FBI Director Wray to Resign Before Trump Inauguration
The move paves the way for Kash Patel or another Trump appointee.

WaPo (“FBI Director Christopher Wray to resign before Trump takes office“):
FBI Director Christopher A. Wray announced Wednesday that he would resign at the end of the Biden administration, stepping down as the leader of the powerful law enforcement bureau before President-elect Donald Trump takes office and can fire him.
Wray’s resignation comes seven years into his 10-year term — a tenure that is meant to span multiple administrations and is intentionally longer than other executive branch appointments to avoid politicization of the FBI. Trump announced last month that he would nominate loyalist Kash Patel to serve as FBI director, sending a message to Wray that he should either resign or prepare to be fired.
Patel has echoed Trump’s calls for retribution against perceived enemies, and has called for using federal law enforcement to prosecute both political opponents and journalists. His looming nomination, along with Wray’s decision to resign, underscores the reality that the Trump administration will attempt to obliterate long-standing norms at the FBI and dramatically reshape the bureau.
Wray announced his plans at a town hall with the FBI workforce Wednesday afternoon, telling his employees that while it was a hard decision to cut his term short, he believed it was the best one for the bureau. It was an emotional meeting, according to an FBI official, and Wray’s announcement was met with a long-standing ovation from his staff. After the town hall, Wray shook hands with many of the FBI employees in the room.
“My goal is to keep the focus on our mission — the indispensable work you’re doing on behalf of the American people every day. In my view, this is the best way to avoid dragging the Bureau deeper into the fray, while reinforcing the values and principles that are so important to how we do our work,” Wray said, according to excerpts released by the FBI.
“It should go without saying, but I’ll say it anyway — this is not easy for me,” he continued. “I love this place, I love our mission, and I love our people — but my focus is, and always has been, on us and doing what’s right for the FBI.”
Trump exulted in Wray’s announcement Wednesday, writing on social media that it was “a great day for America.”
The Atlantic‘s Jonathan Chait deems this “A Scandalous Resignation.”
When Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, in 2017, I was about to drive my daughter and some of her friends to a soccer tryout. I remember that the news came moments before we left; once we arrived, I sat on a bench next to the soccer field, scrolling through incredulous and fearful reactions on Twitter. The news was widely considered akin to Richard Nixon’s Saturday Night Massacre, one of the most odious scandals in American history. TRUMP FIRES COMEY AMID RUSSIA INQUIRY, screamed a banner headline on the front page of The New York Times.
Now Trump, preparing for his second term as president, has decided to replace the FBI director again. The figure he picked to replace Comey—the lifelong Republican Christopher Wray—proved unable to meet Trump’s expectations for the position, which are (1) to permit Trump and his allies to violate the law with impunity, and (2) to investigate anybody who interferes with (1). Wray, wrestling with the problem of Trump’s desire to separate him from a job he apparently liked, chose to step down on his own. This raises the likelihood that the media will treat the replacement of Wray as normal administrative turnover rather than as a scandal.
But a scandal it most certainly is. By tradition, FBI directors serve 10-year terms, a norm designed to insulate the FBI from pressure to serve the president’s whims. Trump supporters have two philosophical rationalizations for his demand to violate that tradition. The lowbrow, populist version favored by Trump cultists is that Trump is beset by a “deep state” conspiracy that has kneecapped him at every turn because it is loyal to globalists, neoconservatives, or some other corrupt network. The highbrow version, preferred by conservative-movement elites, is that presidents possess an inherent right to control the executive branch from top to bottom, and all norms designed to prevent the president from abusing that power are an affront to the Constitution.
Neither theory can explain why Trump continues to go to war with people he appointed himself. Wray is not a Democrat, nor is he a Never Trumper. He’s a Republican picked by Trump. So was former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a Trump loyalist, and his successor, William Barr, who auditioned to succeed Sessions by performing even more obsequious loyalty to Trump.
The problem that keeps arising is that there is no way to remain in Trump’s favor while following the law. In a celebratory statement posted to Truth Social, Trump claims, “Under the leadership of Christopher Wray, the FBI illegally raided my home, without cause.” Had the FBI raid actually been illegal, he could have proved that in court. He didn’t, because by taking massive troves of classified documents when he left office, keeping them in a wildly unsecured location, refusing multiple requests to return them, lying repeatedly about it, and engaging in a clumsy cover-up, Trump had given the bureau no other choice. For Wray to allow this brazen defiance of the law would have been to simply admit that the law doesn’t apply to Trump, in or out of office.
