CNN anchor Pamela Brown Let no contradiction arise in a Thursday interviewwith U.S. Representative Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).
The initial clash for the Browns centered on Jordan’s refusal to acknowledge that Trump’s attorney general nominee, Todd Blanche, did not present a death certificate related to President Donald Trump’s disputed $1.8 billion hidden fund and the protection it offered to Trump’s family.
Well, it appears quite evident that they are seeking guarantees that the anti-weaponization fund will not proceed, and they have concerns about the agreement reached by the justice department to ensure that the trumps are not subject to IRS audits. Do you support that settlement?
“Well, Todd mentioned it’s dead. I believe he said that several times. So, I’m unsure about what’s happening in these discussions. The person who is expected to be the next attorney general has stated that this matter is concluded,” Jordan said.
He mentioned to a house committee that he would not commit it to writing,
“He claimed it’s over. They won’t proceed with it. I’m not sure what more is needed,” Jordan complained.
You’re a lawyer,” Brown objected. “I mean, don’t you ever advise your clients to ‘get it in writing’? Isn’t that basic legal knowledge?
I’m not a lawyer. Full disclosure: I’m not a lawyer either,” Jordan stated. “I attended law school, received my degree, but didn’t sit for the bar exam. Therefore, I don’t know.
Following that, Brown clarified that the slush fund can indeed be utilized to compensate individuals who “injured police officers on January 6.”
No, no, no, no,” said Jordan, becoming annoyed. “The weaponization fund is designed to assist individuals like [anti-abortionist] Mark Houck, when the [Merrick] Garland FBI broke into his home during a pre-dawn raid after he informed his lawyer that he was willing to surrender.
But they wouldn’t exclude the possibility that it might reach those who assault officers,” Brown reminded him. “The vice president did not rule it out.
However, matters deteriorated even more after Brown challenged Jorden on his double standards concerning the sexual misconduct allegations against Democrat candidate Graham Platner and Republican legislator Mark Miller, whom Jordan refused to urge to step down following the accusations.
“Listen, this is a family issue. I know Max is a decent person. I was out campaigning for him. I hope he gets reelected. He has done well as a congressman, and we should all be praying for his family. These are tough times for them,” said Jordan.
It’s worth mentioning. For instance, the accusations state that Miller burned his ex-wife’s chest and stomach by throwing hot water on her, that he pointed a gun at her head, that he pressed her against a wall and struck her in the head, that he broke their daughter’s collarbone and bruised her shoulder. It’s also reported that their two-year-old daughter told her mother, ‘daddy, kill you.’ I want to play for you what you said when questioned about Platner, who was accused of abuse.
Let’s watch what you told News Max,” Brown said to Jordan before playing a clip of him stating that Democrats “will adopt any extreme stance as long as it helps them win elections and gain power, and honestly, to oppose anyone who stands against President Trump.
“Why isn’t this applicable to Republicans seeking to maintain control?” Brown questioned.
Well, I’m not aware of the context behind the question I was asked regarding Mr. Platner, but my assumption is that it was about all the absurd stances he has adopted.
“The [NewsMax] banners there say ‘Platner Ex-girlfriend Accuses Him,’” Brown noted.
“Sure, I don’t know, I didn’t respond, I’m not sure I answered that question. I think I was focused on who he was as a candidate,” Jordan said.
Related Articles:
・Trump pursuing a ‘sugar high’ as DOJ cases ‘collapse’: former federal prosecutor
jasdooit 
Leave a comment