1,100 videos serve as evidence to apprehend the mastermind who incited the riots.

Posted July 10, 2026

Washington, D.C. - July 10, 2026

Former FBI Director Christopher Wray has not been arrested, charged with treason, or accused of conspiring to overthrow the government, despite widespread online rumors to the contrary.

Wray voluntarily resigned as director in January 2025, prior to the start of President Donald Trump’s second term. He was succeeded by Kash Patel, who assumed the role in February 2025. Official records show no criminal proceedings or arrest warrants have been issued against Wray since his departure from the bureau.

The rumors appear to stem from long-running political disputes surrounding the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. In late 2025, President Trump and several conservative media outlets renewed claims that the FBI had embedded undercover agents among the crowd to incite violence. Trump publicly suggested that the Department of Justice might investigate Wray over the matter.

During his tenure, Wray repeatedly testified before Congress and rejected these allegations. He described claims that the FBI orchestrated or provoked the January 6 events as baseless. The bureau maintained that its personnel present that day were performing standard crowd-control and evidence-gathering duties after the violence had already begun.

Much of the confusion in recent online videos and posts appears to arise from a misunderstanding of legal terminology. Between 2023 and 2024, the Republican-led House Oversight Committee issued subpoenas to Wray requesting documents related to the investigation of President Joe Biden’s family. These were formal requests for information and testimony, not arrest warrants. The disputes were ultimately resolved through negotiations between the executive branch and Congress, without any physical detention or criminal charges against Wray.

“There is no basis in fact for claims that Director Wray was arrested or charged with any crime,” a Justice Department official familiar with the matter said.

Current FBI leadership under Director Patel has not indicated any active criminal investigation into Wray’s conduct during his time as director. The bureau continues to focus on its operational priorities, while public discussion of past controversies remains largely confined to political commentary and social media.

The circulation of unverified claims about high-profile former officials highlights ongoing challenges in distinguishing between legitimate political debate and misinformation. As of now, no credible evidence has emerged to support allegations of criminal conduct by Wray, and official records confirm he left office through standard resignation procedures rather than under any legal compulsion.

Iranian ‘Sleeper Cells’ Could Be Activated Inside US: Terrorism Experts

American counterterrorism agencies are quietly keeping an eye on suspected sleeper cells within the U.S. following joint military strikes by the U.S. and Israel on Iran, according to reports this week that cited counterterrorism experts. The increased surveillance comes amid rising concerns about potential retaliation from operatives or sympathizers linked to Iran.

In response, federal and local law enforcement have ramped up security across major U.S. cities as a precautionary measure, even though no specific or credible threats have been publicly identified.

This heightened alert follows a significant operation over the weekend, named Operation Epic Fury, which resulted in the deaths of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several high-ranking Iranian officials in a coordinated military effort between the U.S. and Israel. Security experts caution that the repercussions of these events could reach far beyond the Middle East.

Trump Gets Historic Support From Voting Base: Report
Read More
“If ever there’s going to be a Hezbollah cell or a Hamas cell act in the United States in a violent way, it’s now,” Chris Swecker, a former assistant FBI director, told Fox News.

“Both organizations are Iranian-backed all the way. Both organizations have had a presence in the United States since the 1980s,” he added.

Swecker went on to say that U.S. state and federal authorities have, for some time now, been aware of domestic networks and sympathizers.

“We know that they have cells here. We also know that there are lone sympathizers, many of whom have come out in these protest groups,” he added, going on to cite former President Joe Biden’s insane open borders policy that likely made the situation worse.

“We just come off four years of open borders, and I have said before that that was an open door for terrorists to terrorist cells and terror sympathizers to infiltrate. Many were already here, but it’s impossible that they would not infiltrate into these particular groups and sort of act as catalysts, as enablers,” he told the outlet.

In light of the strikes against Iran, the FBI is taking steps to strengthen its domestic security measures. Director Kash Patel announced on Saturday that counterterrorism and intelligence teams are currently on high alert due to ongoing U.S. activities related to Iran.

“Last night, I instructed our Counterterrorism and intelligence teams to be on high alert and mobilize all assisting security assets needed,” Patel wrote on X.

Patel noted further that while the U.S. military is handling force protection overseas, the FBI “remains at the forefront of deterring attacks here at home” and will continue working around the clock to protect Americans.

Jason Pack, a retired supervisory special agent with the FBI and a Fox News contributor, stated that increased monitoring is standard practice when U.S. military operations engage with adversaries known to respond with indirect or unconventional strategies.

“The intelligence and counterterrorism communities work on this kind of scenario continuously, long before any conflict begins,” Pack said. “When the United States commits to a joint military campaign with Israel, the domestic threat environment doesn’t simply remain static. It could shift, potentially significantly.”

