He’s a relatively rare sight on cable news and Capitol Hill.
Without the sensation surrounding the dismissal of his predecessor in 2017, he’d hardly be a household name. He almost never addresses reporters, comments on headlines, or uses social media.
FBI DIRECTOR WRAY EXPECTED TO FACE HOUSE GOP GRILLING IN MID-JULY AMID SCRUTINY
But FBI Director Christopher Wray has managed to raise the ire of Republicans to a boiling point — in large part by staying silent.
A series of embarrassing revelations about the FBI over the past week has laid bare frustrations with Wray that have simmered in the House GOP conference for months.
Handed the majority in January, House Republicans on multiple committees began investigating what they saw as abuses of power by the FBI.
Wray’s agency has declined cooperation at nearly every step.
The latest standoff came on Monday when House Oversight Committee staff returned empty-handed from a meeting with the FBI over an internal document alleging a criminal scheme between then-Vice President Joe Biden and a foreign national.
“At today’s staff briefing with FBI officials, the FBI again did not produce the unclassified record subpoenaed by Chairman [James] Comer,” a committee spokesperson told the Washington Examiner. “The Oversight Committee will announce next steps soon.”
Comer had pressed the FBI for the document repeatedly, including in a letter Friday that called the bureau’s refusal to produce it “unacceptable.”
The document, according to House Republicans, contains details about payments Biden allegedly accepted from a foreign national seeking to influence American policy.
It’s far from the only piece of evidence sought by GOP lawmakers.
House Republicans have pressed for more information about the FBI’s focus on parents protesting at school board meetings, its aggressive pursuit of anti-abortion activists relative to its treatment of pro-abortion rights activists, a memo from one of its field offices related to suggested surveillance of traditional Catholic parishes, and more.
Much of what GOP lawmakers have learned to date, however, has come from the testimony of whistleblowers and not from the bureau’s leadership.
Republicans last week accused top FBI officials of trying to shut off even that limited pipeline of information by retaliating against whistleblowers who had spoken to Congress.
Some whistleblowers, the House Judiciary Committee said in a report, were stripped of their security clearances or suspended from their posts after disclosing concerns about FBI politicization to Congress.
“We know that FBI whistleblowers are being retaliated against by the FBI — not because they’re lying but because they’re telling the truth,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) told the Washington Examiner. “Looks like the bureau has some explaining to do.”
Wray is set to testify in mid-July before the House Judiciary Committee, where he will face hard questions about why the bureau under his leadership has found itself embroiled in so many controversies, all of them involving at least the perception of unfair treatment toward conservatives only.
One of the most recent emerged Friday from a court filing that showed the FBI abused a surveillance tool to investigate those suspected of attending the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. A court found FBI agents had conducted thousands of searches for the private communications of people they suspected of being present at the riot, violating the standard for using the surveillance database and even, in some cases, reviewing information without warrants.
Republicans began their scrutiny of the FBI this year with inquiries into why the bureau had handled an investigation of former President Donald Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents so much more aggressively than a similar investigation into whether Biden committed the same offense.
The FBI has not shed any light on that question.
Last week, special counsel John Durham released a long-awaited report on the origins of the Russian collusion investigation that revealed, among other things, how FBI agents dove headlong into an investigation of Trump’s 2016 campaign over alleged foreign influence while dismissing arguably stronger and better-sourced allegations of the same offense against Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Wray responded by touting reforms the bureau had already undertaken, without confronting the substance of what Durham found.
Wray’s seeming inability to turn the page from the controversial end of former FBI Director James Comey’s tenure has eroded confidence among Republicans in Wray, who at one time enjoyed broad bipartisan support. His popularity as the bureau’s new leader stemmed from his pledge not to let politics seep into FBI business.
The emerging consensus among Republicans is that he’s failed.
Still, GOP lawmakers could struggle to make the case against Wray sharp and concise enough to drum up public support for his removal given the sheer volume and breadth of allegations they’ve leveled against him.
The findings in the Durham report, while containing new details, broadly mirror what previous inquiries found, creating a sense for the casual observer that FBI misconduct in the Russia investigation was already a settled matter. The FBI has hidden behind the ongoing nature of the Trump and Biden classified document cases, investigations into Jan. 6 offenders, and a litany of other issues to avoid explaining what looks to Republicans as biased treatment.
And Wray maintains the backing of a Washington establishment that uses the fact that Trump appointed him as a catchall defense of his credibility.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Wray’s defenders note that FBI leaders cited for misconduct by Durham and previous investigators are no longer working for the bureau, such as former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe or former senior FBI agent Peter Strzok.
But because the partisan controversies have continued long after their departure, and because whistleblowers frequently point to current FBI leadership as the source of the bureau’s problematic culture, Wray is likely to come under increasing pressure to cooperate with congressional inquiries — or resign.
