering dangerous territory, because this wasn't just political rhetoric. This was Patel promoting pseudoscience, telling people that a supplement could reverse vaccine effects.

Klobuchar asked whether he conducted clinical trials. He said no, because of course he didn't, because the product didn't work, because none of it was real. It's one thing to be loud online, it's another to be irresponsible with public health during a global pandemic, and that matters when you're asking Congress to trust your judgment. But the most explosive moment came when Klobuchar pressed him on statements where Patel promised that if Trump returned to power, they would prosecute government officials and journalists, yes, journalists, for opposing

Donald Trump or reporting unflattering truths. Let's pause on that. He was asked directly whether he said he'd go after members of the media, calling them the most powerful enemy this country has ever seen, and that he'd pursue them criminally or civilly. And instead of owning his own words, he tried the same playbook. I don't have it in front of me. But Klobuchar did.

The dates, the podcasts, the transcripts, all of it. And that's where the danger lies. This isn't someone who merely criticized the press. Plenty of politicians do that. This is someone who talked openly about using government power to punish the press, punish career officials, punish law enforcement leaders, all because they didn't bend to Donald Trump's demands. That is not democratic governance. That is not constitutional leadership. That is authoritarian thinking.

Then Klobuchar went right to the heart of it. Bill Barr, Trump's own attorney general, a man who served the administration loyally and still said there was no evidence of election fraud that would have changed the outcome. Patel put Barr on his so-called deep state list, and Klobuchar asked him directly whether it was because Barr refused to break the law for Trump. Patel, once again, dodged. But the facts? Klobuchar asked him directly whether it was because Barr refused to break the law for Trump.

Patel, once again, dodged. But the facts? They say enough on their own. Barr has publicly said Patel was unqualified. Barr wrote that Patel would never command the respect of the FBI. Barr flat out said Patel shouldn't be anywhere near the leadership of the Bureau.

That isn't coming from a Democrat. That's coming from Trump's own former Attorney General. And when Klobuchar brought up Patel's attempt to push the Italy satellites changing votes conspiracy, one of the wildest and most debunked theories out there, the look on Patel's face said everything. He tried distancing himself. But the testimony under oath from Trump officials says he was involved. Again, this is about judgment, not

partisanship. By the time Klobuchar reached his statements calling for the FBI headquarters to be shut down and turned into a deep state museum, the entire room was already well aware of what was happening. Patel was trying to reinvent himself in real time. But the internet has a memory. Congress has a memory. Receipts exist. And here's where the hearing got really telling. When Klobuchar finished, Republican senators didn't defend Patel's record. They didn't refute the quotes. They didn't argue the facts.

They complained about the time limit. They joked around. They made comments about wanting extra minutes. Because what else can they do? They can't defend the comments. They can't defend the inconsistencies. They can't defend a nominee who has said publicly that the FBI, an agency he wants to lead, is corrupt, compromised, and should be dismantled. That's not reform.

That's demolition. And one more thing. Patel kept repeating that he had the endorsement of 300,000 law enforcement officers. But endorsements don't erase your own words. They don't undo conspiracy theories. They don't magically give someone experience they don't have. They don't replace integrity. This is what Klobuchar exposed today, a nominee who spent years attacking the FBI, undermining faith in elections,

fueling conspiracy theories, threatening the press, dismissing public health, and promoting dangerous rhetoric, only to walk into a Senate hearing and pretend none of it ever happened. That's not leadership. That's not accountability. And it's certainly not someone who should be given the keys to the most powerful law

enforcement agency in the country. This hearing wasn't about a political victory. It was a warning, a preview of what happens when extremism meets scrutiny, a reminder that democracy depends on people who tell the truth, even when it's inconvenient, even when it's uncomfortable. Patel had every opportunity today to clarify, to correct, to own his statements.

He chose denial, he chose evasion, and he showed the country exactly why he cannot be trusted with a job that demands integrity above all else. If this is the future a second Trump administration is planning, purging institutions, targeting journalists, punishing public servants, rewriting reality — then this hearing is more than a political moment. a political moment. It's a wake-up call, and we'd better be paying attention.