Another hit piece on Kash Patel? FBI director accused of 'fire-transfer-push to resign' playbook
In a stinging editorial piece, the New York Times criticized FBI director
Kash Patel
for making the agency an "instrument of Mr Trump's political will". It said that Patel's main qualification is his unquestioning fealty to President Donald Trump and so on expected lines, Patel has assigned agents to pursue long-running MAGA grievances.
And one of them is to prove that China had some role to play in manipulating the 2020 election.
Patel faced intense scrutiny about his private life, his flying with an official jet to meet his girlfriend, his spending time at sporting events etc. He has also been accused of failing to publish the Epstein Files.
The NYT noted that Kash Patel, before taking office, called the FBI an existential threat and its employees political jackals.
People whom Kash Patel scapegoated are the agents that he now oversees, damaging the bureau's morale and its effectiveness, the editorial said.
It said Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, singled out agents who worked on the prosecution of the Jan 6 rioters and then fired them, or transferred them or pushed them to resign.
For example, the FBI transferred Spencer Evans, who ran the FBI's field office in Las Vegas, after Trump allies accused him of denying religious exemptions for the COVID-19 vaccine within the bureau, the NYT editorial said.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Secure Your Child's Future with Strong English Fluency
Planet Spark
Learn More
Undo
"The resulting loss of expertise and experience is chilling. The bureau today has fewer people with the skills to prevent crime, political corruption and foreign espionage," it said.
'Poorly thought out hit piece'
Deputy FBI director Dan Bongino reacted to the piece and called it a poorly thought-out hit piece. 'This NY Times article is precisely why hard-working Americans simply do not trust the media,' Bongino wrote on X Saturday. 'The article is a poorly thought out hit piece which attempts to address the dramatic personnel changes we've made, along with the enterprise-wide reorganization Director Patel and I have undertaken.
'
Bongino provided a snippet of data points proving what they did for the betterment of the agency and said Patel and he have reformed the FBI aggressively.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
32 minutes ago
- Mint
How healthcare cuts in the ‘big, beautiful bill' will affect Americans
After the House narrowly passed President Trump's tax-and-spending-cuts bill, he signed it into law on Friday. The passage of President Trump's 'one big, beautiful bill" has left some hospitals, doctors and patient-advocacy groups reeling. Millions of people will lose health-insurance coverage, and struggling hospitals across the country may have to close, lay off staff or shut down some services, they say. States will also face difficult budget choices as federal funds are reduced. 'The magnitude of these reductions—and the number of individuals who will lose health coverage—cannot be simply dismissed as waste, fraud, and abuse," Rick Pollack, president of the American Hospital Association, said after the House narrowly passed the bill. Trump signed the bill into law on Friday, Independence Day. The act slashes over $1 trillion in healthcare spending over the next decade, mostly from Medicaid, the joint federal and state program that provides health insurance to poor Americans. It is the biggest cut to federal healthcare spending—and to Medicaid—in history. The legislation's health provisions, including work requirements for Medicaid recipients, represent a fundamental shift in the federal government's approach to healthcare for its poorest citizens, both Republicans and Democrats have said. 'This is a much more conservative approach to healthcare," said David Mansdoerfer, a former health official in the first Trump administration. 'The big beautiful bill would represent a significant mindset change for federal safety-net programs." There will be nearly 8.7 million fewer people covered by Medicaid over the next decade because of the bill, according to an analysis by Manatt Health, a consulting firm that advises states and healthcare providers on Medicaid policy. Other provisions in the bill, including more-stringent requirements for people to enroll and retain health-insurance plans under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, are projected to drive up the number of uninsured, healthcare experts said. Many who study healthcare policy say that people who lose insurance, or people who live in rural areas where doctors and hospitals are closing up shop, often delay preventive care, sometimes costing the system more later. Many of the Medicaid policy changes target the 40 states that expanded eligibility for Medicaid to low-income able-bodied adults. Those enrollees will now have to prove their incomes are below a certain threshold every six months to remain on Medicaid, instead of annually, as well as show that they have spent 80 hours a month working, volunteering or attending school. People in the lowest 10% of income distribution in the U.S. stand to lose noncash government benefits such as Medicaid coverage and food stamps worth nearly $1,600 annually on average, according to an analysis of an earlier version of the bill by the Congressional Budget Office. Hospitals say they are big losers under the new legislation. More uninsured people will mean more uncompensated healthcare costs, they say. And many hospitals now face reductions in some supplemental payments that most states have come to rely on to augment low Medicaid payment rates. Over the next decade, Medicaid payments to hospitals will be reduced by nearly $665 billion, an 18.2% reduction, according to analysis by Manatt. Meanwhile, hospitals' uncompensated care costs are projected to increase by upward of $84 billion in 2034, according to an analysis of the bill by America's Essential Hospitals, which represents some 350 hospitals nationwide. That number takes into account lower Medicaid payments and Medicaid payment shortfalls, as well as costs from caring for the uninsured. 'It is a double-whammy. We're going to have many millions more uninsured individuals showing up needing care," said Beth Feldpush, the group's senior vice president of advocacy and policy. 'But at the same time, hospitals won't be able to backfill financial holes." Medicaid payment rates are notoriously low compared with other types of insurance. States have increasingly boosted these rates in recent years through so-called state-directed payments, which can raise Medicaid payment rates to levels comparable with Medicare or even average commercial insurance rates. The bill clamps down on these payments. States that have expanded their Medicaid programs under Obamacare to include more low-income adults would have state-directed payment rates capped at 100% of Medicare rates; states that haven't adopted expansion would be capped at 110% of Medicare rates. The change will reduce federal spending by $149.4 billion over a decade, according to a CBO analysis. Hospitals in about 30 states will likely see reductions in the state-directed payments they receive once cuts go into effect, according to an analysis by KFF, a health-policy nonprofit. State hospital associations said these payments are lifelines for hospitals, many of which operate at or near a loss. Even before the bill's passage, several hospitals across the country laid off employees, froze hiring and tightened spending, citing the impending cuts to Medicaid as a factor. Providence, one of the country's largest health systems, said last month that it had implemented a restructuring plan that would lead to 600 employees losing their jobs. Other hospitals say they are bracing for the changes to come. Our Lady of the Angels Hospital, a safety-net hospital in Bogalusa, La., said it would have to consider closing its doors, and the University of Kentucky said it might have to pause construction on a new building dedicated to caring for cancer patients if state-directed payment cuts go into effect. The cuts may also eat into the earnings of for-profit hospitals like HCA Healthcare and Tenet Healthcare that have enjoyed lucrative boosts to their bottom lines from state-directed payments. The National Rural Health Association said it was worried that the bill's provisions would significantly hamper healthcare access in rural areas. Senate Republicans added a $50 billion relief fund to the bill at the last minute for rural hospitals, but Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine), who voted against the bill, said it wouldn't be enough to offset the other changes. For insurers, the biggest impact of the legislation is clear: fewer customers. Though Medicaid is a government program, most enrollees get their benefits through insurers that are paid with state and federal money. 'From a health insurer's perspective, that's a lot of business to lose," says Cynthia Cox, a vice president at KFF, a health-research nonprofit. The industry impact will be heaviest among companies with a focus on Medicaid. Among the largest are Centene, which has nearly 13 million Medicaid enrollees, Elevance Health, UnitedHealth Group, Molina Healthcare and CVS Health's Aetna. 'Revenue and profits will be pressured," said Sarah James, an analyst with Cantor Fitzgerald. A Wellcare location in New York City, part of Centene Corp., one of the largest Medicaid insurers. The cutbacks to Medicaid will come on top of blows to another key insurance market—Obamacare marketplace plans. Federal subsidies that help people pay for Obamacare plans are set to shrink next year, and the new legislation doesn't fill the gap. Along with other Trump administration changes to the rules for Obamacare plans, the reduction in subsidies is projected to reduce the number of people with coverage by another 5.1 million if Congress doesn't extend them. In Obamacare and Medicaid, the shrinking rolls are likely to create another headache for insurers. When people drop out of insurance markets, the healthier ones are often the first to go. That leaves a sicker, more costly pool of customers for insurers, which then seek to get paid more to cover those expenses. They demand higher premiums, either from state Medicaid agencies or from Obamacare customers. Nationally, states will have roughly $1.3 trillion dollars less in federal and state funds to spend on Medicaid over the next decade, according to Manatt. Most of the reductions—93%—will be in states that have expanded Medicaid to cover able-bodied adults. One of the biggest impacts will come from the bill's crackdown on so-called provider taxes, which states levy on hospitals and other healthcare providers to trigger federal matching funds. Most hospitals receive back more than they pay in taxes through higher payment rates via state-directed payments and other mechanisms. Currently, the taxes are capped at 6% of healthcare providers' net patient revenue, but will be reduced to 3.5% in expansion