But that is precisely the credo Trump demands that the bureau follow. It is why he has selected Kash Patel, a sycophant so childishly worshipful that he spelled out his loyalty to Trump in a literal children’s book portraying Trump as a virtuous king and himself as Trump’s loyal wizard. Perhaps Patel (or whomever Senate Republicans ultimately confirm for the position) will, once in office, somehow develop an adult, professionalized understanding of the rule of law. More likely, Trump’s FBI director will discover that actually locking up Trump’s enemies is hard. This was the anticlimactic outcome of the Durham investigation, Trump’s first-term campaign to imprison his foes, which resulted, after months of conservative-media salivating, in two embarrassing acquittals in court.
Since before Trump’s re-election, Yale historian Timothy Snyder has been urging,
Do not obey in advance. Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do.
In a very real sense, Wray is violating this precept. There’s a good argument that, since Directors are appointed by law for a ten-year term, he should have held firm, demanding that Trump fire him to exact some modest cost for breaking the norm. Why he did not do that, I do not know.
Here’s what he said about the matter:
I want to address a topic that’s been the subject of a lot of speculation, and that’s my future as FBI Director. Since the moment I started in this job seven-plus years ago, my focus has been on trying to do what I think is best for our institution—for the Bureau, and ultimately, for the American people we serve, and what sets us up best for success—not just today, but in the long run. So after weeks of careful thought, I’ve decided the right thing for the Bureau is for me to serve until the end of the current Administration in January and then step down.
My goal is to keep the focus on our mission—the indispensable work you’re doing on behalf of the American people every day. And in my view, this is the best way to avoid dragging the Bureau deeper into the fray, while reinforcing the values and principles that are so important to how we do our work.
It should go without saying, but I’ll say it anyway: This is not easy for me. I love this place. I love our mission. And I love our people. But my focus is, and always has been, on us and doing what’s right for the FBI. And it was important to me that you all got to hear about my decision directly from me, before it gets announced publicly.
That’s all he said about the matter.
It’s possible he thinks making it easy will spare the Bureau more public harassment from Trump. Almost certainly, it spares Wray and his family from it.
Regardless, while it’s a ten-year term, the FBI Director serves at the pleasure of the President. Bill Clinton fired William Sessions, albeit following a DOJ ethics probe that revealed substantial issues. Trump fired Comey, ostensibly for lying to Congress about the Hillary Clinton email investigation but, in actuality, for investigating the Trump 2016 campaign’s ties to the Russian government. He was ready to fire Wray—whom he himself appointed—over various slights, most notably ordering a raid at Mar a Lago to seize classified documents Trump stole and refused to return.
It now falls to the Senate to decide whether to allow Trump to turn the FBI into a personal vengeance team under Patel or some other lackey. I have little faith in their steadfastness.
That was William S. Sessions, although I get why you have Jeff Sessions on the brain…
At this time of year, when good will to our fellow humans should be our guiding principle, I find I just can’t blame him for leaving. I’m sure the man has the courage to rush into a burning building and save the life of a child and their cute puppy, but spending three final years with Trump is just too much to impose on anyone. Merry Christmas, Mr. Wray, and a quiet New Year.
I find it hard to make a big deal out of this, as it would take but one Xitt and two minutes to fire Wray.
On the other hand, why make it any easier and not even imply meddling with the FBI politically is abominable?
It does seem a preemptive knuckling under.
I was hoping that Wray would stand his ground because Trump has been trying to turn any attempt to hold him accountable into either a criminal or firing offense. Resigning because Trump wants to replace you despite (or perhaps because of) your exemplary service is another manner of kissing his ass.
FWIW, David French at the NYT has a different perspective (no subscription required) on this resignation: “ Wray has created a “legal obstacle to Trump trying to bypass the Senate confirmation process.”
Wray is a lifelong Republican careerist, appointed by Trump. If he plays ball he can look forward to making millions with a prestigious conservative law firm. What was the basis for ever thinking he might stand on principle?
@MarkedMan: Jack Goldsmith has a somewhat different interpretation of the VRA: Trump can appoint any person confirmed by the Senate FOR ANY POSITION to the job for up to two years.
