Former FBI Director Wray Referred to DOJ For ‘Misleading’ Congress
WASHINGTON, D.C. — APRIL 18, 2026 — The Oversight Project has officially filed a criminal referral with the Department of Justice against former FBI Director Christopher Wray. The group alleges that Wray provided false testimony under oath and obstructed Congressional oversight regarding two high-profile investigations: the targeting of religious groups and foreign interference in the 2020 election.
The referral, supported by evidence recently released by current FBI leadership and veteran lawmakers, suggests a systemic effort within the previous bureau hierarchy to "bury" politically sensitive information.
I. The Richmond Memo: An "Isolated" Incident?
In July 2023, Wray testified before the House Judiciary Committee that a memo targeting "Radical Traditional Catholics" as potential domestic terrorists was an isolated product of a "single field office" in Richmond. He claimed to be "aghast" and ordered its immediate removal.
However, recent disclosures from Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and FBI Director Kash Patel tell a different story:
The Scope: Rather than one document, investigators found over a dozen similar documents across multiple field offices, including Buffalo, Milwaukee, and Portland.
The Scale: Records show that at least 1,000 FBI personnel had access to information suggesting the Catholic Church needed monitoring for "terrorist" potential.
The Intent: A second version of the Richmond memo was reportedly drafted for bureau-wide distribution just before the backlash, directly contradicting Wray's claim that it was confined to one office.
II. CCP Election Interference and Fake IDs
The second major allegation involves Wray's 2020 testimony, where he stated the FBI had not seen "coordinated national voter fraud" by foreign actors.
New documents released by Director Kash Patel in June suggest the bureau was aware of a significant threat months prior:
Mass-Produced Fraud: As early as August 2020, the FBI received warnings that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was mass-producing fraudulent driver’s licenses intended to aid the Biden campaign.
Political Expediency: Patel alleges that Wray and former leadership "buried" this evidence to protect a specific political narrative, effectively misleading both Congress and the American public.
III. Alleged Legal Violations
The Oversight Project’s referral targets Wray for several potential felony violations:
Perjury: For allegedly lying under oath about the origin and spread of the anti-Catholic memos.
Obstruction of Congressional Proceedings: For impeding the House and Senate’s ability to conduct legitimate oversight.
False Statements: For providing inaccurate information regarding foreign election interference.
IV. A Shift in Bureau Leadership
Current FBI Director Kash Patel has been instrumental in declassifying these documents, working closely with Senator Grassley to expose what he calls "political weaponization." Patel noted that the previous leadership "withheld the facts" for political gain and that the current bureau is committed to "giving Americans the truth."
The Department of Justice must now decide whether to appoint a special counsel or task a grand jury with investigating the former director. Given the gravity of the allegations involving religious bias and election integrity, the pressure for a formal probe is mounting.
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
