The J. Edgar Hoover precedent for weaponizing the FBI
"Yes, we could have a repeat of that," Frank Figliuzzi tells us.
🕵️ Public Notice is possible thanks to paid subscribers. If you aren’t one, please click the button below to sign up and support our independent journalism. 🕵️
After serving in the FBI for more than two decades, in 2011 Frank Figliuzzi became the assistant director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, where he worked alongside FBI Director Robert Mueller. Suffice it to say he saw a lot in his career.
So it should be taken seriously that Figliuzzi, now an MSNBC senior national security and intelligence analyst, describes Trump’s picks to run what are sometimes referred to as the power ministries — among them the DOJ (including the FBI) and the defense department — as a “hijacking of the entire national security structure.”
“My chief concern is this single characteristic that seems to run through these nominees — blind allegiance to Donald Trump,” Figliuzzi told us.
We recently connected with Figliuzzi to get his insight on Trump’s picks and what they signal about how the federal government will operate over the next four years. He warned that “we could be heading toward tremendous abuses of power, with the FBI going after Trump’s political enemies.” And he noted that a previous FBI director provided the president-elect and his choice to run the bureau, Kash Patel, with a blueprint.
“J. Edgar Hoover was found in the 1960s and early 1970s to have repeatedly authorized illegal wiretapping and pursuit of perceived enemies — people he didn't like and people the White House didn’t like,” Figliuzzi said. “Notoriously, the FBI was doing dozens of ‘black bag’ jobs — breaking into people's homes, planting evidence, seizing evidence, planting microphones.”
“Yes, we could have a repeat of that,” he added. “People say, ‘Oh, this won’t be so bad.’ No, it could get really bad.”
A transcript of Figliuzzi’s conversation with Public Notice’s Thor Benson, lightly edited for length and clarity, follows.
Thor Benson
As someone who’s focused on national security and has a background there, what are your top concerns with Trump’s choices for national security roles?
Frank Figliuzzi
Sadly, we’ll have to rank order them.
It’s not just that many of Trump’s nominees are remarkably unqualified for the jobs, and they are — from the DNI pick with Tulsi Gabbard to the DHS with Kristi Noem to Hegseth at DOD and now Kash Patel. But the lack of competence is not my chief concern anymore.
My chief concern is this single characteristic that seems to run through these nominees — blind allegiance to Donald Trump. Yes, there are national security issues with someone like Gabbard or Hegseth — I say national security with Hegseth, particularly, because similar to the concerns about Matt Gaetz, we don’t know what we don’t know. Is there more coming with Hegseth? Is it extortion and blackmail?
He’s already written a check to a woman in California. What else do we not know about? According to the latest reporting, he appears to have an alcohol problem. He’s had to physically be carried out of events he attended because he was drunk. That’s not good with someone who’s running things at the Pentagon. Are there more women and incidents out there? According to the New Yorker, he also yells “kill all the Muslims” when he gets drunk.
Out of all of the nominees, Kash Patel lacks the capacity to have his own independent thoughts and ideology. His record is replete with nothing but kissing Trump’s ass. That’s it. You don’t have to take my word for it. Look at his public statements about persecuting the “deep state,” prosecutors, the media, for christ’s sake. Combine that with Pam Bondi’s almost identical comments, and we’ve now got a Trump hijacking of the entire national security structure.
Programming note: Aaron will hold his first live chat with subscribers on the Substack app tomorrow (Tuesday) at 11am CT (noon eastern). He’ll take any and all questions for an hour. If you’d like to partake, please support our work by becoming a paid subscriber. (And for those of you who have already done that, thank you!)
Thor Benson
So where does that take us?
Frank Figliuzzi
Well, we could be heading toward tremendous abuses of power, with the FBI going after Trump’s political enemies. Where have we seen this before? People may call me alarmist, but this isn’t the first time this has happened in the FBI.