...
By Jesus Mesa
Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Just as FBI Director Kash Patel appeared to be moving past weeks of backlash over the bureau's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, a second crisis erupted—this time involving the high-profile assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and Patel's own missteps in responding to it.
Hours after Kirk was shot and killed during a Utah college event, Patel hurridly took to social media to announce that a suspect (whom Patel referred to as a "subject") was in custody. But local authorities later said the individual had been questioned and released.
The FBI would not have custody of the man now suspected to be the killer for another 33 hours, after his father turned him in to local authorities.
Read More on Politics
The man ultimately arrested, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, had no known connection to the person Patel initially referenced. Robinson, who was detained without incident Friday morning, is being held on federal charges and is expected to face additional counts related to Kirk's killing. Investigators have not disclosed a motive.
The confusion over the arrest, combined with Patel's visible but largely silent presence at a press conference in Utah, has deepened public scrutiny of his leadership on social media. While law enforcement officials praised the rapid progress in the case, Patel's early misstep drew rebukes from across the political spectrum—including from allies in the MAGA movement that helped elevate him to the bureau's top job.
Christopher Rufo, an influential conservative journalist and activist, called for Patel's ouster in the wake of the Kirk investigation.
...
"I'm grateful that Utah authorities have captured the suspect in the Charlie Kirk assassination, and think it is time for Republicans to assess whether Kash Patel is the right man to run the FBI," Rufo wrote in a lengthy X post on Friday. "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—that threaten the peace in the United States."
Other prominent conservatives echoed the frustration.
"Why is the head of the @FBI speculating like everyone not in the know?" wrote Joseph Biggs, a far-right activist and convicted January 6 rioter who was later pardoned by President Donald Trump. "It only proves you were a horrible pick for this position," he added in another X post.
Laura Loomer, a longtime Trump ally and provocateur, slammed the bureau's offer of a $100,000 reward for information in the case.
"So the DOJ and FBI are willing to offer $50 million for information about [Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro], but only $100,000 for information about who killed Charlie Kirk on American soil in a cold blooded assassination?!?" Loomer wrote on X. "This is honestly embarrassing for the FBI and our country."
Lawsuit and Loyalty Tests
Patel, a former public defender turned junior DOJ staffer who has no prior law enforcement or intelligence experience, was confirmed by Senate Republicans earlier this year despite unanimous Democratic opposition. His appointment was already controversial before the Kirk case. For months, critics have accused him of politicizing the FBI, firing senior officials seen as insufficiently loyal to Trump, and prioritizing public image over investigative integrity.
Last week, three former FBI officials filed a withering federal lawsuit accusing Patel of orchestrating a purge of bureau leadership and overseeing a rampant politicization of the bureau. The plaintiffs claim they were fired because they had worked on past investigations involving Trump or resisted pressure to retaliate against former colleagues.
According to the suit, Patel told then-acting FBI Director Brian Driscoll that he was ordered to "fire anyone who they identified as having worked on a criminal investigation against President Donald J. Trump," and that carrying out those firings was necessary to "keep his job."
...
The lawsuit also alleges Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino—another Trump loyalist—were obsessed with the bureau's image online. Staff were instructed to post "FBI wins" on social media, and Patel reportedly floated the idea of suing conservative influencers who criticized bureau leadership.
The FBI did not immediately respond to Newsweek's request for comment on Friday.
"You talk about weaponization," said attorney Mark Zaid, who represents the fired officials, according to CNN. "You are the textbook definition of weaponization."
Patel's leadership is also under fire over the bureau's decision in July to halt further public disclosures related to Jeffrey Epstein. Before joining the FBI, Patel had regularly amplified conspiracy theories about Epstein's death on his and others' podcasts, but once in office, approved a memo, released quietly just after the July 4 holiday weekend, concluding that "no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted." That reversal prompted sharp backlash from Patel's own political base and renewed questions about his credibility.
Even FBI veterans have raised concerns about how Patel's actions are affecting the bureau's internal morale. "I would stay off social media," former special agent Stuart Kaplan told Politico in the wake of the false announcement of a suspect in the Kirk case. "I would not be tweeting or sending out any sort of posting until such time as the investigation has come to completion."
Patel to Face Lawmakers
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are now preparing for Patel's testimony before the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on September 16. Topics are expected to include the Kirk case, the Epstein file decision, and the growing number of allegations tied to political retaliation within the FBI. Delaware Senator Chris Coons, a Democrat, said his office plans to question Patel on "apparently politically motivated firings."
The broader context for Patel's various challenges and missteps is the startling rise in domestic political violence that has included assassination attempts, bombings and public threats against high-profile figures on both sides of the aisle. National security expert Bruce Hoffman said the Kirk case is part of a larger shift toward normalization of political terrorism in the U.S.
...
"Terrorism never occurs in a vacuum—it reflects polarization and divisiveness in society," Hoffman said in an interview with Newsweek. "Extremist partisans on both sides increasingly believe their violence is justified. Those voices like Charlie Kirk's—moderate in the sense of wanting to debate—are being silenced."
The 33-hour timeline from the assassination to apprehension of a suspect in a politically motivated killing is not unprecedented. The Boston Marathon bombing manhunt lasted several days. The FBI's search for the Unabomber took nearly two decades. That case ended after Ted Kaczynski's brother recognized similarities in a manifesto and alerted authorities.
While Patel's critics have focused on his premature announcement—not the duration of the investigation—the pace of the manhunt itself fell well within precedent.
In Robinson's case, a tip from a family member led to his arrest—echoing the 1996 capture of Kaczynski. Years later, Kaczynski's brother David wrote in a New York Times essay about the anguish of turning in his sibling. He described the clarity of doing what was right—and the lasting pain of never reconciling before his brother's death.
Updated on 09/13/25 at 5.15 a.m. ET to edit wording on announcement
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines