The nation’s FBI has proven to be somewhat of a problem in recent years. There was deliberate election interference in 2016 when one agent told another he would make sure then-GOP nominee Donald Trump did not become president, and there was an “insurance policy” for that.

Originally published at WND News Center. Used with permission.

OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.

Then the next election, FBI agents deliberately interfered in the results again, warning social and legacy media to suppress the accurate reporting about the scandals revealed in Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop, even while knowing those claims were true.

Then, of course, there was the “raid” on President Trump’s home.

So a law-enforcement expert, Stephen Friend, a former state and federal law enforcement officer and now a fellow on domestic intelligence and security services at The Center for Renewing America, is offering a solution.

“Disarm the FBI and force it to partner with local law enforcement agencies for any investigative and enforcement activities,” he’s written at The Federalist.

He explains further:

Republicans hammered FBI Director Christopher Wray during his recent testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. Their inquiries concerned illegal FISA searches, overly aggressive arrest tactics, investigations of parents attending school board meetings, labeling traditional Catholics as anti-government extremists, and potential misuses of undercover agents at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Throughout the hearing, Wray repeatedly denied knowing the information Republicans sought. He proclaimed FBI policy precluded him from discussing ongoing investigations.

Wray’s testimony offered ample evidence of an agency in dire need of reform. In the aftermath, Republicans face questions about funding a new FBI headquarters, countering political investigations of American conservatives, FISA renewal, and how to counter Wray’s unwillingness to submit to the legislative branch’s oversight authority over his agency. Most importantly, Republicans must contend with growing calls from the electorate to defund the FBI. Many Republican representatives lack the political appetite to withstand a “defund the police” label from corporate media.

His alternative isn’t complicated, he said.

“The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) defines a series 1811 ‘criminal investigator’ as one who supervises, leads, or performs work involving planning, conducting, or managing investigations related to alleged or suspected criminal violation of federal laws. OPM similarly defines a lesser-known 1810 general ‘investigator.’ These employees supervise, lead, or perform work involving planning, conducting, or managing investigations. 1810 investigators are unarmed. Their work does not involve criminal violations of federal laws, and they can only make or invoke administrative judgments,” he said.

He said the positions should be merged.

“Through budget appropriations, Republicans can defund all 1811 criminal investigators from the FBI. Eliminating special agents will disarm the agency and remove its ability to arrest alleged criminal violators,” he said.

Then Congress could have OPM create a new category, 1812, for an “unarmed criminal investigator.”

Agents would then be transitioned.

Further, there should be a requirement that agents coordinate with any local law enforcement.

“Republicans can require federally deputized ‘Task Force Officers’ from the approving agencies to partner and participate in all FBI investigations,” he said.

Such plans could set up local sheriffs and police departments as a “stopgap measure” against politicized FBI ranks.

He concluded, “The answer to a weaponized FBI may not exist in defunding the bureau, merely disarming it.”

By Bob Unruh/WND News Center

Disclaimer: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.