What I'm driving at is that while there's been a lot of focus (rightly) on the political nature of Patel's appointment, there are a lot of other types of crimes that the FBI bears responsibility in investigating and bringing about resolution. White collar crimes, violent crimes, hate crimes, drug crimes, cybersecurity, etc. In offices all over the country.
And there is absolutely *nothing* in Patel's background to suggest he has even a bit of a clue in how to run an agency with those responsibilities. And plenty of evidence in his background (such as his time at the NSC) that suggests he really isn't qualified to be in any sort of counterterrorism role, let alone leading the FBI.
I'm open to hearing a good case as to why he's qualified, but I don't expect it to be forthcoming.