Kash Patel told senators during his confirmation hearings that he had “no interest, no desire and will not, if confirmed, go backwards.” He promised there would be “no politicization at the FBI” and “no retributive actions taken.”
On Friday, the FBI director who promised not to go backwards fired at least 15 agents for actions they took during George Floyd protests five years ago. Their offense: taking a knee during a tense standoff with protesters while trying to secure federal buildings with limited personnel.
The FBI Agents Association called the firings “unlawful” and said they violated “the due process rights of those who risk their lives to protect our country.” The statement suggested Patel’s personnel purge is illegal and accused him of “repeatedly breaking” the law he’s supposed to uphold.
The bureau hasn’t explained why honoring a murder victim or using de-escalation tactics is now a fireable offense.
The De-Escalation Tactic That Became a Termination Offense
During the protests that followed George Floyd’s murder in May 2020, FBI agents were assigned to help secure federal buildings. A tense standoff developed between large crowds of protesters and limited FBI personnel. Some agents took a knee – a gesture protesters had adopted to honor Floyd and protest police brutality.
According to a source familiar with the terminations, agents took a knee “as a tactic meant to de-escalate the conflict.” They were outnumbered, facing angry crowds, and trying to prevent violence while protecting federal property with insufficient resources.
Taking a knee in that context served multiple purposes. It acknowledged protesters’ grief and anger. It reduced the physical threat posture that armed federal agents in tactical gear naturally present. It created a moment of shared humanity that could prevent the confrontation from escalating into violence.
Law enforcement officers across the country used similar tactics during Floyd protests. Images of police chiefs and sheriffs kneeling with protesters became symbols of departments trying to bridge divides and demonstrate that not all officers supported the brutality that killed Floyd.
Five years later, the FBI is firing agents who made that tactical choice. The bureau hasn’t provided justification for why de-escalation tactics during a crisis now warrant termination. Patel’s FBI apparently views taking a knee as political statement rather than operational decision – and punishable political disloyalty rather than professional judgment.
The Confirmation Hearing Promises That Didn’t Last Six Months
Patel’s confirmation hearings centered on concerns about his lack of qualifications, conspiracy theory promotion, and stated desire for retribution against Trump’s perceived enemies. Senators questioned whether he would politicize the FBI and use his position to target people based on their political opposition to Trump.
Patel assured them he wouldn’t. “I have no interest, no desire and will not, if confirmed, go backwards,” he testified. “There will be no politicization at the FBI. There will be no retributive actions taken by any FBI, should I be confirmed as the FBI director.”
Those promises lasted less than six months. The FBI under Patel has conducted an unprecedented personnel purge targeting agents deemed insufficiently loyal to Trump and his agenda. Last month, three experienced bureau officials were fired, including Brian Driscoll – a widely respected figure who was terminated after he helped prevent mass firing of thousands of FBI officials who worked on January 6 cases.
Now Patel is firing agents over their actions during 2020 protests. That’s literally “going backwards” – punishing people for decisions made five years ago, before Trump’s second term began, based on political judgments about what those decisions signaled about agent loyalty.
The FBI Agents Association didn’t mince words about what’s happening. “Leaders uphold the law – they don’t repeatedly break it. They respect due process, rather than hide from it,” the FBIAA statement said. “Patel’s dangerous new pattern of actions are weakening the Bureau because they eliminate valuable expertise and damage trust between leadership and the workforce, and make it harder to recruit and retain skilled agents – ultimately putting our nation at greater risk.”
When firing agents becomes illegal but nobody stops it, the law becomes optional for people with enough power to ignore it.
The Purge That’s “Without Precedent in Modern Bureau History”
MSNBC’s Ken Dilanian reported last month that “the purge that is ongoing is without precedent in the modern history of the bureau. It raises questions about whether the Trump administration is trying to turn the nation’s most powerful law enforcement agency into an instrument of presidential whim.”
That assessment came before Friday’s firing of 15 agents over five-year-old protest responses. The purge isn’t slowing – it’s accelerating and reaching further back in time to find justifications for removing agents.
The pattern is clear. Agents who worked January 6 cases get fired. Agents who took a knee during Floyd protests get fired. Agents whose actions can be characterized as insufficiently loyal to Trump – even actions taken years before his second term – face termination without due process.
The FBI Agents Association’s claim that these firings violate due process rights matters because federal employment law provides protections against arbitrary termination. Agents are entitled to hearings, appeals, and opportunities to contest disciplinary actions. Summary firings based on political loyalty tests bypass those protections.
But due process only works if someone enforces it. If Patel can fire agents without following legally required procedures, and if no authority steps in to reverse those illegal terminations, then due process becomes a theoretical protection rather than a practical one.
The agents who’ve been fired can file lawsuits. They can appeal through administrative channels. They can hope that courts will eventually rule the terminations illegal and order reinstatement with back pay. But that process takes years, and in the meantime, they’re unemployed with FBI terminations on their employment records.
What Happens When FBI Agents Can’t Trust Their Director
The FBI Agents Association warned that Patel’s actions “eliminate valuable expertise and damage trust between leadership and the workforce, and make it harder to recruit and retain skilled agents.”
