Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) says the FBI has failed to produce an unclassified document alleging that President Joe Biden engaged in a criminal bribery scheme and that Republicans in turn will move to initiate contempt of Congress proceedings.
Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and the White House have disputed the credibility of the document.
After a June 5 meeting with Wray to view the document, Comer claimed that Wray confirmed that this isn’t the case. Wray allegedly acknowledged that the document is credible, comes from a long-trusted FBI source, and is currently the subject of an active FBI investigation.
“Today, FBI officials confirmed that the unclassified FBI-generated record has not been disproven and is currently being used in an ongoing investigation,” Comer said. "The confidential human source who provided information about then-Vice President Biden being involved in a criminal bribery scheme is a trusted, highly credible informant who has been used by the FBI for over 10 years, and has been paid over six figures.
“These are facts, and no amount of spin and, frankly, lies from the White House or congressional Democrats can change this information.”
Comer said the FBI “refused to hand over the unclassified record” to the Oversight panel and that Republicans will follow through on initiating contempt of Congress proceedings against Wray.
“At the briefing, the FBI again refused to hand over the unclassified record to the custody of the House Oversight Committee. And we will now initiate contempt of Congress hearings this Thursday,” Comer said.
Comer told The Epoch Times that not only the panel should be given access to the document: “I think everybody should see it.”
“It’s unclassified,” he added. “So, I mean, it’s not real complicated. We want the document.”
Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) made the same point while talking to reporters on Monday evening, saying that every member of the committee should at least be able to view the document.
“Everybody on that committee has the responsibility of oversight,” he said. “[Wray] needs to supply it to everybody on the committee. If not we will move forward [with contempt proceedings].”
After he viewed the document with Comer on June 5, Raskin reiterated his position, suggesting that he saw nothing in the document that would require pursuit of criminal action.
But when he was asked whether he knew if there was an active FBI investigation into the contents of the document, as Comer claims, Raskin evaded the question, instead replying, “What I know is that the FBI Department of Justice team under [ Attorney General] William Barr … terminated the investigation, they said there were no grounds for further investigative steps.”
The development in the growing feud between Congress and the FBI comes amid a flurry of Republican investigations into the Biden family and the president’s administration.
Previous reports based on findings from Hunter Biden’s laptop and testimony from former business associates suggest that Joe Biden took part in Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine and received a cut of the profits from the deals—including while he was vice president.
If Comer is right about the authenticity and credibility of the document, it could prompt Republicans to undertake further legal action against the embattled president, who has announced that he will seek a second term in office.
Should Oversight Committee Republicans advance a contempt charge through the panel, it will then be taken up by a vote of the full House. If the House votes to recommend charges, it will be up to Attorney General Merrick Garland to determine whether a crime took place.
In a response to an inquiry from The Epoch Times, the FBI called the move to advance contempt proceedings against Wray “unwarranted.”
“The FBI has continually demonstrated its commitment to accommodate the committee’s request, including by producing the document in a reading room at the U.S. Capitol,” a spokesperson said.
“This commonsense safeguard is often employed in response to congressional requests and in court proceedings to protect important concerns, such as the physical safety of sources and the integrity of investigations. The escalation to a contempt vote under these circumstances is unwarranted.”
