There's a grand total of one source for an article about the FBI being "in revolt", and he's not even an FBI agent. They can't get a single one to confirm, even off the record?

If it's an "open revolt," why do we have to rely on the hearsay of a former AG?

At best it's a quiet revolt.

From the article:

"The FBI in open revolt against a deceitful director."

James Comey presides over an FBI in revolt over his leadership, a former U.S. attorney tells The American Spectator, and pursues “paranoid, delusional, and vindictive” measures to prevent negative information leaking out to the public.

“I know that inside the FBI there is a revolt,” Joseph diGenova tells The American Spectator. “There is a revolt against the director. The people inside the bureau believe the director is a dirty cop. They believe that he threw the [Hillary Clinton email] case. They do not know what he was promised in return. But the people inside the bureau who were involved in the case and who knew about the case are talking to former FBI people expressing their disgust at the conduct of the director.”

Read the article for details.

Honest Agents are keeping us from a dictatorship. Hats off to these brave men and women.