Clash in the Senate

A confirmation hearing for Kash Patel, President Trump’s nominee for FBI Director, turned heated on Thursday as Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) sparked outrage among conservatives on social media. The backlash was predominantly aimed at Schiff, who was perceived as having lost ground to Patel during the proceedings.

The exchanges during the hearing revolved around a controversial song related to the January 6 Capitol riot inmates, specifically a track that incorporated audio of Trump reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. Patel had previously stated he had no involvement in its production, a claim Schiff sought to challenge.

Questioning the ‘We’

Schiff focused his initial lines of questioning on Patel’s past statements, asking if he maintained that he had “nothing to do” with the song. He referenced Patel’s remarks on Steve Bannon’s podcast, where Patel remarked that “we thought it would be cool” to create the song. The exchange quickly devolved into a semantic argument over the meaning of the word “we”.

Schiff: “You’re part of that ‘we’ — right?”

Patel: “Not in every instance.”

Patel clarified his stance by asserting he had not participated in the recording or mastering of the track. Schiff’s probing continued, questioning whether Patel’s belief that he was not included in “we” was a new interpretation of the word.

Back-and-Forth Over Promotion

The discourse further escalated as they debated the essence of involvement and promotional efforts surrounding the song. Patel insisted he had contributed to fundraising for families affected by the January 6 events, while Schiff accused him of promoting the song, which depicted individuals who confronted law enforcement agents.

Schiff: “You promoted the hell out of it.”

Patel: “I promoted the heck out of raising money for families in need.”

Defensive Stance and Bipartisan Criticism

Patel remained steadfast in asserting his qualifications for the role. When Schiff posed a hypothetical regarding the appropriateness of a director promoting a song that glorified hostility towards law enforcement, Patel retorted confidently, “I am fit to be the director of the FBI.”

Many commentators from the conservative sphere quickly sided with Patel, leveraging social media to criticize Schiff’s approach. Richard Grenell, a former Director of National Intelligence, blasted Schiff for not portraying the views of “commonsense Californians.” He labeled Schiff as “partisan” and “petty,” reinforcing the notion that Schiff’s tactics were out of touch with broader sentiments.

Vocal Support and Backlash

The exchanges drew responses from various figures across the media landscape. Pradheep Shanker, a contributor to National Review, noted a significant loss of credibility for Democrats due to their line of questioning. Daily Signal columnist Tony Kinnett remarked on the absurdity of the confrontations, comparing them to other outrageous moments from Senate hearings.

Additionally, Judicial Watch Chairman Tom Fitton expressed concerns over Schiff’s reliability in committee settings, further amplifying the divide between the parties and highlighting the extremities to which the hearing had devolved.

Schiff’s Assertion of Victory

Despite the backlash, Schiff maintained that he had achieved a critical point during the hearing, arguing that Patel’s involvement in raising money for individuals associated with the January 6 insurrection illustrated a disconnect from the responsibilities expected of an FBI Director.

Schiff: “I asked him to look those officers in the eye and tell them he was proud of what he did. He couldn’t.”

Throughout the hearing, there were numerous combative exchanges as Democrats pressed Patel on various aspects of his record and his book, “Government Gangsters.” Patel addressed the negativity aimed at him, branding the accusations as “grotesque mischaracterizations.”

Culminating Remarks

In a final assertion, Patel defended his commitment to law enforcement and the principles of the Constitution, emphasizing his history of service. He challenged the motives behind the criticisms leveled at him, framing them as an attack not just on him but on the credibility of the FBI as a whole.

Patel: “If the best attacks on me are false accusations… this body is doing is defeating the credibility of the men and women at the FBI.”