It appears that James Comey could have a familiar cellmate when he is finally sent to prison for lying under oath to Congress and the American people.
Former FBI Director Chris Wray lied and lectured House Republicans for accusing the FBI of planting informants/operatives/agents inside the massive crowd of Trump supporters on January 6, 2021.
In a bold statement that directly contradicts multiple official sources, FBI Director Christopher Wray testified before Congress in July 2023 that he “does not believe” undercover FBI agents were present at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Wray’s statement came during a tense exchange with Representative Andy Biggs (R-AZ), who specifically asked about the number of undercover agents in the Capitol vicinity on the infamous day.
Wray stated that he could not provide such a figure and even expressed doubt about the presence of undercover agents at all.
“I’m not sure there were undercover agents on scene,” Wray responded to Biggs. “As I sit here right now, I do not believe there were undercover agents on.”
Biggs wrote on Twitter that “Wray will be held accountable for this lie.”
“FBI Director Wray just told me he “does not believe” there were any undercover FBI agents in or around the U.S. Capitol on January 6. This claim has been already debunked—including by the former U.S. Capitol Police Chief,” Biggs added.
WATCH:
FBI Director Wray just told me he “does not believe” there were any undercover FBI agents in or around the U.S. Capitol on January 6.
This claim has been already debunked—including by the former U.S. Capitol Police Chief.
Wray will be held accountable for this lie. pic.twitter.com/jJ4RV3PINE
— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) July 12, 2023
The Director’s statement is in stark contrast to facts previously revealed by the Washington D.C. FBI Field Office. According to their confirmed reports, a number of undercover officers, confidential informants, and FBI assets were indeed present at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th.
On Thursday night, the FBI finally acknowledged it had 274 plainclothes agents in the massive crowds on Jan. 6, 2021. This was hundreds more than was previously reported.
The Blaze reported:
A senior congressional source said the number is not necessarily a surprise, since the FBI often embeds countersurveillance personnel at large events.
But given the FBI’s until-now steadfast refusal to disclose the level of its presence at the Capitol, the figure might still be viewed with skepticism in some quarters.
The news comes in the wake of claims by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Inspector General that the FBI had no undercover personnel in the Jan. 6 crowds.
“We found no evidence in the materials we reviewed or the testimony we received showing or suggesting that the FBI had undercover employees in the various protest crowds, or at the Capitol, on January 6,” the DOJ OIG said in an 88-page report released in December 2024.
As the Gateway Pundit as previously reported — Dozens if not hundreds of government operatives infiltrated the protests at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
The Gateway Pundit previously identified 20 different confirmed incidents and operations involving federal, state, and local government operatives who infiltrated the massive Trump crowds on January 6, 2021.
Each one of these incidents has been confirmed by the far-left press or the government in court documents.
**You can read more here: 20 CONFIRMED INCIDENTS AND OPERATIONS: The DOZENS of Feds, FBI Agents and State Operatives Who Infiltrated the Trump Crowds on January 6th at the US Capitol and Led the Protests
We currently have no idea how many federal, state and local government operatives were working undercover on January 6 but it looks like it is close to 100 operatives leading the charge on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Recent court documents reveal the Biden Department of Justice admitting to at least 40 undercover operatives with the Proud Boys on January 6.
In September 2022, TGP learned the FBI was running operatives inside The Oath Keepers on January 6th. The DOJ sprung this on the Oath Keepers members before their trial in Washington DC before a Kangaroo Court. The US government finally admitted in this letter they sent out before the trial that they were running Confidential Human Sources (CHS) inside the Oath Keepers organization on January 6.
In November 2022, the FBI finally admitted they had 8 informants inside the Proud Boys organization on January 6 and likely more.
More at:
Trump rages at bombshell report alleging FBI had 274 plainclothes agents in crowd during Capitol riot
President Trump raged Saturday at the bombshell report alleging the FBI had 274 plainclothes in the crowd on Jan. 6, 2021 — declaring that the bureau’s former director Christopher Wray “has some major explaining to do.”
The FBI had privately acknowledged the existence of those plainclothes agents, despite a Justice Department Inspector General report denying that they were there, according to a Blaze report on Thursday.
“It was just revealed that the FBI had secretly placed, against all Rules, Regulations, Protocols, and Standards, 274 FBI Agents into the Crowd just prior to, and during, the January 6th Hoax,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
“This is different from what Director Christopher Wray stated, over and over again!” he went on. “I want to know who each and every one of these so-called ‘Agents’ are, and what they were up to on that now ‘Historic’ Day.
“Christopher Wray, the then Director of the FBI, has some major explaining to do. That’s two in a row, Comey and Wray.”
It is not fully clear if all of those 274 plainclothes agents were supposedly all in the crowd that ransacked the Capitol that day or if they were in other crowds engaging in protest activity.
The official Justice Department watchdog released a report last year about the Capitol riot, claiming, “we found no evidence in the materials we reviewed or the testimony we received showing or suggesting that the FBI had undercover employees in the various protest crowds, or at the Capitol, on January 6.”
However, that same report noted that the FBI had 26 confidential human sources in the Jan. 6, 2021 crowd. That includes four who entered the Capitol Building despite not being authorized to do so.