He pointed out that adversarial groups — such as Hezbollah, Hamas’s external networks, and proxies of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps — have a history of both intent and, in some instances, the means to retaliate against U.S. military actions.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) on Monday warned that the possibility of Iranian “sleeper cells” is being “seriously” evaluated in the Lone Star state, The Hill reported.

Federal authorities are investigating a shooting that occurred on Sunday in Austin, Texas, as a potential terrorist attack. The shooter killed two people and injured 14 others.

He was wearing a shirt that had the phrase “Property of Allah” printed on it, along with a design featuring the Iranian flag.

“Early that morning, on Saturday morning, we made clear to the public that the state of Texas is taking seriously the possibility of terrorist activity, lone wolf, lone wolf activity,” Abbott told Fox on Monday.

Report this article

Select a reason for reporting:

Inaccurate information Copyright violation Spam / advertisement Offensive content Other '; footer.hidden = true; overlay.hidden = false; document.body.style.overflow = 'hidden'; } function hideSection() { if (section) section.hidden = true; } function openModal() { if (alreadyReported) { showSuccess(); return; } overlay.hidden = false; document.body.style.overflow = 'hidden'; } function closeModal() { overlay.hidden = true; document.body.style.overflow = ''; footer.hidden = false; overlay.querySelectorAll('input[name="report_reason"]').forEach(function(r) { r.checked = false; }); document.getElementById('reportMessage').value = ''; errorBox.hidden = true; submitBtn.disabled = false; submitBtn.textContent = 'Submit report'; imageItems = []; imgGrid.innerHTML = ''; updateAttachBtn(); } btn.addEventListener('click', openModal); closeBtn.addEventListener('click', closeModal); cancelBtn.addEventListener('click', closeModal); overlay.addEventListener('click', function(e) { if (e.target === overlay) closeModal(); }); document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) { if (!overlay.hidden && e.key === 'Escape') closeModal(); }); // --- Error helper --- function showError(msg) { errorBox.textContent = msg; errorBox.hidden = false; } // --- Submit --- submitBtn.addEventListener('click', function() { var selected = overlay.querySelector('input[name="report_reason"]:checked'); if (!selected) { showError('Please select a reason.'); return; } errorBox.hidden = true; submitBtn.disabled = true; var itemsToUpload = imageItems.filter(function(it) { return !it.uploadedUrl; }); if (itemsToUpload.length === 0) { doSubmit(selected.value); return; } submitBtn.textContent = 'Uploading…'; var done = 0, failed = 0; itemsToUpload.forEach(function(entry) { entry.statusEl.textContent = '…'; entry.statusEl.className = 'report-img-item__status'; entry.statusEl.hidden = false; resizeImage(entry.file, MAX_LONG_PX, function(resized) { uploadFile(resized, currentSlug, function(err, url) { done++; if (err) { failed++; entry.statusEl.textContent = 'Failed'; entry.statusEl.className = 'report-img-item__status err'; } else { entry.uploadedUrl = url; entry.statusEl.textContent = '✓'; entry.statusEl.className = 'report-img-item__status done'; } if (done === itemsToUpload.length) { if (failed > 0) { showError('Could not upload ' + failed + ' image(s). Remove the failed ones (red) or submit without them.' ); submitBtn.disabled = false; submitBtn.textContent = 'Submit report'; } else { doSubmit(selected.value); } } }); }); }); }); function doSubmit(reason) { submitBtn.textContent = 'Sending…'; var uploadedUrls = imageItems .map(function(it) { return it.uploadedUrl; }) .filter(Boolean); var payload = { reason: reason, message: document.getElementById('reportMessage').value.trim(), post_slug: currentSlug, post_url: window.location.href }; if (uploadedUrls.length) payload.image_urls = uploadedUrls; fetch('/api/post-report', { method: 'POST', headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json', 'X-Requested-With': 'XMLHttpRequest' }, body: JSON.stringify(payload) }) .then(function(r) { return r.json(); }) .then(function(data) { if (data && data.ok) { markReported(currentSlug); alreadyReported = true; bodyEl.innerHTML = '✓ Thank you for your report.'; footer.hidden = true; setTimeout(function() { closeModal(); footer.hidden = false; hideSection(); }, 2000); } else { showError((data && data.message) ? data.message : 'Something went wrong. Please try again.'); submitBtn.disabled = false; submitBtn.textContent = 'Submit report'; } }) .catch(function() { showError('Connection failed. Please try again.'); submitBtn.disabled = false; submitBtn.textContent = 'Submit report'; }); } })();

Comments 0

Posting as Guest

CBS Host LOSES IT After Sen. Kennedy FACT CHECKS Her Trump LIES… THIS GOT BAD!...

