ss “It’s not about the men—you’re missing the real threat.” Glenn Greenwald is ripping the spotlight off personalities and shining it straight on power itself. In a searing, unflinching analysis, he reveals why Kash Patel and Dan Bongino are more than critics of the FBI—they’re symbols of a hidden, systemic problem that most people refuse to face. According to Greenwald, the real shocker isn’t whether you like them or not—it’s that questioning a federal agency now sparks outrage, while unquestioning loyalty is praised as a civic virtue. Independent voices aren’t debated—they’re silenced…

What happens when a system designed to enforce the law begins operating behind layers of secrecy and internal politics? According to journalist Glenn Greenwald, that question sits at the heart of the ongoing debate surrounding the FBI—and the roles played by figures like Kash Patel and Dan Bongino.

In a recent, sharply worded discussion, Greenwald laid out what he believes is the real story behind the public clashes, media narratives, and institutional battles that continue to swirl around federal law enforcement. His argument wasn’t framed as partisan cheerleading or outrage theater. Instead, it was a methodical challenge to how power operates when transparency fades and loyalty becomes currency.

FBI Power Struggle book

The FBI and the Trust Problem

Greenwald began by addressing what he sees as the FBI’s most pressing issue: credibility. Once widely viewed as a neutral protector of the rule of law, the agency has increasingly become a symbol of distrust for large segments of the public.

According to Greenwald, this erosion didn’t happen overnight. It grew out of years of selective leaks, politically charged investigations, and a media ecosystem that often treats anonymous intelligence sources as unquestionable authorities.

Dan Bongino merchandise

“The problem isn’t criticism of the FBI,” Greenwald argued. “The problem is the assumption that questioning it is somehow dangerous or illegitimate.”

Where Kash Patel Fits In

Kash Patel, a former government official who has been openly critical of the FBI’s leadership, is often portrayed as a radical disruptor. Greenwald pushed back against that characterization, suggesting it serves a convenient purpose.

In Greenwald’s view, Patel represents something the institution finds threatening: an insider willing to challenge how power is wielded internally. Rather than engaging with Patel’s claims, critics often dismiss him outright, labeling him partisan or extreme.

Greenwald noted that this tactic avoids addressing the substance of Patel’s concerns—especially allegations about politicized decision-making and accountability failures at the highest levels.

FBI career guide

“Discredit the person,” Greenwald said, “and you don’t have to answer the questions.”

Dan Bongino’s Role in the Narrative

Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service agent turned commentator, occupies a different space in the controversy. Unlike Patel, Bongino operates largely outside government, speaking directly to a massive audience.

Greenwald argued that Bongino’s influence is precisely why he draws such aggressive pushback. By bypassing traditional media filters, Bongino challenges official narratives and encourages skepticism toward federal institutions.

Critics accuse him of fueling distrust. Greenwald counters that distrust isn’t manufactured—it’s earned.

Glenn Greenwald books

“When people stop believing institutions,” Greenwald said, “it’s rarely because of one commentator. It’s because their lived experience no longer matches what they’re being told.”

Media, Messaging, and Selective Outrage

A central theme of Greenwald’s argument was the media’s role in shaping perception. He pointed to what he described as a double standard: skepticism is praised when directed at political opponents, but condemned when aimed at powerful institutions.

FBI Power Struggle book

According to Greenwald, Patel and Bongino are controversial not because they threaten democracy, but because they threaten narrative control.

When former insiders and independent voices question the same agencies journalists rely on for access, it creates tension. That tension, Greenwald says, often gets resolved by labeling critics as dangerous rather than engaging with their claims.

The Question No One Wants to Answer

Greenwald posed a question he believes is deliberately avoided: What mechanisms exist to hold the FBI accountable when it gets things wrong?

Dan Bongino merchandise

He cited past intelligence failures and misconduct that were later acknowledged—often years after the damage was done. In those cases, the people who raised early concerns were frequently dismissed or marginalized.

“That pattern should make people nervous,” Greenwald warned. “Not because the FBI is uniquely evil, but because unchecked power always produces abuse.”

Why This Debate Matters Now

Greenwald emphasized that this conversation isn’t about defending specific personalities. It’s about whether institutions that operate largely in secrecy can maintain public trust without genuine transparency.

As political divisions deepen, federal agencies increasingly find themselves at the center of cultural conflict. Greenwald argues that pretending neutrality while quietly shaping outcomes only accelerates public skepticism.

Glenn Greenwald books

For supporters of Patel and Bongino, Greenwald’s analysis feels validating. For critics, it feels dangerous. But Greenwald insists that discomfort is the point.

“A democracy,” he said, “doesn’t survive by demanding faith. It survives by tolerating doubt.”

A Warning, Not an Endorsement

Greenwald was careful to note that questioning the FBI doesn’t require idolizing its critics. Patel and Bongino, he acknowledged, are flawed and controversial figures. But dismissing their arguments solely because of who they are, he argued, is intellectually lazy—and politically risky.

The real danger, Greenwald concluded, is a culture that equates criticism with disloyalty.

“When citizens are told not to question power,” he said, “power stops answering to citizens.”

FBI career guide

An Uncomfortable Truth

Whether one agrees with Greenwald or not, his message cuts against a prevailing trend: the idea that institutions deserve automatic trust.

By placing Kash Patel and Dan Bongino within a broader conversation about accountability, Greenwald reframed the controversy. It’s not about personalities. It’s about power—who has it, how it’s used, and who gets to question it.

And in that sense, the truth he claims to reveal isn’t secret at all. It’s simply the part many would rather not confront.