EXPOSED: FBI Chief Wray Misled Congress on Mass Catholic Surveillance Program

Paul Riverbank, 6/4/2025 In a troubling development, newly released documents reveal the FBI's surveillance of traditional Catholic groups was significantly more extensive than previously disclosed, contradicting former Director Wray's congressional testimony. The operation involved multiple field offices and broader internal distribution, raising serious concerns about religious liberty and oversight.

Let me walk you through what we've learned. Senator Chuck Grassley's office has unveiled documents showing at least 13 additional FBI records, plus five attachments, specifically targeting certain Catholic communities. This stands in stark contrast to former FBI Director Christopher Wray's July testimony, where he characterized this as merely "a single product by a single field office."

I've seen my share of congressional testimonies, but this discrepancy is noteworthy. The original memo wasn't just gathering dust in Richmond - it reached over 1,000 FBI personnel nationwide. Field offices in Louisville, Portland, and Milwaukee had their hands in drafting this controversial document. That's hardly the isolated incident Wray described to Congress.

What really catches my attention is the FBI's reliance on Southern Poverty Law Center classifications. Having covered the SPLC's evolving role in federal investigations, I've noticed increasing criticism of their methodology from across the political spectrum.

Here's what troubles me most: A second memo, drafted but never released, doubled down on linking traditional Catholicism to extremism. The FBI pulled it back after public outcry, but its very existence suggests a pattern rather than an aberration.

The bureau's response to these revelations? Silence, beyond acknowledging receipt of Grassley's letter. In my experience covering federal agencies, such reticence often precedes more significant disclosures.

Speaking as someone who's watched the delicate balance between national security and civil liberties for years, these revelations deserve serious scrutiny. When federal surveillance targets religious groups, it demands rigorous oversight and complete transparency - neither of which seems evident here.

The implications stretch beyond just Catholic communities. This episode raises fundamental questions about religious liberty protections and the scope of government surveillance. As this story continues to unfold, we'll need to watch carefully how Congress balances its oversight role with the FBI's legitimate law enforcement mission.

The FBI's surveillance of traditional Catholic groups has emerged as far more extensive than initially portrayed, raising troubling questions about transparency and religious liberty. As someone who's covered federal agencies for decades, I find the disconnect between official testimony and newly revealed documents particularly concerning.Let me walk you through what we've learned. Senator Chuck Grassley's office has unveiled documents showing at least 13 additional FBI records, plus five attachments, specifically targeting certain Catholic communities. This stands in stark contrast to former FBI Director Christopher Wray's July testimony, where he characterized this as merely "a single product by a single field office."I've seen my share of congressional testimonies, but this discrepancy is noteworthy. The original memo wasn't just gathering dust in Richmond - it reached over 1,000 FBI personnel nationwide. Field offices in Louisville, Portland, and Milwaukee had their hands in drafting this controversial document. That's hardly the isolated incident Wray described to Congress.What really catches my attention is the FBI's reliance on Southern Poverty Law Center classifications. Having covered the SPLC's evolving role in federal investigations, I've noticed increasing criticism of their methodology from across the political spectrum.Here's what troubles me most: A second memo, drafted but never released, doubled down on linking traditional Catholicism to extremism. The FBI pulled it back after public outcry, but its very existence suggests a pattern rather than an aberration.The bureau's response to these revelations? Silence, beyond acknowledging receipt of Grassley's letter. In my experience covering federal agencies, such reticence often precedes more significant disclosures.Speaking as someone who's watched the delicate balance between national security and civil liberties for years, these revelations deserve serious scrutiny. When federal surveillance targets religious groups, it demands rigorous oversight and complete transparency - neither of which seems evident here.The implications stretch beyond just Catholic communities. This episode raises fundamental questions about religious liberty protections and the scope of government surveillance. As this story continues to unfold, we'll need to watch carefully how Congress balances its oversight role with the FBI's legitimate law enforcement mission.