When Christopher Wray took the witness stand on June 10, he sounded an awful lot like James Comey or Bill Clinton. Whether January 6 was is an “insurrection” or not depends on what the definition of “is” is. Any time a public official says “I don’t recall” or “I don’t know” while under oath, you might as well substitute “I don’t want to go to jail for answering that.” The alleged FBI Director used that phrase a lot when he recently testified to Congress.
Wray gets ‘cagey’
Christopher Wray, the person currently in charge of the federal department that started out with J. Edgar Hoover and his extensive collection of blackmail files on all the movers and shakers of his day, testified with great caution and wariness when he took the stand in front of the House judiciary committee.
He also showed quite a bit of self-interest and shrewdness responding to lawmakers. The very definition of “cagey.” He obviously does not want to end up in a cage himself.
When members of the committee grilled him relentlessly about whether “Parler had alerted the FBI” about violent plans for the planned Capitol rally on January 6, Christopher Wray replied, “I don’t want to go to jail for answering that.” The social media platform in question “touted for its emphasis on free speech,” just happened to be “deplatformed” because they supposedly allowed “violent rhetoric to flourish ahead of the chaos at the U.S. Capitol.”
Former Green Beret Jeremy Brown is convinced that the FBI was monitoring his particular Parlor account because they managed to get the number of his cell phone from it. He picked up that tasty breadcrumb of information while he was in the process of recording them offering to pay him to infiltrate the Oathkeepers. The audio seems to prove that the FBI was planning for January 6 as early as December 9.
The House Committee was supposed to be a favorable environment for Wray to testify, packed with liberal progressive Democrats. The whole point of the hearing was to blame the false-flag Barbarian Invasion on Once and Future President Donald Trump and call it an “insurrection.”
Meanwhile the bureau leader refuses to admit that those associated with Antifa® and Black Lives Matter™ were anything but peaceful protesters exercising their free speech rights to loot, riot, pillage, plunder, and generally create as much mayhem as they please. Even torching police stations is protected free speech these days. Everyone knew once burning the flag was okay the slope would get really slippery. We haven’t hit bottom yet either.
Blinking red
Liberal New York lawmaker Carolyn Maloney brought a video clip for the whole committee to watch “that included the alarming number of times Parler contacted the FBI.” The threats, she probed, “I would say, were everywhere. The system was blinking red.”
Wray doesn’t see it that way. When she asked him point blank, “I don’t want to go to jail for answering that,” he answered. Well, she continued, The New York Times has this email that might improve your memory.
Parler, it seems, “had complained in March that they had been unfairly maligned for not doing enough to prevent the violence at the Capitol.” They were ticked about it. “The letter outlined some of the instances of violent plots that the social media company had forwarded to the FBI, including many related to the January 6 pro-Trump rally.” Email, what email?
“I don’t want to go to jail for answering that,” he didn’t say. What Wray did say is “I do not recall hearing about this particular email. I’m not aware of Parler ever trying to contact my office.”
Okay then, what about the National Guard. Maloney is under the distinct impression that “Capitol Police requested urgently for help from the National Guard 12 times during the riot, but that Army leaders had the National Guard ‘stand down’ fives times.”
Not good, she pointed out. “That response took far too long. This is a shocking failure.” Well, Wray considered, “I don’t want to go to jail for answering that.”
