top of page

What the Hell are You Hiding?

"'What The Hell Are You Hiding?': Troy Nehls Presses FBI's Wray About January 6 Investigation"

In a recent congressional hearing, Representative Troy Nehls confronted FBI Director Christopher Wray with pointed questions about the January 6th investigation. Nehls' line of inquiry focused on why the FBI's massive undertaking regarding the Capitol riots was conspicuously absent from Wray's formal testimony. The exchange highlights a tense and politically charged atmosphere, underlining the complex web of priorities and challenges facing the FBI.

Nehls, a former sheriff, didn't mince words, accusing the FBI of prioritizing the Capitol riot investigation over severe crimes like child exploitation. He referenced an article from CNN calling the January 6th investigation the largest in FBI history, questioning why such a significant operation wasn't mentioned in Wray's report. This omission raised suspicions for Nehls, who bluntly asked Wray, "What the hell are you hiding?"

Wray's responses, often circumspect and guarded, reflected the tightrope the FBI must walk in politically sensitive investigations. He clarified that no agents were reassigned from child exploitation cases to the January 6th probe, maintaining the FBI's commitment to combating all forms of crime. However, Nehls remained unconvinced, pointing to the testimony of Steve Friend, a former domestic terrorism investigator for the FBI, who claimed that January 6th was prioritized over child pornography cases.

The congressman also scrutinized the FBI's handling of Ray Epps, a figure involved in the Capitol breach. Nehls highlighted discrepancies in Epps' actions and statements, questioning the FBI's decision not to arrest him while others faced charges for similar or lesser actions. This part of the discussion hinted at deeper conspiracy theories and public distrust towards the FBI, suggesting possible political motivations behind the agency's decisions.

Wray, adhering to protocol, refrained from discussing specific cases or the potential arrest of individuals. He emphasized that decisions about arrests and charges are the purview of prosecutors, not the FBI. His response, while procedurally correct, did little to quell Nehls' concerns or those of a segment of the American public suspicious of the FBI's role in political matters.

This hearing underscores the delicate balance the FBI must maintain in its dual role as a law enforcement agency and a politically neutral entity. The intense scrutiny it faces from both sides of the political spectrum reflects the polarized nature of current American politics. The FBI's actions, or lack thereof, in high-profile cases like January 6th, become a lightning rod for broader debates about justice, fairness, and the role of law enforcement in a deeply divided country.

6 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

A Candidate Questionaire?

Campaign Finance Reform: Election law in Florida provides for the establishment of “Political Committees” which can be operated by industry and trade groups, unions and other special interest organiza


bottom of page