Public Citizen Complaint to OGE Regarding Ethics Waiver for Patel
OGE Must Intervene to Enforce the Ethics Agreement of FBI Director Kashyap Patel
By Craig Holman, Ph.D.
Dear Acting Director Greer:
In a stunning move and without explanation, the Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO) for the Federal Bureau of Investigation has issued a waiver for Kash Patel that frees him from a conflict of interest restriction. The waiver allows him to work in the interest of the government of Qatar, a former client of Patel, while serving in public office in his official capacity as Director of the FBI.
This waiver has been granted in spite of the explicit ethics agreement negotiated with OGE in which Patel pledged to avoid actual and apparent conflicts of interest with his former client while serving as Director of the FBI. “I will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which I know a former client of mine is a party or represents a party for a period of one year after I last provided service to that client or until the client satisfies any outstanding bill, whichever is later, unless I am first authorized to participate,” Patel pledged in his ethics agreement.[1]
The criminal conflict of interest statute, 18 U.S.C. § 208, prohibits senate-confirmed political appointees in the administration from taking official actions that may have an apparent or actual effect on the financial status of any recent client or employer prior to appointment, unless specifically exempted from the statute in writing on the grounds that the potential conflict is so minor, or the government’s interest is so critical, that the official’s “participation outweighs the concern that a reasonable person may question the integrity of the agency’s programs and operations.”[2]
Unbeknownst to the public until the time of his senate confirmation hearing, the embassy of Qatar employed Kash Patel’s firm, Trishul LLC, as a consultant for the Qatari government until November 2024. Patel neither disclosed this work nor registered as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which left the public without any record of earnings from Qatar or the nature of Patel’s work. All that the public knows comes from Patel’s personal financial disclosures during the confirmation hearing that Qatar paid more than $5,000 for consulting services from Trishul, and that Trishul in turn paid Patel $2.1 million.
On Feb. 4, 2025, Public Citizen filed a complaint with the FARA Unit of the Department of Justice for Patel’s apparent violation of the law. Public Citizen also requested that the Senate Judiciary Committee revisit Patel’s confirmation and seek disclosure of his activities on behalf of Qatar.[3]
The very next day, Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memorandum scaling back enforcement of the disclosure requirements of foreign lobbying under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). The memo reads in part: “Recourse to criminal charges under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and 18 U.S.C. § 951 shall be limited to instances of alleged conduct similar to more traditional espionage by foreign government actors.”[4]
Bondi’s memorandum gravely undermines the very purpose of FARA. Laws against espionage are already on the books. FARA is a disclosure law, not an anti-espionage law. Its sole purpose is to inform the public of any efforts by foreign governments to influence U.S. domestic or foreign policy or public opinion generally.
Nevertheless, the Bondi memorandum has left the business relationship between Qatar and Patel a mystery mired in secrecy. To make matters worse, the DAEO overseeing the FBI has compounded that mystery and secrecy by allowing Patel to continue serving Qatari interests in his official capacity and conducting more activities on behalf of Qatar that remain undisclosed to the public.
Given the sheer secrecy that engulfs Patel’s relationship with the government of Qatar – and the fact of earlier sensational scandals involving Qatari investments with American lawmakers[5] — this waiver should never have been granted.
Public Citizen urges the Office of Government Ethics to review these circumstances and rescind Patel’s waiver from his pledged ethics obligations.
Sincerely,
Craig Holman, Ph.D.
Government affairs lobbyist
Public Citizen
215 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20003
[1] Jolene Lauria, DAEO, Ethics Agreement of Kash Patel (Jan. 28, 2025), available at: https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presiden.nsf/PAS+Index/730D7A12BBF6654785258C240032196E/%24FILE/Patel%2C%20Kashyap%20%20finalEA.pdf
[2] 5 CFR § 2635.502 Personal and business relationships.
[3] Public Citizen, Letter to FARA Unit Regarding Patel (Feb. 4, 2025), available at: https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-to-fara-unit-regarding-patel/
[4] Pam Bondi, Office of Attorney General, Memorandum for All Department Employees (Feb. 5, 2025), available at: https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1388541/dl?inline
[5] For example, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) was sentenced to 11 years in prison for receiving gold bars in exchange for official actions related to a Qatari investment fund. President Donald Trump has received a $400 million Boeing luxury aircraft from Qatar under circumstances many find questionable if not illegal.