CBS Host PRESSES John Kennedy on Trump’s Spending — His Answer Takes an Unexpected Turn

The interview began with some of the biggest questions facing Washington: the conflict with Iran, rising fuel costs, and the approaching midterm elections. But when Republican Senator John Kennedy appeared on Face the Nation with CBS host Margaret Brennan, the conversation quickly moved toward an issue that could shape the political debate for months to come: how the government spends taxpayers’ money.

Kennedy did not pretend that the economic pressure facing American families was insignificant. He argued that voters were far more concerned about the cost of living than the daily battles playing out on television. With oil prices affected by disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz, he said, the consequences of foreign policy were reaching directly into household budgets.

Kennedy Brings the Conversation Back to Affordability

Kennedy’s message to the White House was unusually direct. He predicted that the midterm elections would be close and argued that Republicans needed to keep their attention on the financial concerns of ordinary Americans.

“When moms and dads lie down to sleep at night and can't,” Kennedy told Brennan, they are worried about the cost of living.

He also called for a nationwide address explaining why the United States entered the conflict with Iran, what the administration hoped to achieve, and how it intended to bring the situation to a conclusion.

His position was not a blanket rejection of the administration’s strategy. Kennedy defended continued pressure on Iran while acknowledging the economic consequences of the partially closed strait. He opposed sending American troops into the situation, warning that deploying them could create a new set of problems.

That combination—support for pressure abroad alongside concern about prices at home—set the tone for the rest of the interview.

image

Nearly $1 Billion in Cuts Sparks a Constitutional Dispute

The conversation became more pointed when Brennan asked about the White House’s decision to cancel nearly $1 billion in previously approved federal funding without congressional consent.

Brennan raised concerns expressed by Senator Susan Collins, the Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, who argued that the move threatened Congress’s constitutional authority over federal spending.

Kennedy disagreed.

“I love Susan like a taco, but she's wrong,” he said before explaining his view that Congress often appropriates money in broad categories, leaving agencies with considerable discretion over how funds are ultimately used.

He then deployed the phrase that would become the interview’s most memorable sound bite: “Spending porn.”

Kennedy used the expression to criticize what he considers wasteful government expenditures, pointing to funding for circumcision programs in Zambia and electric buses in Rwanda. He also argued that Congress should take greater responsibility for identifying and eliminating spending it believes is unnecessary.

But the disagreement was about more than whether particular programs were worthwhile. It raised a larger question: when Congress approves funding, how much authority should the executive branch have to cancel or redirect it?

Kennedy defended the cuts, while Brennan’s question highlighted the legal and constitutional objections. The interview did not resolve that dispute, but it brought the competing arguments into sharp focus.

image

Then Kennedy Turned the Standard on Trump

The most revealing moment came when Brennan shifted from the proposed cuts to taxpayer-funded advertising.

She asked Kennedy about a government-funded commercial prominently featuring President Donald Trump and praising his leadership. The question echoed earlier controversy surrounding former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, whose department had spent $220 million on a border-security advertising campaign in which she appeared prominently.

Kennedy had previously criticized Noem’s campaign. Now, with Trump featured in another advertisement paid for by the federal government, Brennan asked whether that spending was appropriate.

Kennedy’s response was notable because he explicitly included his own political allies—and himself—in the principle he was defending.

“I don't think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves,” he said.

He acknowledged that the White House viewed the issue differently but argued that public funds should not be used to promote individual politicians. He also suggested that politicians should not have buildings named after them while they are still alive.

That answer complicated any attempt to portray his position as simply a defense of the administration. Kennedy supported the proposed spending cuts, but he also applied his criticism of taxpayer-funded self-promotion to Trump.

The Real Takeaway From the Interview

The exchange was not a shouting match, nor does the published transcript establish that Brennan lost her composure or that Kennedy fact-checked a series of false statements from her. What it does show is a pointed discussion about economic priorities, congressional spending authority, and whether public money should be used to enhance a politician’s image.

Kennedy’s argument was straightforward: families are worried about affordability, government spending deserves scrutiny, and the rules should apply regardless of party.

Whether viewers agree with his assessment of the proposed cuts is a separate question. The legal dispute over executive spending authority and the debate over taxpayer-funded political advertising deserve examination beyond a few memorable television lines.

The moment worth watching is when Brennan moves from criticizing government spending in general to asking Kennedy about an advertisement featuring Trump himself. That is where the discussion becomes more complicated—and where Kennedy’s stated principle is tested against his own party’s leadership.

Watch the full interview through the link below to hear the exchange in context and decide how convincing each side’s argument really was.