43 years ago, the NSA went in front of the Church Committee and claimed all of their warrantless phone surveillance against American citizens had been been closed more than a year earlier. This was a naked lie - the program was continuing unaltered even as the testimony was given.
The Church Committee went further than anything we have today - there was a major investigation aiming at criminal prosecution of NSA officials. The eventual conclusion was that their actions were obviously illegal, but that prosecution was impossible; the agency's charter appeared to exempt it from following surveillance laws, and broader charges would be deflected by "buck-passing" and subpoenaing high-level officials to disrupt government operations.
This is where we've been since the 1970s, if not earlier.
I'm not seeing how the FBI has made no effort to correct the record here, this article is citing the FBI. Is there evidence that this is not an official disclosure?
This is not a defense of his actions, just the reality he was presented with.
If the answer was no, he could say no.
Being honest about not being able to answer a question in an open forum isn't perjury. That is someone trying to follow conflicting laws and erring on the side of caution. If his information was bad and he wasn't aware at the time, it isn't perjury. Misremember but try to answer? Not perjury.
/cynical/ if you could get easily prosecuted from telling Congress "incorrect" information, it might be predominantly used against lone whistleblowers who had ended up on the loosing side of a very effective information squashing campaign. That's just one example of how such a law could be abused if it was over-enforced. /end cynical/
Lying in trials is not protected, but very rarely prosecuted. The penalty usually is that you lose credibility with the judge and jury, and piss them off.
> Were you trying to say lying under oath is usually very difficult to prove?
No, I'm saying it is rarely prosecuted at all, based on what I've been told by attorneys.
If congressional perjury laws were repealed, the only effect would be making the level of scrutiny that is necessary now obvious (in addition to protecting people from false accusations.) In a world where disingenuous speech can accomplish everything lying can, laws against lying are winking security theatre.
Edit: if you're making a more general point, point cheerfully granted. :)
Check out the contrasting body language in the photo. Wray looking smug, practically sauntering (reminds me of this: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/strutting-leo), not a care in the world. On the left is someone from the Capitol Police, much lower-ranked, who actually worries about and protects things for a living and probably doesn't get as much sleep as he should.
The first guy could stand to be a little more like the second, since at least in theory he's the "top law enforcement officer in the land" and a supposed protector of law and order. In reality he's presumably an expert at playing politics, doing favors, and stretching the truth to get an advantage, such as... hey, this article. Not to mention that spying on people, I suspect, has a lot less to do with guy-on-the-left/protecting-people concerns than it does with guy-on-the-right/political-jockeying concerns.
I wouldn't read too much into the body language. Newspapers choose whatever relatively recent pictures they have, coupled with some relevant features (leading to those great pouty-face photos whenever there's bad news for the person involved).
And yeah I'm not necessarily trying too hard to link the photo to this news in space and time; just taking it on its own, and extrapolating. I rarely pay this much attention to the art.
And I don't think the FBI has ever stated that they dropped or lost a case due to crypto.
Executives of US federal government entity lie to executives of another US federal government entity!
Videotape at ten! Tune in!
From Stratfor's leaked Glossary of Useful, Baffling and Strange Intelligence Terms 
Wow. I always had a feeling they were useless, and this makes it really clear.