states. In non-expansion states such as Florida and Texas, tax rates will be frozen in place up to the 6% maximum on the date the bill is signed into law. Healthcare workers last month protested the Medicaid cuts proposed in the bill that President Trump signed Friday. The taxes have been criticized as a gimmick that exploits federal taxpayers without requiring states to put any skin in the game. President Obama twice proposed clamping down on provider taxes, including in his 2013 budget, which would have reduced the maximum rate to 3.5%. States use provider taxes to fund state-directed payments to hospitals and other providers. Some, such as North Carolina, have also designed the taxes to fund their Medicaid expansions. On a percentage basis, red and purple expansion states will be hit hardest since many of them tend to rely heavily on provider taxes, says Avi Herring, a Manatt managing director. Montana faces a 21% reduction in state and federal funds; Arizona, Kentucky and Virginia are each looking at reductions of about 18%. The largest blue states, which tend to have more generous Medicaid programs, face far bigger dollar cuts, though they are somewhat smaller proportionally. California is expected to see a 13% reduction. New York's spending will be reduced by nearly 9%. Write to Dominique Mosbergen at Joseph Walker at Liz Essley Whyte at and Josh Ulick at
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Musk launches ‘America Party'
Washinton: Techbillionaire Elon Musk has launched a new political party to the surprise of many Americans and consternation of some.'By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party, and you shall have it!' he posted on X on Saturday and declared the result of the 24-hour poll he had conducted on the social media platform he owns. The poll showed that 64 per cent of the respondents favoured the formation of a new political party. 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy. Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom. The way we are going to crack the uniparty system is by using a variant of how Epaminondas shattered the myth of Spartan invincibility at Leuctra: Extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield,' he explained in a subsequent post. Epaminondas was a Greek statesman and military strategist in the 4th Century BC credited with breaking the military dominance of Sparta and disrupting the balance of power among Greek states. Musk had threatened to form a new political party if President Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' was passed by the Congress. He had also threatened that every single member of the Congress who voted for the Bill did not deserve winning another term. In the event, barring three Republican Senators in the US Senate and two Republican Members of the House of Representatives voted in favour of the Bill, while every Democratic Member in the two Houses voted against. The MAGA (Make America Great Again) supporters of President Donals Trump reacted to the announcement with disappointment, dismay and even anger, believing that a third party will cut into Republican votes, divide Trump supporters and allow the Democratic Party to win the next election. However, some Republicans seemed to believe that the third party will destroy the Democratic Party by attracting opponents of Trump into what will be essentially another conservative and 'rightist' party. The poll that Musk conducted on X, however, was immediately contested. Some even claimed to have asked the AI tool created for X, Grok, about the party affiliation of the respondents. The reply received from Grok was claimed to be the following: 'X doesn't track or reveal voter nationalities in polls, so the exact number is unknown. However, with Elon's global audience (over 200M followers) and X's user base being only 17 per cent American, it's likely a significant portion—possibly over half—of the voters are non-American)." Response from Republican Party supporters were varied. 'A big mistake. A third political party would be Perot 2.0 and guarantee electing Democrats to the Oval Office and Congress. We have seen this show before. If you want to curb government spending, devote resources to elect more Republicans because the solution is not more Democrats in office,' responded one of them. Ross Perot was a businessman and industrialist from Texas who ran for the US presidency as an independent candidate in 1992 and 1996, losing both times to Bill Clinton. Perot passed away in 2019. Others were angry at Musk's seeming betrayal of President Trump. 'You turned out to be a real Trojan horse. There is nothing in you but a thirst for power and profit. Even a thousand lifetimes would not be enough to spend what you have now. Why want more? In history books, you will be described as a Judas who backstabbed the sitting president,' posted another. Others vented their outrage by asking, 'Does anyone remember the Leftist surge in attacks on Elon Musk and vandalisation of Tesla? Many large MAGA accounts and millions of other Trump supporters strongly, vocally expressed their support of Musk and Tesla - often stating they would buy stock and buy vehicles in support of Elon. Is he really mocking us now?' Many more respondents appeared convinced that the venture would never take off. Musk responded to them by reposting a supporter who reminded people that sceptics who believed that Tesla, the electric car with a driverless model, would never succeed, that Musk could never start a space company, that SpaceX could never re-use a rocket, that SpaceX would never occupy Mars, that Musk cannot do politics or run a social media have already been proved wrong. Sixteen hours after Musk's announcement of the America Party, Donald Trump was yet to dignify it with his response, choosing to ignore it. The US President, soaking in his moment under the Sun after getting the Congressional approval for his 860-page 'Big and Beautiful Bill', can afford to ignore the blip—at least for the time being.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
