Kash Patel Makes Another Major Error on Brown University Shooting

Kash Patel celebrated too early again.

On Sunday, the FBI director made a lengthy post boasting about the bureau’s efforts to detain a person of interest in the Brown University shooting on Saturday night that killed two and wounded nine.

“Early this morning, FBI Boston’s Safe Streets Task Force … detained a person of interest in a hotel room in Coventry, RI, based off a lead by the @ProvidenceRIPD. We have deployed local and national resources to process and reconstruct the shooting scene—providing HQ and Lab elements on scene,” Patel wrote, attaching pictures. “We set up a digital media intake portal to ingest images and video from the public related to this incident. And the FBI’s victim specialists are fully integrating with our partners to provide resources to victims and survivors of this horrific violence. This FBI will continue an all out 24/7 campaign until justice is fully served.”

Local authorities even confirmed that the person of interest was detained off of a tip obtained by Patel’s FBI.

The person of interest was released hours after Patel’s announcement.

This blunder from Patel reeks of the same overeagerness that led to this same outcome in the Charlie Kirk shooting.

In September, he drew the ire of the left and right for his premature social media post the day of the shooting, declaring that “the subject for the horrific shooting” was in custody—a claim almost immediately contradicted by local officials. Patel later backtracked, and the manhunt ensued for another 27-plus hours before the suspect, Tyler Robinson, was turned in by a family member.

“I’m grateful that Utah authorities have captured the suspect in the Charlie Kirk assassination, and think it is time for Republicans to assess whether Kash Patel is the right man to run the FBI,” right-wing culture warrior Chris Rufo posted then. “He performed terribly in the last few days, and it’s not clear whether he has the operational expertise to investigate, infiltrate, and disrupt the violent movements—of whatever ideology—that threaten the peace in the United States.”

It’s clear that these questions still apply—and that the FBI director is still more concerned with looking tough and being celebrated than he is with actually being good at his job.