Rep. Jim Jordan
More than a week after receiving a subpoena from the House Select Committee, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio has responded by telling investigators he will consider complying if they meet a list of his demands, including that the probe share any information it has on him that prompted the subpoena.
In a six-page letter to Committee Chair Bennie Thompson littered with accusations that the probe is unconstitutional, the Ohio Republican said he would “adequately” respond if investigators provided, in advance, “all documents, videos, or other material” they anticipate using during his possible deposition.
He has also demanded that the committee give him all other materials it has where he is specifically referenced and any legal analyses the panel has accumulated pertaining to the constitutionality of subpoenaing a fellow member of Congress.
A spokesperson for the committee did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.
In related news: On Thursday, Politico was first to get its hands on a letter from at least 20 former House Republicans urging GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy and other Republicans subpoenaed by the select committee to comply with the requests.
Addressing the letter to McCarthy and Reps. Andy Biggs, Mo Brooks, Jim Jordan, and Scott Perry, the former Republican lawmakers stressed that they understood the rarity of a “congressional investigative body” issuing a subpoena to sitting lawmakers.
But, they wrote, “we also recognize that the subject of this inquiry is unprecedented in American history.”
“A full and honest accounting of the attack and its causes is critical to preventing future assaults on the rule of law and American institutions — and ensuring that we all can move forward,” the letter states.
The committee first asked Jordan to voluntarily cooperate in December, highlighting questions it had for him about his contact with former President Donald Trump before, during, or after the insurrection at the U.S Capitol.
Historically, Jordan’s public response to these questions has been wildly inconsistent. Last summer Jordan told Fox News he spoke to Trump on January 6. When asked the same question a day later by a reporter from a different outlet, Jordan initially couldn’t recall if or when he spoke to Trump on January 6.
But he ultimately bumbled through the question and said he “thought” he spoke with Trump after the attack.
Then, a month after that interview, Jordan told Politico he spoke to the former president during the attack. And last October, when testifying before the House Rules Committee, Jordan was adamant that he spoke to Trump after the attack but he also said he couldn't remember how many times he spoke to Trump that day, either.
It was only after several minutes of House Rules Committee Chair Jim McGovern (D-MA) pushing Jordan to get specific that he stated he did not talk to Trump during the Capitol assault.
Last February, the committee investigating the insurrection obtained White House call records from the National Archives that showed Trump attempting to reach Jordan on the morning of January 6 from the White House residence.
Another entry following it noted the call lasted for 10 minutes.
When this news broke in February and reporters asked Jordan yet again if he remembered speaking to Trump before the insurrection, he responded: “I don’t recall.”
But he did say that he talked to Trump after delivering remarks on the House floor for roughly five minutes on January 6.
Legislators were debating objections to Biden’s electoral vote in Arizona and Jordan’s remarks began just after 1:30 PM. Jordan then spoke again from the House floor hours after the riot had subsided, this time around 10:27 PM.
"I know I talked to him after we left off the floor," Jordan told CNN in February.
Investigators also want to ask Jordan about any communication he was privy to that took place at the Willard Hotel on the eve of the attack or on Jan. 6 itself.
Trump’s legal team established a “war room” at the Willard, an upscale venue just blocks from the White House. Using a block of suites there, the president’s attorneys, advisers, and campaign strategists would meet regularly to hash out a strategy to overturn the 2020 election results.
Public reporting, witness testimony, and court records have indicated it was Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Bernie Kerik, Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, and others who convened there, though it is critical to note that they were far from the only Trump aides, attorneys, or insiders who frequented the room.
All told, it has been estimated that up to 30 people attended meetings at the Willard where the overturn—and “alternate elector”—strategy was discussed in detail.
Response to the January 6th Committee: pic.twitter.com/zO7nPK72QQ
— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) May 25, 2022
In his response to the committee’s subpoena, Jordan argues at length that neither the subpoena nor the committee are constitutional. His argument has become a de facto position for Republicans who have faced the probe’s scrutiny.
Though Jordan claims the panel’s request is invalid because the committee does not have proper representation of Republican members appointed by GOP leader Kevin McCarthy, Jordan fails to note that when he had a chance to vote in favor of a wholly bipartisan committee—evenly split between Republicans and Democrats with even subpoena powers—he voted against it.
McCarthy appointed Jordan to serve on the initial bipartisan committee proposed by Democratic leaders. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi rejected Jordan—and Rep. Jim Banks—and asked McCarthy to advance two new nominees to the pool of five GOP members he was permitted to appoint.
McCarthy refused to do so, negotiations ended, and the hopes of an evenly split committee were dashed.
As for the select committee itself, it was, in fact, also properly formed.
To stand up a special committee in the House, congressional rules dictate that a resolution is drafted and voted on. When lawmakers in the House drafted the resolution to form the special committee in 2021, this is exactly what happened: They wrote a resolution, imbued the committee with the power to have subpoena authority, and dictated the membership terms.
The House voted on it and a majority of lawmakers voted in favor of it.
A federal judge in California last January has dismissed similar claims about the committee’s unconstitutionality from election subversion strategist John Eastman.
“The public interest here is weighty and urgent. Congress seeks to understand the causes of a grave attack on our nation’s democracy and a near-successful attempt to subvert the will of the voters. Congressional action to ‘safeguard [a presidential] election’ is ‘essential to preserve the departments and institutions of the general government from impairment or destruction, whether threatened by force or by corruption,’” U.S. District Judge David Carter wrote earlier this year.
And just a few weeks ago, on May 2, in a different court—this one in Washington, D.C.—a federal judge handily dismissed a lawsuit by the Republican National Committee (RNC) brought against the January 6 probe to stop it from obtaining information about fundraising efforts the RNC premised on Trump’s bogus claim that he won the election.
Among allegations that the probe was engaging in a fishing expedition for sensitive party information, the RNC also argued that the select committee was invalid and its subpoena powers unenforceable.
“The subpoena’s valid legislative purpose is apparent enough to sustain it against this challenge,” U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly wrote.
Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.
Advertising
Start your day with National Memo Newsletter
Know first.
The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning
Kyrsten Sinema
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), one of two major roadblocks to Democrats passing President Joe Biden’s top agenda items including gun control, just one day after an 18-year old gunman massacred 21 people in Texas (including 19 elementary school children) made clear she does not believe in a federal solution to the gun violence that plagues America.
The United States is the only country in the world with a gun crisis of this magnitude. The leading cause of death for children and teens is now a gun.
Republicans allowed the 1994 federal ban on semi-automatic weapons to expire in 2004. A 2019 study found “Mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the federal ban period.”
Senator Sinema appeared to disagree with that study in remarks to reporters late Wednesday morning.
“I asked her if she was willing to set aside the filibuster,” Punchbowl News co-founder Jake Sherman reports. “She said she didn’t believe ‘that DC solutions are realistic here.'”
The federal assault weapons ban was a “DC solution.”
Sinema also told Sherman that “despite the fact that there is always heated rhetoric here in DC, I do think there’s an opportunity for us to actually have real conversations and try and do something. I think the conversation across America is very different than it is here.”
Polls show that up to 90 percent of Americans want Congress to pass a background check bill, which the House already has but Senate Republicans refuse to allow. Eliminating the 60-vote threshold in the filibuster might allow that legislation to pass, as it almost did under President Barack Obama, with 54 votes.
“People at home all across America are just, they’re scared,” Sinema added, suggesting that is no reason to make changes to the way the Senate works, or to pass gun control legislation. “They want us to do something.”
Sinema committed to no action other than “to start having conversations again with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to determine whether or not there’s something we can actually do to help increase safety and protect kids across the country.”
The House has already passed multiple bills the Senate could take up and pass — or at least get Senators on the record.
Sen. Sinema’s reluctance to do anything substantive stands in clear contrast to her Arizoan Democratic colleague in the House. Rep. Ruben Gallego, long rumored to be a potential primary opponent when Sinema is up for re-election, on Tuesday night blasted Sinema and others, like “baby killer” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), standing in the way of gun control.
Please just stop.. unless you are willing to break the filibuster to actually pass sensible gun control measures you might as well just say “thoughts and prayers” https://t.co/YA5Pp3dqao
— Ruben Gallego (@RubenGallego) May 24, 2022
Just to be clear fuck you @tedcruz you fucking baby killer.
— Ruben Gallego (@RubenGallego) May 24, 2022
Fuck you @NRA
— Ruben Gallego (@RubenGallego) May 24, 2022
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
Barely days after 19 elementary school children and two teachers were shot to death by an 18-year old with two AR-15 style assault rifles, questions are swirling about the actions of local law enforcement, supported by video and photos apparently taken by those who were outside Robb Elementary School during the massacre.
“Frustrated onlookers urged police officers to charge into the Texas elementary school where a gunman’s rampage killed 19 children and two teachers, witnesses said Wednesday, as investigators worked to track the massacre that lasted upwards of 40 minutes and ended when the 18-year-old shooter was killed by a Border Patrol team,” the Associated Press reports.
“Go in there! Go in there!” nearby women shouted at the officers soon after the attack began, said Juan Carranza, 24, who saw the scene from outside his house, across the street from Robb Elementary School in the close-knit town of Uvalde. Carranza said the officers did not go in.
Multiple reports state police waited outside for those 40 minutes, or more, before taking action to neutralize the shooter. During that time, some have noted, it’s possible children who had been shot died of their wounds rather than receiving medical attention.
CNN’s Chief National Security Correspondent Jim Sciutto:
Texas police are saying a lot of things. They’re not saying why it took so long to go into the classroom.
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) May 26, 2022
Veteran journalist Soledad O’Brien:
If these were the reporters’ children they’d be more blunt and less delicate. Why did police wait to rush in? Why did they ignore the pleas from parents—who we see in video begging the police to help their kids? These are not ‘tough questions’. But journalists are often reluctant https://t.co/conf5g3nYX
— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) May 26, 2022
Indeed, additional reports appear to show not only did police not storm the school, for reasons yet unknown, they appear to have prevented desperate parents from doing anything to help save their children, even using force, including a taser, to stop them. And in one case (below,) from the account of one of the children who survived published by CBS affiliate KENS5, police action may have led to the death of one of the students.
VICE News reports: “Texas law enforcement officials are being strangely opaque about what actually happened during the shooting at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas.”
“When asked how much time passed between the gunman arriving at the school and the gunman being killed, Texas’ Director of Public Safety Steve McCraw offered an indefinite response.”
“Forty minutes, an hour,” he said. “But I don’t want to give you a particular timeline.”
VICE adds that “officers ‘were responsible’ for containing the gunman in a classroom, McCraw said. (Spokespersons for the Texas Department of Public Safety had repeatedly told news outlets earlier that the suspect barricaded himself into the classroom and immediately started shooting.)”
NBC News correspondent covering national security and intelligence Ken Dilanian:
The Texas officials have glossed over this, but by their account, the gunman was first spotted outside the school by an armed school resource officer who did not fire at him, but instead confronted him and “followed him in” to the school. That needs to be explained.
— Ken Dilanian (@KenDilanianNBC) May 25, 2022
Matt Novak, a senior writer at the tech site Gizmodo, posted these tweets:
This video make so much more sense now. The cops literally stopped parents from helping their kids. pic.twitter.com/zhQfUjlpjd https://t.co/DqgZUH3uCC
— Matt Novak (@paleofuture) May 26, 2022
This one is tragic:
Not only did cops with long guns have their tasers out, ready to stop parents from saving their own children, it looks like the cops have one parent pinned to the ground.
You can hear one person yell, "what the fuck are you doing to him? Let him up!" pic.twitter.com/zW5V9FJ2r0
— Matt Novak (@paleofuture) May 26, 2022
Sawyer Hackett, a senior advisor to Julián Castro, the former Obama HUD Secretary and former Mayor of San Antonio, Texas, reposted these videos and offers some commentary:
This also took place hours after the shooting, and the officer is sharing lots of false information with news networks.
Was he misinformed by local police? Or intentionally spinning the story? https://t.co/vAQzsaES5q
— Sawyer Hackett (@SawyerHackett) May 26, 2022
This video is insane.
Dozens of cops outside the school as the shooter continues rampage. Parents almost ran inside since police wouldn’t. All of a sudden police are gun shy? https://t.co/CtswI3u9Eu
— Sawyer Hackett (@SawyerHackett) May 26, 2022
Even this editor from the right wing website Daily Caller says “it appears the police did everything wrong once the shooter was in the room.”
Police reportedly waited for up to an hour before breaching and killing the suspect. This goes against everything police are taught in the post-Columbine world.
Before Columbine, protocol was to sit and wait assuming it was a hostage situation. Not anymore. (2/8)
— David Hookstead (@dhookstead) May 26, 2022
Breaching a room with multiple windows and a door, again without getting into tactics, is very doable. Why did police not attempt it?
In close quarters combat done in light (this doesn't apply to night vision and the dark), speed is everything. The fastest guys win. (5/8)
— David Hookstead (@dhookstead) May 26, 2022
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
- Texas shooting: Police face questions over delays in action - Verve ... ›
- 21 killed at Uvalde elementary in Texas' deadliest school shooting ... ›
- Police Face Questions Over Response To Texas School Shooting ... ›
- Uvalde, Texas School Shooting Updates: Police Defend Response ... ›
- Uvalde, Texas, gunman was increasingly troubled and violent ... ›
- 'I'm fed up': Steve Kerr, Jason Kidd give emotional responses to ... ›
- Texas shooting: Police face questions over delays in action | CTV ... ›
