Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan unloaded the House GOP’s first subpoenas a month into the new majority, demanding records about certain Biden administration decisions regarding threats against school officials during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Jordan (R- Ohio) on Friday sent subpoenas to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray and Department of Education Secretary Miguel Cardona — requesting a laundry list of documents by March 1, according to a review of the three subpoenas by POLITICO.

The subpoenas, which Jordan formally signed Thursday, are linked to a long-held GOP claim that federal agencies “targeted” parents.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/03/jim-jordan-subpoena-biden-administration-00081179

 

To me it’s a fishing expedition the republicans claim that the Biden administration weaponized the fbi doj that obviously is pure 100% projection,the trump administration are the ones that did that obviously but hey if they can continue to bs gullible people and avoid doing any constructive governing oh well ……..

“The subpoenas, which Jordan formally signed Thursday, are linked to a long-held GOP claim that federal agencies “targeted” parents.

 

Whistleblowers: FBI targeted parents via terrorism tools despite Garland's testimony that it didn't happen!

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-targeted-parents-via-terrorism-tools-despite-garland-testimony

 

To me its all about how credible fbi whistleblower's are! This is some of the evidence JJ will use to hold garland and his DOJ accountable to the Americans who voted for Gop oversight.

Imop If it was the other parties WB’s the msm would all be shouting how brave and trustworthy they are to come forward!

Edited February 4, 20233 yr by riclag

Why let facts get in the way of a few subpoenas from the the GOP

 

From the OP link:

 

"Garland and the FBI have strenuously rejected the GOP accusation — which fact checkers have also deemed false — saying their focus was on protecting school board members amid sharply escalating threats of violence, with no emphasis on parents or those raising policy concerns about Covid restrictions.

 

the White House immediately hit back at Jordan — saying he was marshaling his powerful gavel in pursuit of right-wing conspiracy theories that had largely been debunked."

No one really expected anything but culture war bee ess with this Congress, did they? 

1 hour ago, mikebike said:

No one really expected anything but culture war bee ess with this Congress, did they? 

I think there's a lot of Republicans skeptical about these nutjobs. The far right whack jobs are firmly in control of the House agenda now. Many a conservative voters are wondering how they get out of this now. The strategy is to give the plebs double speak while protecting the power of the rich.  Dems are wondering how they lose this. That said, the immediate danger is the likely defections of up to 2 dems from the senate.

3 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Why let facts get in the way of a few subpoenas from the the GOP

 

From the OP link:

 

"Garland and the FBI have strenuously rejected the GOP accusation — which fact checkers have also deemed false — saying their focus was on protecting school board members amid sharply escalating threats of violence, with no emphasis on parents or those raising policy concerns about Covid restrictions.

 

the White House immediately hit back at Jordan — saying he was marshaling his powerful gavel in pursuit of right-wing conspiracy theories that had largely been debunked."

Why should anyone respond to the subpoena when the same people issuing them think if given to them it's not valid 

7 minutes ago, Dave0206 said:

Why should anyone respond to the subpoena when the same people issuing them think if given to them it's not valid 

Whilst I agree I think most likely the dems will respect the subpoenas as a matter of principle and showing they don’t have any reason not to 

12 minutes ago, Tug said:

Whilst I agree I think most likely the dems will respect the subpoenas as a matter of principle and showing they don’t have any reason not to 

Are you insinuating some Republicans have bad memories  before or after the storming of capital I'm I'm I'm not sure I speak with the president all the time

from the OP

"“the FBI has never been in the business of investigating speech or policing speech at school board meetings or anywhere else, and we never will be. Our focus is and always will be on protecting people from violence and threats of violence,” the bureau said."

 

Well that is a complete lie. Thanks to the incredible Twitter files and honest media outlets with the integrity to cover what happened we know that is a lie.

 

"FBI leadership and Twitter censors conferred constantly about how to shut down political speech based on its content, confirming the suspicions of, well, anyone who was paying attention. And it proves without a doubt that over the past few years, countless Americans have undergone a real violation of their First Amendment rights."

https://www.newsweek.com/fbi-colluded-twitter-suppress-free-speech-where-outrage-opinion-1768801

 

Go get them Jim Jordan, don't forget the perjury charges too!

