FBI chief Chris Wray still won’t vouch for Hunter Biden laptop reports

WASHINGTON — FBI Director Christopher Wray repeatedly refused to say Thursday whether he considered media reporting on first son Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop to be “disinformation” — despite repeated confirmation of its legitimacy.

“I want to be careful about — there is an ongoing investigation that is relevant to that,” Wray said under questioning from Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) during a House Intelligence Committee hearing.

“So I have to be careful what I can share on that here.”

“Do you believe the Hunter Biden laptop story is disinformation?” Stefanik repeated her earlier question.

“I don’t think there’s anything I can share on that in open setting,” Wray repeated his earlier answer.

Stefanik, the No. 4 House Republican, then turned to revelations from the Twitter Files reports that the FBI warned top executives at the social media platform that The Post’s initial story of Oct. 14, 2020, could be the result of a Russian “hack and leak” operation — even while knowing the concern was unfounded.

“Were you aware that the FBI personnel were in contact with Twitter regarding the Hunter Biden laptop story?” Stefanik asked.


FBI Director Christopher Wray refused to say whether he considered media reporting on Hunter Biden's laptop to be "disinformation" at a House Intelligence Committee hearing.
FBI Director Christopher Wray refused to say whether he considered media reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop to be “disinformation” at a House Intelligence Committee hearing.
AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

Wray said he had to be careful what he said about Hunter Biden due to the ongoing investigation.
Wray said he had to be careful what he said about Hunter Biden due to the ongoing investigation.

“I don’t believe FBI personnel were in contact with Twitter about the Hunter Biden laptop stories specifically,” Wray claimed.

“I think there were people in contact with Twitter about Russian disinformation efforts.”

“Of which the Hunter Biden laptop story was included, according to the FBI,” Stefanik fired back.

“Well, I don’t know exactly what you’re looking at,” Wray answered.

“But I am happy to talk about what it is the FBI does and does not do with respect to social media companies.”


Rep. Elise Stefanik asked Wray if he was "aware that the FBI personnel were in contact with Twitter" in regard to the Biden laptop story.
Rep. Elise Stefanik asked Wray if he was “aware that the FBI personnel were in contact with Twitter” about the Biden laptop story.
AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Wray, who has headed the FBI since August 2017, also deflected Stefanik’s next question: “Were you aware that the FBI had Hunter Biden’s laptop since December of 2019?”

“I can’t speak to exactly when we had a laptop available,” the director said, citing the ongoing investigation into Hunter Biden by the Delaware US Attorney.

However, photos of a federal subpoena that were included in The Post’s initial story proved the FBI seized the computer at that time from computer repair shop owner John Paul Mac Isaac, who alerted the bureau of its existence after discovering evidence of the first son’s influence peddling while his father was Barack Obama’s vice president.


Stefanik accused Wray of "stonewalling" her questions.
Stefanik accused Wray of “stonewalling” her questions.
REUTERS/Ken Cedeno

Wray testified that he couldn't confirm when the FBI was in possession of Hunter Biden's laptop.
Wray testified that he couldn’t confirm when the FBI had Hunter Biden’s laptop.
Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

A fed-up Stefanik wrapped up her line of questioning by saying: “This stonewalling, Director Wray, the American people deserve answers, and this is unacceptable.”

After much of the media, prompted by former intelligence officials, initially dismissed The Post’s laptop stories as “Russian disinformation,” the computer’s contents were later confirmed as authentic by the New York Times, Washington Post and CBS News.

In February, Hunter Biden’s attorney Abbe Lowell confirmed the laptop belonged to his client when he demanded an investigation of what he called the “exposure, exploitation, and manipulation” of the first son’s personal information.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *