FBI Director Wray Says No Evidence Antifa, Left-Wing Groups Played a Role in January 6 Capitol Riot (VIDEO): 'There is no evidence of “fake Trump supporters” at the US Capitol'

Disgraced FBI Director Christopher Wray testified before the US Senate on Tuesday in his first testimony since the US Capitol riot on January 6th.

Director Wray also said there is no evidence left-wing groups or Antifa played a role in the Capitol riot under questioning by Democrat Senator Leahy.

To date, Wray has barely acknowledged the existence of Antifa and he struggled to utter the “A” word during his hearing on Tuesday.

Wray’s testimony contradicts statements made by ex-Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund and other eye witnesses who were on the ground at the Capitol on January 6.

Last Tuesday ex-Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund dropped a bombshell on lawmakers in his opening statement during a hearing before the Senate Rules and Homeland Security committees.

Mr. Sund testified that according to intelligence gathered by law enforcement groups, members of the Proud Boys, white supremacist groups, ANTIFA and other extremist groups were expected to participate on January 6 and that they may be inclined to become violent.

Michael Waller, a senior analyst for strategy at the Center for Security Policy specializing in propaganda, political warfare, psychological warfare, and subversion, said he was at the Capitol on January 6 and witnessed:

Well known Antifa-Insurgence leader John Earl Sullivan was arrested in Utah after the US Capitol riots.

Antifa protester John Sullivan was caught on video posing as a Trump supporter during the rioting at the US Capitol on January 6th.

Despite all of the reports indicating that Antifa played a role in the January 6 riot, Wray and the media continue to blame President Trump and his supporters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

(derived from COunter INTELligence PROgram) (1956–1971) was a series of covert and illegal[1][2] projects conducted by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) aimed at surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting American political organizations.

...The FBI has used covert operations against domestic political groups since its inception; however, covert operations under the official COINTELPRO label took place between 1956 and 1971.[12] COINTELPRO tactics are still used to this day and have been alleged to include discrediting targets through psychological warfare; smearing individuals and groups using forged documents and by planting false reports in the media; harassment; wrongful imprisonment; and illegal violence, including assassination.[13][14][15][16] The FBI’s stated motivation was “protecting national security, preventing violence, and maintaining the existing social and political order”.[17]

...Illegal surveillance
The final report of the Church Committee concluded:

Too many people have been spied upon by too many Government agencies and too much information has been illegally collected. The Government has often undertaken the secret surveillance of citizens on the basis of their political beliefs, even when those beliefs posed no threat of violence or illegal acts on behalf of a hostile foreign power. The Government, operating primarily through secret and biased informants, but also using other intrusive techniques such as wiretaps, microphone “bugs”, surreptitious mail opening, and break-ins, has swept in vast amounts of information about the personal lives, views, and associations of American citizens. Investigations of groups deemed potentially dangerous—and even of groups suspected of associating with potentially dangerous organizations—have continued for decades, despite the fact that those groups did not engage in unlawful activity.

Groups and individuals have been assaulted, repressed, harassed and disrupted because of their political views, social beliefs and their lifestyles. Investigations have been based upon vague standards whose breadth made excessive collection inevitable. Unsavory, harmful and vicious tactics have been employed—including anonymous attempts to break up marriages, disrupt meetings, ostracize persons from their professions, and provoke target groups into rivalries that might result in deaths. Intelligence agencies have served the political and personal objectives of presidents and other high officials. While the agencies often committed excesses in response to pressure from high officials in the Executive branch and Congress, they also occasionally initiated improper activities and then concealed them from officials whom they had a duty to inform.

Governmental officials—including those whose principal duty is to enforce the law—have violated or ignored the law over long periods of time and have advocated and defended their right to break the law.

The Constitutional system of checks and balances has not adequately controlled intelligence activities. Until recently the Executive branch has neither delineated the scope of permissible activities nor established procedures for supervising intelligence agencies. Congress has failed to exercise sufficient oversight, seldom questioning the use to which its appropriations were being put. Most domestic intelligence issues have not reached the courts, and in those cases when they have reached the courts, the judiciary has been reluctant to grapple with them.[92][93]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.