Lifestyle
J. Edgar Hoover's biographer weighs in on Trump's pick to lead the FBI
Kash Patel speaks before Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump during a campaign rally at Thomas & Mack Center, Thursday, Oct. 24, 2024, in Las Vegas.
Alex Brandon/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Alex Brandon/AP
President-elect Donald Trump shocked even some of his most ardent critics when he announced he would nominate former national security aide Kash Patel to lead the FBI.
Trump called Patel a “brilliant lawyer, investigator, and ‘America First’ fighter who has spent his career exposing corruption, defending Justice, and protecting the American People” in a post on social media over the weekend.
Patel, a former Justice Department prosecutor and fierce FBI critic, openly vowed to find ways to punish Trump’s perceived enemies. Critics say that would be an appalling use of the justice system to carry out political ends.
But if that were to occur, it would not be the first time. The agency’s longest serving director, J. Edgar Hoover, authorized covert harassment campaigns against perceived enemies like the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
There are more guardrails on the FBI now than there were decades ago, historian and author Beverly Gage told NPR’s Michel Martin. But whether protections will be strong enough to hold up against pushes they haven’t been subjected to, as could happen under Patel, is the big question.
Gage, who wrote the Pulitzer Prize-winning G-Man: J. Edgar Hoover and the Making of the American Century, also believes the FBI’s politicization could damage the American public’s view of it even further.
She spoke to Morning Edition about what Patel’s pick means for the FBI and how the agency has in the past exerted vast amounts of power and influence, particularly under Hoover, its most notable director.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Michel Martin: What is the history of the FBI? How did it start and how did it become what a lot of people call the preeminent law enforcement agency in the United States?
Beverly Gage: The FBI got started pretty informally and actually pretty controversially during the progressive era. The Justice Department decided it needed its own investigators. This was around 1908. J. Edgar Hoover became the head of the bureau in 1924, and he’s really the one who put his stamp on it and turned it into, as you said, our premier law enforcement agency, but also our domestic intelligence agency. And those things have sometimes gone very well together and sometimes not so much.
Martin: How did it happen that he led the FBI for 48 years? I mean, that’s just inconceivable today.
Gage: Hoover came in at a moment when the government was just starting to expand in the 1920s. And he really built the bureaucracy in his own image and kind of managed its politics really successfully for almost half a century.
Martin: The fact that the FBI director has a 10-year term, which exceeds the two terms allowed to a president, was that a reaction to Hoover?
Gage: It was a reaction to Hoover. The analysis at the time in the ’60s and ’70s – he died in 1972 – was that future directors should not be able to amass that kind of power because it made Hoover sort of invulnerable.
Martin: Was there a bipartisan consensus at the time that there needed to be these kinds of controls?
Gage: Hoover served under four Democrats and four Republicans. He was pretty careful to be nonpartisan, really tried to keep the FBI out of politics because he thought it would damage the agency. He thought that it wasn’t right and he never would have done what we’re seeing today.
Martin: Liberals have long been suspicious of the FBI because of that legacy of covert harassment campaigns. When did the right start to become suspicious of the FBI?
Gage: When Hoover died in 1972, there would have been a lot of suspicion coming from the left and from liberals who were very critical about the FBI’s disruption of the civil rights movement, the antiwar movement. He was an ideological conservative, but a lot of conservatives really thought of the FBI as the part of the state that they liked. And so one of the really interesting things that’s happened certainly in the last decade is that we can see that flip around, but we’ve never seen anything like what’s been happening in the last several years, which is certainly Trump and his allies, but in large part, the mainstream Republican Party has really turned on the FBI and the national security state in a whole new way.
Martin: What do you make of Mr. Patel’s vow that he will use the levers of the justice system to punish those who he believes have unfairly targeted the president elect? Can he do that?
Gage: Look, there are a lot more controls on what the FBI can do, both legally and in terms of intelligence than there were during Hoover’s day. What Hoover did a lot of and where I think there is some more wiggle room even today, is in harassment campaigns, in wiretapping and bugging, the use of secret information. And in some ways, the great danger at the FBI is not going after people such that we’re going to end up in court. But the use of secret information, the use of the FBI’s surveillance and intelligence powers to specifically target people who are your personal enemies, your political enemies or your ideological enemies.
Martin: Well, one of the things that Hoover did is he authorized behavior that many people today look at as completely outside the boundaries, like, for example, discovering things about people’s personal lives. Are there any guardrails against that kind of conduct happening again?
Gage: There are more guardrails now than there were then. A lot of them are internal to the FBI and to the Justice Department. The question is whether they’re going to be strong enough to hold against a push that they have never been subjected to before. The major things that happened in the 1970s, after Hoover’s death, to begin to revise control, prevent the sorts of practices that went on during his time partly were about Congress. Congressional intelligence committees came into being. They had a lot more access to what was happening in the world of intelligence. There’s a little bit of law that’s now in place that looks quite different, but a lot of it was about internal reforms within the Justice Department and the FBI itself.

Martin: Which can be abrogated if the people who run that department so choose.
Gage: It does seem that that’s possible.
Martin: Do you have a sense of just what the public thinks about the FBI now?
Gage: I think that the FBI is in some real trouble with the public. The FBI’s legitimacy, its ability to do its work, its ability to have the support of the public really depended upon its nonpartisan image. And I think this latest appointment may potentially damage it even further. Trump seems to be saying, I want to use the FBI and its powers in order to go after my enemies and I want to destroy the FBI kind of from within. And he wants both of these things at once.
This article was edited by Treye Green. The radio version was edited by Adriana Gallardo and produced by Julie Depenbrock.
Lifestyle
It Started with a Midnight Swim and a Kiss Under the Stars
When Marian Sherry Lurio and Jonathan Buffington Nguyen met at a mutual friend’s wedding at Higgins Lake, Mich., in July 2022, both felt an immediate chemistry. As the evening progressed, they sat on the shore of the lake in Adirondack chairs under the stars, where they had their first kiss before joining others for a midnight plunge.
The two learned that the following weekend Ms. Lurio planned to attend a wedding in Philadelphia, where Mr. Nguyen lives, and before they had even exchanged numbers, they already had a first date on the books.
“I have a vivid memory of after we first met,” Mr. Nguyen said, “just feeling like I really better not screw this up.”
Before long, they were commuting between Philadelphia and New York City, where Ms. Lurio lives, spending weekends and the odd remote work days in one another’s apartments in Philadelphia and Manhattan. Within the first six months of dating, Mr. Nguyen joined Ms. Lurio’s family for Thanksgiving in Villanova, Pa., and, the following month, she met his family in Beavercreek, Ohio, at a surprise birthday party for Mr. Nguyen’s mother.
Ms. Lurio, 32, who grew up in Merion Station outside Philadelphia, works in investor relations administration at Flexpoint Ford, a private equity firm. She graduated from Dartmouth College with a bachelor’s degree in history and psychology.
Mr. Nguyen, also 32, was born in Knoxville, Tenn., and raised in Beavercreek, Ohio, from the age of 7. He graduated from Haverford College with a bachelor’s degree in political science and is now a director at Doyle Real Estate Advisors in Philadelphia.
Their long-distance relationship continued for the next few years. There were dates in Manhattan, vacations and beach trips to the Jersey Shore. They attended sporting events and discovered their shared appreciation of the 2003 film, “Love Actually.”
One evening, Mr. Nguyen recalled looking around Ms. Lurio’s small New York studio — strewed with clothes and the takeout meal they had ordered — and feeling “so comfortable and safe.” “I knew that this was something different than just sort of a fling,” he said.
It was an open question when they would move in together. In 2024, Ms. Lurio began the process of moving into Mr. Nguyen’s home in Philadelphia — even bringing her cat, Scott — but her plans changed midway when an opportunity arose to expand her role with her current employer.
Mr. Nguyen was on board with her decision. “It almost feels like stolen valor to call it ‘long distance,’ because it’s so easy from Philadelphia to New York,” Mr. Nguyen said. “The joke is, it’s easier to get to Philly from New York than to get to some parts of Brooklyn from Manhattan, right?”
