The surveillance state machinery has been a long time building, under the aegis of both parties. I think the Republicans push this with more vigor than the Democrats, but Democratic administrations such as the current one keep the machinery running.
It is entirely the responsibility of intellectuals and opinion leaders -- including ordinary smart people like HN readers -- that Americans haven't been educated to care and vote on the issue. We appear ready to continue voting for it to get worse.
That decision was a decision entirely up to the executive branch, which is entirely up to the electorate. Making (not well supported) assertions about "republican adminstrations pushing a surveillance state" does not change those facts.
The Democrats clearly won't do it, and we can rest assured the Republicans will busy themselves with abortion and warmongering with Iran.
Third parties do change things, even if it's just the major parties co-opting their positions after getting a scare in the election. "Hey, Party X took ten percent of the vote simply by opposing mass surveillance. Maybe we should get some of that action."
My CEO doesn't watch what I do on a daily or ever basis. I have my assignments and my evaluation criteria, and that criteria does not change when the CEO changes.
Personnel at the working level don't change much with new administrations, and the personnel rules and evaluation criteria likely don't change at all. Agents have to investigate and arrest, prosecutors have to prosecute and win.
I'm sure the President and AG had no hand in deciding whether to start and continue this investigation.