3 hours ago, Tug said:

Whilst I agree I think most likely the dems will respect the subpoenas as a matter of principle and showing they don’t have any reason not to 

It's the turn of the Dem side to stall for time, you know, the way the 2016 election interference is still unresolved and 1/6 has yet to be dealt with by US DOJ -- only 22 months left for this Congress, but for actual work days it's less than half of that..  We already know how much respect Li'l Jimmy Jordan has for subpoenas.  We'll see how he responds to Smith's subpoena for himself. 

requesting a laundry list of documents by March 1        Sure Jim, we'll get those right out to ya.

I hope Fetterman's health is improving, I want to see him pick up JJ by his collar, like a cat, and and dump him in a garbage can.

 

For a good time, search on:   jim jordan ohio state

 

 

25 minutes ago, bendejo said:

It's the turn of the Dem side to stall for time, you know, the way the 2016 election interference is still unresolved and 1/6 has yet to be dealt with by US DOJ

Can you be specific about your claim there was interference in the 2016 election? I realize you are probably referring to the long debunked claim that Trump colluded with Putin to effectively cheat in the 2016 election(1), while now we know the DOJ was involved in actively censoring conservatives and shutting down inconvenient news(2) before the election which totally misinformed the public(3). Which interference do you refer to?

 

supporting links for all claims made

 

(1) https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/verdicts-in-its-a-complete-exoneration-for-trump/

(2) "The FBI pressured Twitter to suppress The Post’s blockbuster scoop about Hunter Biden’s laptop by warning it could be part of a Russian “hack and leak” operation — even while knowing the concern was unfounded, according to internal company records made public Monday."

https://nypost.com/2022/12/19/fbi-reached-out-to-twitter-before-post-broke-hunter-biden-laptop-story/

(3)https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276

8 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Can you be specific about your claim there was interference in the 2016 election? I realize you are probably referring to the long debunked claim that Trump colluded with Putin to effectively cheat in the 2016 election(1), while now we know the DOJ was involved in actively censoring conservatives and shutting down inconvenient news(2) before the election which totally misinformed the public(3). Which interference do you refer to?

 

supporting links for all claims made

 

(1) https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/verdicts-in-its-a-complete-exoneration-for-trump/

 

How many times are you going to try and promote the assertion that the Mueller report was a complete vindication for the Trump campaign working with the Russians? A federal judge castigated Barr for making such assertions. There was plenty of evidence that Trump's campaign worked with the Russians. The Mueller report said there were 10 criminal charges that could be brought against Trump were he not the President.

5 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

from the OP

"“the FBI has never been in the business of investigating speech or policing speech at school board meetings or anywhere else, and we never will be. Our focus is and always will be on protecting people from violence and threats of violence,” the bureau said."

 

Well that is a complete lie. Thanks to the incredible Twitter files and honest media outlets with the integrity to cover what happened we know that is a lie.

 

"FBI leadership and Twitter censors conferred constantly about how to shut down political speech based on its content, confirming the suspicions of, well, anyone who was paying attention. And it proves without a doubt that over the past few years, countless Americans have undergone a real violation of their First Amendment rights."

https://www.newsweek.com/fbi-colluded-twitter-suppress-free-speech-where-outrage-opinion-1768801

 

Go get them Jim Jordan, don't forget the perjury charges too!

Do you read the nonsense you are providing links to?  Are you aware that the link it is an opinion piece?  Did you notice that the opinions are not supported by links provided by the author?

 

 

4 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Can you be specific about your claim there was interference in the 2016 election? I realize you are probably referring to the long debunked claim that Trump colluded with Putin to effectively cheat in the 2016 election(1), while now we know the DOJ was involved in actively censoring conservatives and shutting down inconvenient news(2) before the election which totally misinformed the public(3). Which interference do you refer to?