In January 2025, Mr. Nguyen visited Ms. Lurio in New York with more up his sleeve than spending the weekend. Together they had discussed marriage and bespoke rings, but when Mr. Nguyen left Ms. Lurio and an unfinished cheese plate at the bar of the Chelsea Hotel that Friday evening, she had no idea what was coming next.
“I remember texting Jonathan,” Ms. Lurio said, bewildered: “‘You didn’t go toward the bathroom!’” When a Lobby Bar server came and asked her to come outside, Ms. Lurio still didn’t realize what was happening until she was standing in the hallway, where Mr. Nguyen stood recreating a key moment from the film “Love Actually,” in which one character silently professes his love for another in writing by flashing a series of cue cards. There, in the storied Chelsea Hotel hallway still festooned with Christmas decorations, Mr. Nguyen shared his last card that said, “Will you marry me?”
They wed on April 11 in front of 200 guests at the Pump House, a covered space on the banks of Philadelphia’s Schuylkill River. Mr. Nguyen’s sister, the Rev. Elizabeth Nguyen, who is ordained through the Unitarian Universalist Association, officiated.
Although formal attire was suggested, Ms. Lurio said that the ceremony was “pretty casual.” She and Jonathan got ready together, and their families served as their wedding parties.
“I said I wanted a five-minute wedding,” Ms. Lurio recalled, though the ceremony ended up lasting a little longer than that. During the ceremony, Ms. Nguyen read a homily and jokingly added that guests should not ask the bride and groom about their living arrangements, which will remain separate for the foreseeable future.
While watching Ms. Lurio walk down the aisle, flanked by her parents, Mr. Nguyen said he remembered feeling at once grounded in the moment and also a sense of dazed joy: “Like, is this real? I felt very lucky in that moment — and also just excited for the party to start!”
Lifestyle
L.A. Affairs: I loved someone who felt he couldn’t be fully seen with me
He always texted when he was outside. No call, no knock. It was just a message and then the soft sound of my door opening. He moved like someone practiced in disappearing.
His name meant “complete” in Arabic, which is what I felt when we were together.
I met him the way you meet most things that matter in Los Angeles — without intending to. In our senior year at a college in eastern L.A. County, we were introduced through mutual friends, then thrown together by the particular gravity of people who recognized something in each other. He was a Muslim medical student, conservative and careful and funny in the dry, precise way of someone who has always had to choose his words. I was loud where he was quiet, messy where he was disciplined. I was out. He was not.
I understood, or thought I did. I thought that I couldn’t get hurt if I was completely conscious throughout the endeavor. Los Angeles has a way of making you feel like the whole world shares your freedoms — until you realize the city is enormous, and not all of it belongs to you in the same way.
For months, our world was confined to my apartment. He would slip in after dark, and we’d stay up late talking about his family in Iran, classical music and the particular pressure of being the son someone sacrificed everything to bring here. He told me things he said he’d never told anyone, and I believed him.
The orange glow from my Nesso lamp lit his face while the indigo sky pressed against the window behind him. In our small little world, we were safe. Outside was another matter.
On our first real date, I took him to the L.A. Phil’s “An Evening of Film & Music: From Mexico to Hollywood” program. I told him they were cheap seats even though they were the first row on the terrace. He was thrilled in the way only someone who doesn’t expect to be delighted actually gets delighted — fully, without guarding it. I put my arm around his shoulders. At some point, I shifted and moved it, and he nudged it back. He was OK with PDA here.
I remember thinking that wealth is a great barrier to harm and then feeling silly for extrapolating my own experience once again. Inside Walt Disney Concert Hall, we were just two people in love with the same music.
Outside was still another matter.
In February, on Valentine’s Day, he took me to a Yemeni restaurant in Anaheim. We hovered over saffron tea surrounded by other young Southern Californians, and we looked like friends. Before we went in, we sat in the parking lot of the strip mall — signs in Arabic advertising bread, coffee, halal meats, the Little Arabia District — hand in hand. I leaned over to kiss him.
“Not here,” he said. His eyes shifted furtively. “Someone might see.”
I understood, or told myself I did, but I was saddened. Later, after the kind of reflection that only arrives in the wreckage, I would understand something harder: I had been unconsciously asking him to choose, over and over, between the people he loved and the person he loved. I had a long pattern of choosing unavailable men, telling myself it was because I could handle the complexity. The truth was more embarrassing. I thought that if someone like him chose me anyway — chose me over the weight of societal expectations — it would mean I was worth choosing. It took me a long time to see how unfair that was to him and to me.
We went to the Norton Simon Museum together in November, on the kind of gray Pasadena day when the 210 Freeway roars in the background like white noise. He studied for the MCAT while I wrote a paper on Persian rugs. In between practice problems, he translated ancient Arabic scripts for me. I thought, “We make a good team.” Afterward, we walked through the galleries and he didn’t let go of my arm.
That was the version of us I kept returning to — when the ending came during Ramadan. It arrived as a spiritual reflection of my own. I texted: “Does this end at graduation — whatever we are doing?”
He thought I meant Ramadan. I did not mean Ramadan.
“I care about you,” he wrote, “but I don’t want you to think this could work out to anything more than just dating. I mean, of course, I’ve fantasized about marrying you. If I could live my life the way I wanted, of course I would continue. I’m just sad it’s not in this lifetime.”
I was in Mexico City when these texts were exchanged. That night I flew to Oaxaca to clear my head and then, after less than 24 hours, flew back to L.A. No amount of vacation would allow me to process what had just happened, so I threw myself back into work.
My therapist told me to use the conjunction “and” instead of “but.” It happened, and I am changed. The harm I caused and the love I felt. The beauty of what we made and the impossibility of where it could go. She gave me a knowing smile when I asked if it would stay with me forever. She didn’t answer, which was the answer.
I think about the freeways now, the way Joan Didion called them our only secular communion. When you’re on the ground in Los Angeles, the world narrows to the few blocks around you. Get on the freeway and you understand the whole body of the city at once: the arteries, the pulse, the scale of the thing.
You understand that you are a single cell in something enormous and moving. It is all out of your control. I am in a lane. The lane shaped how I drive. He was simply in a different lane, and his lane shaped him, and those two facts can coexist without either of us being the villain of the sad story.
He came like a secret in the night, and he left the same way. What we made in between was real and complicated and mine to hold forever, hoping we find each other in the next life.
The author lives in Los Angeles.
L.A. Affairs chronicles the search for romantic love in all its glorious expressions in the L.A. area, and we want to hear your true story. We pay $400 for a published essay. Email LAAffairs@latimes.com. You can find submission guidelines here. You can find past columns here.
Lifestyle
The Nerve Center of This Art Fair Isn’t Painting. It’s Couture.
The art industry is increasingly shaped by artists’ and art businesses’ shared realization that they are locked in a fierce struggle for sustained attention — against each other, and against the rest of the overstimulated, always-online world. A major New York art fair aims to win this competition next month by knocking down the increasingly shaky walls between contemporary art and fashion.
When visitors enter the Independent art fair on May 14, they will almost immediately encounter its open-plan centerpiece: an installation of recent couture looks from Comme des Garçons. It will be the first New York solo presentation of works by Rei Kawakubo, the brand’s founder and mastermind, since a lauded 2017 survey exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute.
Art fairs have often been front and center in the industry’s 21st-century quest to capture mindshare. But too many displays have pierced the zeitgeist with six-figure spectacles, like Maurizio Cattelan’s duct-taped banana and Beeple’s robot dogs. Curating Independent around Comme des Garçons comes from the conviction that a different kind of iconoclasm can rise to the top of New York’s spring art scrum.
Elizabeth Dee, the founder and creative director of Independent, said that making Kawakubo’s work the “nerve center” of this year’s edition was a “statement of purpose” for the fair’s evolution. After several years at the compact Spring Studios in TriBeCa, Independent will more than double its square footage by moving to Pier 36 at South Street, on the East River. Dee has narrowed the fair’s exhibitor list, to 76, from 83 dealers in 2025, and reduced booth fees to encourage a focus on single artists making bold propositions.
