Senate Democrats pressed FBI Director Kash Patel on Tuesday for assurances that federal agents won’t be stationed at the polls on Election Day, reflecting concerns on their side that the Trump administration will use its power to attempt to intimidate voters.
At a Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) told Patel that she has “great concerns about the president’s use of the Justice Department when it comes to our democracy.” She noted that, since the Civil War, the government has been forbidden from deploying armed officers of any kind at election sites.
“Are you aware of the Justice Department’s long-standing guidance that states that FBI agents cannot conduct investigations inside polling places on Election Day, and that federal prosecutors have no authority to send FBI agents or deploy U.S. Marshals at polling places?” she asked.
“I’m aware,” Patel responded.
Trending
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) pressed the point later in the hearing. “Can you commit to this committee that you will not send FBI agents to the polls on Election Day?” Blumenthal asked.
Patel replied: “The FBI will follow the law. If there’s a reason to go there because there’s been a violation of the law, we will — otherwise we won’t.”
Blumenthal noted during the hearing that the FBI is involved in seven voter-related subpoenas issued to the Nevada secretary of state’s office and had seized voting records in Fulton County, Georgia. Trump was indicted in Fulton County along with several co-defendants on charges related to efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, in a case that was later dropped.
But Patel appeared to contradict himself when Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vermont) returned to the topic later in the hearing and pointed out that Rep. John James, who is running as the Republican nominee for governor in Michigan, told podcaster Benny Johnson that “my friend Kash Patel” had already laid out plans to have FBI agents present leading up to the election in that state.
“Wait, I thought you weren’t going to be sending people to the polls?” Welch said.
“When did you hear that? It’s just another lie,” Patel said.
After a lengthy verbal spat, Welch demanded answers while shaking with rage.
“This is existential. You told Mr. Blumenthal you weren’t sending agents to election sites,” Welch said. “Do you pledge that you will not, in any way, interfere in the will of the American people when they go to the polls in November?”
“I pledge unequivocally that I will not participate in your charade of lies,” Patel shot back.
The United States has several laws that prohibit stationing “troops or armed men” at the polls, using the military to intimidate voters or employing any government official to interfere with an election.
However, these typically arcane laws have become a focus for Democrats this year in response to President Donald Trump’s unprecedented attempts to use executive power to change how elections are conducted — despite the Constitution giving states exclusive right to manage them.
The Trump administration’s attempt to use the U.S. Postal Service to implement nationwide mail-in ballot restrictions ahead of the midterm elections was knocked down by the Supreme Court Monday night.
The DOJ has taken a starkly different approach to handling the election this time around, The Washington Sun reported in June. That includes canceling election-integrity training sessions for prosecutors and FBI agents stationed across the country, deleting the official internal guide about handling election crimes, opting not to employ experts at the Public Integrity Section, and not taking the usual steps to establish a “command center” to monitor and address the typical emergencies that pop up around Election Day.
At Tuesday’s hearing, Patel told senators that the FBI would continue to have “election counselor coordinators” in every bureau field office to “quarterback” election activities. That’s the same kind of arrangement the bureau has had for years, with a designated agent keeping an eye out for potential violations of election laws, such as voter intimidation.
But when asked by Blumenthal whether he’d acknowledge that the FBI has no authority to monitor the election itself — in other words, police the election — Patel deflected.
“That priority rests with DHS,” Patel said.
“So you would agree with me that deploying FBI agents to the polls on Election Day would be contrary to law?” Blumenthal said.
“I don’t know that we can’t legally do it. I’m telling you we’re going to house our agents and intel analysts in our field offices for election security efforts,” Patel said.
“Well, I’m dissatisfied that you are unable to give us an unequivocal, clear, unambiguous commitment that the FBI will be kept out of election interference,” Blumenthal said.
Senate Democrats’ inquiries on Tuesday echoed a line of questioning by Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Michigan) in March, during Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin’s confirmation hearing. She expressed concerns that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents could be sent to election sites as an intimidation force — and asked Mullin if he thought he had “the authority to put uniformed officers at polling locations in 2026.”
“The only reason why my officers should be there is if there was a specific threat for them to be there, not for intimidation,” Mullin said.
The discussion about the 2026 election was nearly overshadowed by a bizarre exchange earlier in the hearing, as Patel defended the bureau’s decision to drop automatic disqualification for job candidates over “beastiality.”
“We did not want to punish victims of beastiality,” Patel told Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois).
Sen. John Kennedy (R-Louisiana) wouldn’t let go of the matter, pressing the FBI director to explain himself. “Um … what about the beastiality?” Kennedy began.
Patel explained that previous regulations automatically disqualified anyone to work at the FBI who’d been forced by adults to engage in sex with animals “on either side” when they were children. “Obviously, we are never going to hire the criminals,” Patel clarified.
“Either side of what? The beastiality? So you disqualified the animal?” Kennedy said.
“Well, we have great canines, but I don’t think we’re going to disqualify them,” Patel said with a chuckle.
Kennedy then asked why Patel would even wade into this discussion at a time when the FBI’s reputation is under attack, asking: “Why would you even get into beastiality?”
“We are not into beastiality,” Patel said.
Author