Earlier this month, the GOP-led House voted to form a new subcommittee to investigate the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
“With that many paid informants being in the crowd, we want to know how many were in the crowd, how many were in the building, but I also want to know, were they paid to inform or instigate?” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who chairs the subcommittee, told “Just the News” on Sept. 23.
The Post has contacted the FBI for comment.
Wray previously testified to Congress that the bureau did not instigate the riot, but refused to disclose how many informants were there that day.
“If you’re asking if the violence at the Capitol was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources or agents, the answer is no!” outgoing FBI director Christopher Wray told lawmakers in July of last year.
On Thursday, Wray’s predecessor, James Comey, was indicted on accusations of making a false statement to Congress. The charges stem from Comey denying to Congress that he authorized a leak to the media about the existence of an FBI investigation into Trump and a second one into Hillary Clinton.
More at:
James Comey is no pristine model of ethics, and now he’s staring down karma
On Thursday, James Comey became the first former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to be indicted for a federal crime.
That is likely the only fact upon which you will receive anything close to agreement in the country.
For some, the two-count indictment is long-overdue accountability for a man who pushed through the now-debunked Russia collusion investigation.
For others, it is another abuse on President Trump’s revenge tour.
There are legitimate concerns about the targeting of a political critic of the president, who publicly complained just days ago that Attorney General Pam Bondi was not indicting Comey and others.
However, Comey is hardly the pristine model of “ethical leadership” that he described in his book. Putting aside his critical role in the Russia collusion investigation, Comey tossed aside even the pretense of ethics after Trump fired him.
Inspector General Michael Horowitz issued a scathing report that found Comey was a leaker and had violated FBI policy in his handling of FBI memos.
On his way out of the bureau, Horowitz wrote, Comey improperly removed FBI materials, including those containing the “code name and true identity” of a sensitive source.
While he did not find that he disclosed the classified information, Horowitz found that Comey took “the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive investigative information, obtained during the course of FBI employment, in order to achieve a personally desired outcome.”
He further added that Comey “set a dangerous example for the over 35,000 current FBI employees — and the many thousands of more former FBI employees — who similarly have access to or knowledge of non-public information.”
Comey later admitted that he asked a friend, Columbia Law Professor Daniel Richman, to leak information from the documents to the New York Times.
Comey’s close associate, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, stated that Comey instructed him to leak information to the media. Comey denied that repeatedly under oath.
James Baker, FBI general counsel and a close adviser to Comey, also told investigators that he was “under the belief” that he was “ultimately instructed and authorized to [provide information to the Times] by then-FBI Director James Comey.”
That sets up a straightforward question: Who is lying?
It could also set up a bizarre scene of McCabe or Baker testifying against their friend. Both men appear to despise Trump, so either could prove an overtly hostile witness for the prosecutors.
Washington will be glued to any such trial.
The only thing more unnerving than the alleged targeting of a political critic in Washington is the prosecution of a leaker.
This is a city that floats on a rolling sea of leaks.
The Justice Department is notorious for leaks made with lethal effect against targets.
Now the former FBI director will stand trial to see if he is a leaker and a liar.
There is one individual who is likely to be watching with particular interest and perhaps satisfaction: former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
Comey is facing two counts of making false statements and obstructing a congressional proceeding.
The first count under 18 U.S.C. 1001 (a)(2) is the exact charge that Comey engineered against Flynn.
Comey gave a book tour where he thrilled audiences about how he secured a criminal charge against Flynn for making false statements.
In one event, an audience cheered as Comey took credit for the controversial charge. He explained that what he did was not exactly proper. It was, he explained, “Something we’ve, I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation, a more organized administration … I thought, ‘It’s early enough, let’s just send a couple of guys over.’”
The actual agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that he intentionally lied about a meeting with Russian diplomats, but Comey and his investigators pushed for charges anyway.
They drained Flynn of resources, threatened to indict his son, and ultimately secured a guilty plea.
Now it will be Comey in the dock, facing a charge of making a false statement.
He will do so as someone who has admitted to improperly removing FBI material and leaking information to the media.
The odds still favor Comey.
He will have a jury taken from a generally liberal, Democratic jury pool.
He is also a sophisticated player.
Perhaps that is why he issued a videotaped message saying effectively “Bring it on” and let’s go to trial.
While an improvement over Comey’s bizarre seashell messages, the videotaped message may be a bit too confident.
Perjury or false statements can be challenging to prove, particularly when vague or nuanced language is used.
This is neither vague nor nuanced.
Comey repeatedly swore that he never asked anyone at the FBI to leak information.
That is either true or it is not.
Comey will continue to be vilified and lionized by different parts of the population.
Yet this is an ignoble moment that he helped bring about.
Notably, this indictment comes 50 years after the only attorney general to be convicted of crimes (including false statements and obstruction).
That was John Mitchell after the Watergate scandal.
Now the man who bragged about nailing Michael Flynn will face the same false statement charge.
The man who celebrated the charging of Donald Trump (including obstruction-related charges) will face his own obstruction charge.
Whether karma or lawfare, Comey will now have his day in court.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
More at:
More Stories
The 28th Amendment: Will Trump v. Barbara Be the Final Word on Birthright Citizenship?
Supreme Court strikes down Trump birthright citizenship order in blow to President
SCOTUS Rules 5-4 to Permit Counting of Mail-In Ballots that Arrive After Election Day