To the degree the hearing was useful it confirmed that Wray is an enemy of the First Amendment and the Constitution and is willing to abuse his civil rights of countless American citizens to advance whatever agenda that he’s being asked to advance through the FBI.

Big news this week centered around the testimony of FBI Director Wray. Rattled by the corruption allegations, Republicans attempted to challenge him, but his legal background proved difficult to shake. However, it is disappointing that Wray is rarely questioned by representatives of the American people, given the significant role his agency plays in federal law enforcement. Therefore, having a hearing allows for some level of accountability.

During the testimony, Wray was questioned about censorship, which he defended. He framed the FBI’s actions as simply urging Twitter, Facebook, and Google to enforce their own rules and take down certain tweets or posts. However, this is a form of censorship, as a federal court has determined.

Wray’s support of government intervention in the content removal decisions made by big tech companies is deeply concerning. He argued from the leftist narrative that the government has the right to dictate what material should be taken down from social media platforms. This defense further confirmed that Wray is an adversary to the First Amendment and the Constitution. He is willing to disregard the civil rights of countless American citizens to promote whatever agenda is requested of him through the FBI.

Wray’s defense of suppressing speech extends beyond specific issues like COVID-related content or election misinformation. It is crucial to recognize that when terms like disinformation or misinformation are used, they often act as distractions. At their core, they are about suppressing speech that the leftist ideology disagrees with. This suppression is being carried out by the FBI, though a federal court has recently imposed an injunction against it. However, it remains to be seen how long this injunction will remain in effect.

It is perplexing that Congress has not directly put an end to this censorship. While there may be amendments in the Appropriations process that could restrict government agencies from engaging in such practices, it is uncertain whether they will be vigorously pursued. The key question is whether lawmakers are willing to halt government spending in general unless this censorship comes to an end. Unfortunately, it seems unlikely that the House of Representatives has the determination to take such action.

The protection of the First Amendment is essential, and it should be safeguarded by those in Congress responsible for allocating funds. Regardless of one’s personal perspective on the matter, it is crucial to communicate your views to your representative in Congress. Additionally, Judicial Watch is actively pursuing Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits concerning these issues involving the FBI, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security. This censorship state aimed at stifling your First Amendment rights needs to be addressed and challenged.