'We welcome India's Candidacy to host COP 33 in 2028': BRICS declaration
Leaders of the BRICS nations have welcomed India's candidacy to host the 33rd Conference of the Parties (COP 33) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in the year 2028. In a joint declaration at the 17th BRICS Summit on Sunday, they also expressed their commitment to remain united in the pursuit of the purpose and goals of the Paris Agreement. The joint declaration stated, "We stress our commitment to uphold multilateralism as necessary to address challenges threatening our shared planet and future such as climate change. We resolve to remain united in the pursuit of the purpose and goals of the Paris Agreement and the objectives of the UNFCCC and call on all countries to uphold their existing commitment by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Scientists: Tinnitus? When tinnitus won't go away, do this (Watch) Hearing Magazine Undo as Parties to the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement and to maintain and scale up their effort to combat climate change. "We further reaffirm our steadfast commitment, in pursuit of the objective of UNFCCC, to tackle climate change by strengthening the full and effective implementation of the Paris Agreement, including its provisions related to mitigation, adaptation and the provision of means of implementation to developing countries, reflecting equity and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in light of different national circumstances," the declaration said. Live Events "In this regard, we express our full support to the Presidency of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) COP-30, which will take place in the city of Belem, in Brazil, highlighting the importance of action and cooperation on all pillars of the UNFCCC as applicable considering each country's membership and commitments thereunder. We also underscore our full commitment to a successful COP30 that will catalize progress in implementing the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement. We welcome India's Candidacy to host COP 33 in 2028," it added. The leaders of BRICS nations call for a strengthened global response to climate change, in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication. They endorsed the BRICS Climate Leadership Agenda as a statement of their resolve to exercise collective leadership through mutual empowerment, by advancing solutions that support BRICS development needs and priorities, while accelerating action and enhancing cooperation towards the full implementation of the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement. They stressed that this outcome demonstrates that multilateralism and Global South cooperation can shape a more inclusive and sustainable governance for a better future. BRICS nations underscored the critical role of all types of forests. The joint declaration stated, "We underscore the critical role of all types of forests, including tropical forests, for conserving biodiversity, preserving water basins and soils and providing timber and non-timber forest products of high value for economic sectors, regulating hydrological cycles, as well as combatting desertification and serving as vital carbon sinks." "We also take note of the United for Our Forests initiative, which promotes the conservation, sustainable management, and restoration of these essential tropical ecosystems. While appreciating the efforts of our countries to preserve rare species and noting the high vulnerability of big cats, we take note of the Republic of India's initiative to create an international Big Cats Alliance and encourage BRICS countries to work together to the conservation of big cats," it added. The leaders of BRICS nations emphasised the urgent need to reform the governance of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to ensure more balanced and equitable representation for developing countries, in line with the value of natural capital that these countries uphold. They also expressed support for the simplification of procedures and the facilitation of access to resources, and the participation of those directly involved in the conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems, such as Indigenous peoples and local communities, including through improved voice and vote mechanisms and equitable access to decision-making by developing countries. The joint declaration stated, "We commend Brazil's BRICS Chairship in 2025 and express our gratitude to the government and people of Brazil for holding the XVII BRICS Summit in the city of Rio de Janeiro." The leaders also expressed full support for India's BRICS Chairship in 2026 and the holding of the 18th BRICS Summit in India. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, along with other leaders, attended the 17th BRICS Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on Sunday. Brazil assumed the BRICS Chairship on January 1, 2025, with the theme 'Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance'.