“Rei’s work has been pivotal to thinking about how my work as a curator, gallerist and art fair can push boundaries, especially during this extraordinary move toward corporatization and monoculture in the art world in the last 20 years,” Dee said.
Kawakubo’s designs have been challenging norms since her brand’s first Paris runway show in 1981, but her work over the last 13 years on what she calls “objects for the body” has blurred borders between high fashion and wearable sculpture.
The Comme des Garçons presentation at Independent will feature 20 looks from autumn-winter 2020 to spring-summer 2025. Forgoing the runway, Kawakubo is installing her non-clothing inside structures made from rebar and colored plastic joinery.
Adrian Joffe, the president of both Comme des Garçons International and the curated retailer Dover Street Market International (and who is also Kawakubo’s husband), said in an interview that Kawakubo’s intention was to create a sculptural installation divorced from chronology and fashion — “a thing made new again.”
Every look at Independent was made in an edition of three or fewer, but only one of each will be for sale on-site. Prices will be about $9,000 to $30,000. Comme des Garçons will retain 100 percent of the sales.
Asked why she was interested in exhibiting at Independent, the famously elusive Kawakubo said via email, “The body of work has never been shown together, and this is the first presentation in New York in almost 10 years.” Joffe added a broader philosophical motivation. “We’ve never done it before; it was new,” he said. Also essential was the fair’s willingness to embrace Kawakubo’s vision for the installation rather than a standard fair booth.
Kawakubo began consistently engaging with fine art decades before such crossovers became commonplace. Since 1989, she has invited a steady stream of contemporary artists to create installations in Comme des Garçons’s Tokyo flagship store. The ’90s brought collaborations with the artist Cindy Sherman and performance pioneer Merce Cunningham, among others.
More cross-disciplinary projects followed, including limited-release direct mailers for Comme des Garçons. Kawakubo designs each from documentation of works provided by an artist or art collective.
The display at Independent reopens the debate about Kawakubo’s proper place on the continuum between artist and designer. But the issue is already settled for celebrated artists who have collaborated with her.
“I totally think of Rei as an artist in the truest sense,” Sherman said by email. “Her work questions what everyone else takes for granted as being flattering to a body, questions what female bodies are expected to look like and who they’re catering to.”
Ai Weiwei, the subject of a 2010 Comme des Garçons direct mailer, agreed that Kawakubo “is, in essence, an artist.” Unlike designers who “pursue a sense of form,” he added, “her design and creation are oriented toward attitude” — specifically, an attitude of “rebellion.”
Also taking this position is “Costume Art,” the spring exhibition at the Costume Institute. Opening May 10, the show pairs individual works from multiple designers — including Comme des Garçons — with artworks from the Met’s holdings to advance the argument made by the dress code for this year’s Met gala: “Fashion is art.”
True to form, Kawakubo sometimes opts for a third way.
“Rei has often said she’s not a designer, she’s not an artist,” Joffe said. “She is a storyteller.”
Now to find out whether an art fair sparks the drama, dialogue and attention its authors want.
-
Mississippi4 seconds agoMississippi powered Artemis II
-
Missouri6 minutes agoKansas City, Missouri, police launch homicide investigation, after shooting at 55th and Prospect
-
Montana12 minutes agoEmergency declared as supply chain disruptions hit farms
-
Nebraska18 minutes agoToday in History – April 24: Statue added to top of Nebraska Capitol
-
Nevada24 minutes agoHenderson mental health professionals to be dispatched through 988
-
New Hampshire30 minutes agoNH News Recap: Local police and ICE funds; more YDC scrutiny; good news in Franklin
-
New Jersey36 minutes ago
How are public libraries funded in New Jersey? ⋆ Princeton, NJ local news %
-
New Mexico42 minutes agoHere’s how to get extra SNAP dollars in New Mexico this year