Since before Trump’s re-election, Yale historian Timothy Snyder has been urging,
I agree in principle with Snyder, however I completely understand why Wray is ducking out. He, and everyone else, has seen what Trump can and will do.
And no doubt he’s mindful of what happened to his FBI colleague Andrew G. McCabe, the former F.B.I. deputy director, who was fired and had his pension stripped a day before his eligibility was to begin (it was later reinstated.) This situation is not identical or similar … but … it demonstrates just how miserable Trump can make your life.
Mixed feelings. On one hand, it does appear that Wray has ensured that Patel has to go through the confirmation process. On the other hand, I am reminded of how many senior Senators and Congressional Representatives resigned when the Tea Party became vogues. Decades of institutional learning went out the door because they didn’t risk losing a campaign, which was, as Timothy Snyder suggest, obeying in advance.
I don’t know why Wray decided to step down, but honestly, I don’t blame him one bit. The stress of the inevitable sh!tshow, clashing with the morons Trump’s bringing with him into a second term, the notion that a spineless Senate would pile on, the (likely) death threats that seem pro forma nowadays for anyone in a high profile position…is any job worth it?
We’re at a collective stage of letting the American public touch the hot stove. They voted for this sh!t, they can deal with the consequences.
The big question for me is how good a friend of Trump (i.e. how much do I pay him) to ensure that I will not be investigated in the foreseeable future? I guess that environmental and economic irregularities are definitely on the menu as are most cases of sexual abuse. Can I get a carte blanche for violent crimes? I’m white which gets me a discount, I’m sure.
@Jen: Agreed on all counts.
I appreciate and applaud the herioc resistors, but I won’t attack those like Wray who will just take their golden parachutes and get out of dodge. Some don’t want to play martyr for someone else’s stupidity, and I don’t blame them.
The resignation offends me.
He should have waited to get fired so he could collect unemployment. He paid into the system, and he has earned those unemployment checks.
Hopefully he files anyway. I think a good case can be made that having the incoming president threatening his job made staying untenable.
Sure, I’d prefer it if Wray stayed in place and forced Trump to fire him but frankly, the American people don’t value (or, more importantly, deserve) leaders with integrity. Can’t blame the guy for simply jumping ship.
The gloating Truth Social post that Jonathan Chait links to will be an astonishing exhibit when historians write about the fall of the US legal system.
Per Trump, Wray’s resignation is proof that the “United States Department of Injustice” was Weaponized against Trump. “We will now restore the Rule of Law for all Americans.” Almost 250 years of American Jurisprudence is turned on his head.
Turns out Trump has been right about one thing. “And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.” And “anything” doesn’t just mean grabbing women by their pussies, but also bank fraud, election fraud, classified document theft, obstruction of justice, and insurrection.
A nit to pick.
I can only speak from my experience.
I have never been an employee of the Federal Government.
I was eligible for and collected unemployment benefits when I was laid off jobs in the 35 years that I was a waged employee in the landline telephone industry.
At one time I was an employer.
Unlike FICA which is withheld from an employees wages and also paid by employers, in the 14 states where I worked there was no deduction for Unemployment Insurance taken from my pay as a waged employee. The money supporting the initial 6 month claim for Unemployment Benefits is contributed only by employers. When there are extensions of the unemployment benefits state and federal government finance those benefits. As an employee I never “paid in” to the system.
The first time that I was laid off a job and qualified for benefits in 1973 I collected $50 a week. My rent in those days was $50 a month all utilities except telephone were included. Gas was 39¢/gal.
Draft beer was 25¢ a draw and weed was $20 a lid (1 oz) and a tab of acid was about $4 or $5.
The good old days!
A new “norm” has been established in US governance. Republican presidents appoint a partisan FBI Director to persecute “enemies”, and Democratic presidents keep them in office to “protect the institution”.
“most notably ordering a raid at Mar a Lago to seize classified documents Trump stole and refused to return.”
Every President takes whatever personal items and copies of any government documents that they want. The librarians of the National Archives are there to assist with the storage and the eventual Presidential Library.
@joe: Nope. You don’t get to haul off classified information WITHOUT CLEARING IT FIRST.
Trump. Stole. Classified. Documents.
@Jen:
Really? Who outranks the President?