Have The Republicans Been Playing Director Wray Over The FD-1023 Form?

Over the past month, there's been a cat-and-mouse game between congressional Republicans and FBI Director Wray over a purported FBI FD-1023 form that may contain allegations of bribery against Joe Biden when he was vice president. My kabuki alarm had been going off over this from the start. Here was the status as of May 3:

Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member and long-time whistleblower advocate Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) today are demanding the FBI produce an unclassified record alleging a criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Joe Biden and a foreign national. The document, an FBI-generated FD-1023 form, allegedly details an arrangement involving an exchange of money for policy decisions. Comer issued a subpoena today following legally protected disclosures to Grassley’s office.

Director Wray slow-walked a passive-aggressive reply on May 10:

FBI Director Christopher Wray declined during his testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee on Wednesday to confirm whether the document exists.

“I will tell you that we understand completely the importance of congressional oversight, that’s important to me,” Wray said. “I also understand very much, as I think you do, the importance of us protecting sources and methods and ongoing investigations.”

. . . “An FD-1023 form documents information as told to a line FBI agent. Recording the information does not validate the information, establish its credibility, or weigh it against other information known or developed by the FBI,” [acting FBI assistant directotr Christoper] Dunham wrote. “The mere existence of such a document would establish little beyond the fact that a confidential human source provided information and the FBI recorded it."

And over the next several weeks, there was wrangling over whether a specific FD-1023 detailing an alleged bribery scheme involving Joe Biden existed at all, and even if it did, whether it proved anything. And the Republicans continued to imply in their statements that an unnanmed whistleblower had simply told them about the FD-1023 -- and they simply wanted a copy, if the FBI had one. Per the link above,

Comer and Sen. Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, claimed they had spoken to an unnamed whistleblower who claimed the FBI document included evidence that Biden, while vice president, was allegedly involved in an illegal payment that also involved a foreign national. Comer subpoenaed the document, setting a Wednesday deadline for the FBI to provide it. Pressed in media interviews for more details about the whistleblower’s claims, Grassley has admitted he does not know whether they are true or false.

So their position for all of last month was, at least for public consumption, "Please, oh, please, Mr FBI director, if such an FD-1023 exists, please provide us with a copy! Or we shall have to demand it through channels!" Wray's answer has basically been "Bwahahaha!" But the log jam began to break on May 30:

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Tuesday warned he would move contempt charges against FBI Director Christopher Wray

House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) issued a subpoena earlier this month to compel Wray to produce any FD-1023 forms — records of interactions with confidential sources — from June 2020 that contain the word “Biden.”

. . . McCarthy’s pledge to bring contempt charges gives weight to Comer’s threat. He said he personally called Wray to tell him to produce the document.

Notice, though, that the subpoena from the Comer committee was broad -- any FD-1023s at all that contained the word "Biden". This still implied that there was maybe such a thing or maybe not. And indeed, as of May 30, received opinion from Dan Abrams and NewsNation was that this was just a vague fishing expedition:

Former FBI agent Tracy Walder tells NewsNation host Dan Abrams it’s “highly unusual” for someone to demand the release of an FD-1023 and that the House Oversight Committee’s request seems like a “very broad fishing expedition.”

But late this week, everything turned upside down. First, according to the Daily Wire, on Friday:

Top lawmakers on the House Oversight Committee will review an FBI document containing allegations that President Joe Biden received a multi-million-dollar bribe from an “adversarial country” on Monday.

Committee chairman Rep. James Comer (R-KY) and ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) will review the document in a secured facility, known as the SCIF, for reviewing sensitive intelligence. The document will not be handed over to Congress, despite recent reports suggesting otherwise.

But even that changed later in the day, according to Just the News:

Facing a potential contempt of Congress vote, FBI Director Christopher Wray relented and has agreed to bring a subpoenaed document from the Biden family investigation to Capitol Hill for lawmakers to inspect on Monday, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer announced Friday.

. . . As recently as Wednesday, Wray indicated he would not turn over the document in compliance with the subpoena, but would let lawmakers come read it at the FBI. But a deal was struck late Thursday for the FBI to bring the document to the Capitol, officials said.

The threat of a Contempt of Congress vote against Wray would actually be idle, since the Biden Justice Deparment would have to prosecute it, and they simply wouldn't move forward. A civil lawsuit would take years to go through the courts. So what changed Wray's mind? The Federalist has what I think is the only credible take:

Sen. Chuck Grassley has already seen the FBI’s lengthy summary of a confidential human source’s claims that then-Vice President Joe Biden agreed to accept money from a foreign national to affect policy decisions, the Iowa Republican revealed on Thursday. Grassley further pledged to make the FBI report public as soon as the bureau complies with a congressional subpoena to provide an official copy of the FD-1023 form — something Director Christopher Wray has so far refused to do.

. . . That Grassley has already seen the FD-1023 summary of the CHS’s allegations raises the likelihood that the senator had access to additional documentary support for the whistleblower’s claims.

. . . And what about the other documents Grassley has requested that Wray provide? Does the senator already have copies of those?

This, of course, changes everything. It sounds to me as though when the unnamed whistleblower first went to Grassley and Comer, he already had a photocopy of the FD-1023 in hand, and the Republicans were playing Wray all along in subpoenaing the original. When did Wray become aware that the Republicans already had a copy of the FD-1023?

It does sound as though the Republicans, perhaps including Speaker McCarthy in his own call to Wray, eventually explained we can do this the hard way, or you can make it easy on yourself. This can be a disastrous blow to your credibility, or just a routine one.

Grassley has also pledged to make the contents of the FD-1023, which is unclassified, public as soon aa the FBI complies with the subpeoena. What's in it remains to be seen.