Jim Jordan Spirals When Asked About Losing His Star Biden Witness
Jim Jordan Spirals When Asked About Losing His Star Biden Witness
House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan is desperately trying to spin the damning news on ex–FBI informant Alexander Smirnov.
House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan is desperately trying to spin the damning news on ex–FBI informant Alexander Smirnov.
Representative Jim Jordan seems to be struggling with the realization that Republicans’ impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden appears to be founded on a bed of lies peddled by the Russian government.
On Wednesday, the Ohio Republican got caught up in his own words, insisting that the inquiry still had merit, despite the Justice Department indictment against its primary witness, Alexander Smirnov.
“You said the 1023 is the most corroborating piece of information you have,” CNN’s Manu Raju prompted the Freedom Caucus politician on Wednesday, referring to the FBI’s FD-1023 form that documents Smirnov’s claims, which he is now accused of completely making up. In December, Jordan claimed the 1023 form constituted the “key” impeachable offense.
“It corroborates but it doesn’t change the fundamental facts,” Jordan responded, trying to flip the script and maintain that Biden was still involved in his son’s business dealings during his vice presidency.
You're viewing a single thread.
Representative Jim Jordan seems to be struggling with the realization that Republicans’ impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden appears to be founded on a bed of lies peddled by the Russian government.
Implying he didn't already know...
He's struggling with other people realizing
I give it fifty-fifty odds he's just that incompetent.
I'm not sure which is worse, to be honest.
He just ignores facts that don’t agree with the conclusions he’s already made. His time ignoring the criminal sexual abuse in his previous career has paid dividends.
yup. there's two alternatives: he knew it was bullshit, and his ignorance was willful, or he didn't know and he's fucking incompetent.
it comes down to: did he do due diligence on the whistleblower to check his sources credibility? it fits his narrative, so it's running, but competent assholes do damage control preemptively.
Either he knew, incompetently didn't know, or didn't care. (Or some combination of these.) I'm not sure which is worst for him.
These are the same lying liars that go on about how cons are being "censored" and "cancelled" on social media, and that they have to repeal Section 230 because of their feels, in spite of all evidence to the contrary about how FB, Twitter, Youtube, actually help to promote right wing extremism instead of bothering to police hate speech meaningfully.