That’s not hyperbole about internal morale problems. That’s operational reality about how law enforcement effectiveness depends on agent judgment and initiative.
FBI agents conduct complex investigations requiring independent decision-making under ambiguous circumstances. They make tactical choices in rapidly evolving situations. They exercise discretion about when to escalate or de-escalate confrontations. They decide which leads to pursue and which witnesses are credible.
All of that depends on agents trusting that professional judgment will be supported by leadership even when outcomes aren’t perfect. If agents believe that every tactical decision will be evaluated five years later for political loyalty signals, they stop making independent judgments and start covering themselves bureaucratically.
The agents who took a knee during Floyd protests made a tactical decision to de-escalate a dangerous confrontation. That decision is now being punished as political disloyalty. Future agents facing similar situations will remember that taking initiative to prevent violence can result in termination if the political winds shift.
So they’ll wait for explicit orders from leadership before making any decision that could be interpreted politically. They’ll avoid actions that might offend whoever’s in power five years from now. They’ll prioritize career protection over operational effectiveness.
That’s how you destroy an institution’s capacity to function – not through dramatic dismantling, but through incremental intimidation that makes professional judgment too risky to exercise.
The Revenge Tour That Became Official FBI Policy
Trump has been explicit about wanting retribution against people he views as disloyal or responsible for investigations he considers persecution. During his first term, that desire was constrained by institutional resistance and leaders who refused to weaponize law enforcement for political purposes.
Trump’s second term eliminated those constraints by installing loyalists like Patel who will execute retribution campaigns without institutional resistance.
The firing of agents who took a knee during Floyd protests is revenge – there’s no operational justification for terminating experienced agents over five-year-old tactical decisions that successfully de-escalated dangerous confrontations. The only explanation is that taking a knee has political meaning Trump opposes, and agents who made that choice demonstrated insufficient loyalty.
NBC News noted in its reporting that the FBI has not explained why taking a knee is a fireable offense. The bureau doesn’t need to explain when the actual reason is political purge disguised as personnel management.
Patel is implementing Trump’s revenge agenda while claiming he’s restoring FBI integrity. He’s purging agents based on political loyalty tests while insisting there’s no politicization. He’s conducting illegal terminations while claiming to uphold the law.
And agents who trusted that professional law enforcement work would be evaluated on professional criteria are learning that criteria changed retroactively to include political loyalty assessments of actions taken years before the current administration existed.
Why This Matters Beyond FBI Personnel Decisions
The FBI is the nation’s premier federal law enforcement agency. It investigates terrorism, organized crime, public corruption, civil rights violations, and threats to national security. Its effectiveness depends on independence from political influence and agent confidence that professional work won’t be punished for political reasons.
Patel is destroying both. He’s demonstrating that FBI leadership will punish agents for political reasons regardless of legal protections or due process requirements. He’s showing that no agent action – no matter how far in the past or how professionally justified – is safe from retroactive political evaluation.
That transforms the FBI from an independent law enforcement agency into an instrument of presidential whim – exactly what Patel testified he would prevent.
The consequences extend beyond FBI morale and recruitment challenges. When federal law enforcement becomes politicized, its investigations become suspect. Defense attorneys argue that prosecutions are politically motivated. Judges question whether agents are following evidence or political directives. The public loses confidence that justice is administered impartially.
Trump repeatedly accused the FBI of being weaponized against him during his first term. Those accusations were baseless – FBI investigations followed evidence of potential crimes regardless of political affiliation. But Trump is now actually weaponizing the FBI by installing a director who fires agents for political reasons and conducts personnel purges based on loyalty rather than performance.
The irony would be amusing if the consequences weren’t so serious. Trump claimed Biden was doing what Trump is actually doing. And Patel promised not to do what he’s systematically implementing.
The 15 Agents Who Thought De-Escalation Was Professional Duty
The agents fired Friday for taking a knee during Floyd protests likely believed they were doing their jobs. They faced angry crowds, limited resources, and a mission to protect federal property without creating unnecessary violence. They made tactical decisions designed to de-escalate confrontations and prevent bloodshed.
Five years later, those tactical decisions became evidence of political disloyalty warranting termination without due process.
These weren’t agents who refused orders or abandoned posts or engaged in misconduct. They were agents who used a de-escalation tactic that law enforcement agencies across the country employed during Floyd protests – a tactic that acknowledged protesters’ grief and reduced threat postures to prevent violence.
Now they’re unemployed. Their careers are destroyed. Their professional reputations are damaged by FBI termination. Their expertise is lost to the bureau. And every remaining FBI agent understands the message: professional judgment that can be interpreted as insufficient loyalty to Trump is grounds for termination regardless of legal protections or operational justification.
Patel promised senators he wouldn’t go backwards, wouldn’t politicize the FBI, and wouldn’t take retributive actions. Then he fired 15 agents over their actions during protests five years ago because those actions signal political disloyalty to a president who demands absolute loyalty over constitutional duty.
The FBI Agents Association called it illegal. They’re right. But legality only matters if someone enforces the law against people breaking it.
And the director breaking the law is the same person who’s supposed to enforce it.