 

supporting links for all claims made

 

(1) https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/verdicts-in-its-a-complete-exoneration-for-trump/

(2) "The FBI pressured Twitter to suppress The Post’s blockbuster scoop about Hunter Biden’s laptop by warning it could be part of a Russian “hack and leak” operation — even while knowing the concern was unfounded, according to internal company records made public Monday."

https://nypost.com/2022/12/19/fbi-reached-out-to-twitter-before-post-broke-hunter-biden-laptop-story/

(3)https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276

The Mueller report did not find proof that Trump himself colluded with Russia.  It did not find proof that no one in the Trump campaign did not collude, and it definitely did not find that there was no obstruction of justice.

 

The FBI knew the Hunter Biden laptop story was not verified, and to this day does not "know" that it was not part of a hack and leak operation.  Most of the contents of the hard drive have not been verified.

 

The first link of your Politico link is:

 

"More than 50 former senior intelligence officials have signed on to a letter outlining their belief that the recent disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Biden’s son “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” "

 

What is dishonest about that?

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

The Mueller report did not find proof that Trump himself colluded with Russia.  It did not find proof that no one in the Trump campaign did not collude, and it definitely did not find that there was no obstruction of justice.

 

The FBI knew the Hunter Biden laptop story was not verified, and to this day does not "know" that it was not part of a hack and leak operation.  Most of the contents of the hard drive have not been verified.

 

The first link of your Politico link is:

 

"More than 50 former senior intelligence officials have signed on to a letter outlining their belief that the recent disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Biden’s son “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” "

 

What is dishonest about that?

You are, of course, absolutely correct. Unfortunately, countering the MAGA crowd's bee ess with facts is like spraying water on a duck; not a productive use of one's time.

11 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Can you be specific about your claim there was interference in the 2016 election? I realize you are probably referring to the long debunked claim that Trump colluded with Putin to effectively cheat in the 2016 election(1), while now we know the DOJ was involved in actively censoring conservatives and shutting down inconvenient news(2) before the election which totally misinformed the public(3). Which interference do you refer to?

 

supporting links for all claims made

 

(1) https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/verdicts-in-its-a-complete-exoneration-for-trump/

(2) "The FBI pressured Twitter to suppress The Post’s blockbuster scoop about Hunter Biden’s laptop by warning it could be part of a Russian “hack and leak” operation — even while knowing the concern was unfounded, according to internal company records made public Monday."

https://nypost.com/2022/12/19/fbi-reached-out-to-twitter-before-post-broke-hunter-biden-laptop-story/

(3)https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276

Can you imagine how fox news and others would respond if Biden was to say " Russia if you're listening find dirt on my opponent I'm sure you will be well rewarded " or praise putin and take the side of Russia " he said he didn't do it and I believe him " not a bad result for Russia having another country say we believe you not our own security services 

13 minutes ago, Dave0206 said:

Can you imagine how fox news and others would respond if Biden was to say " Russia if you're listening find dirt on my opponent I'm sure you will be well rewarded " or praise putin and take the side of Russia " he said he didn't do it and I believe him " not a bad result for Russia having another country say we believe you not our own security services 

Uh, I believe that is what is called a "joke", and to take it seriously is the height of ridiculousness.  Obviously a punch line in the Trump Show- if you watch the footage of it,  you would know. You would also know that he said the PRESS would reward them, not Trump. 

 

Plus, if you do truly believe that Trump was a Russian asset, he would not need to make such a public plea. He would have other, more nefarious and secret, means at his disposal to contact his masters in Moscow. 

Trumpers never ever give up trying to defend the indefensible.  That is why trump loves them and will continue to welcome the $$ that the kool aide crew sends to him.

 

Greatest grifter ever but having so many gullible followers wrapped up in absurd conspiracy theories, Qanon, Fox "news" garbage makes it way too easy.

12 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Uh, I believe that is what is called a "joke", and to take it seriously is the height of ridiculousness.  Obviously a punch line in the Trump Show- if you watch the footage of it,  you would know. You would also know that he said the PRESS would reward them, not Trump. 

 

Plus, if you do truly believe that Trump was a Russian asset, he would not need to make such a public plea. He would have other, more nefarious and secret, means at his disposal to contact his masters in Moscow. 

You are playing with my input even if what he said was a joke it had same effect immediately many attempts to hack by Eastern Europeans was detected .nevertheless Biden would be given same pass its just a joke? .

2nd part where he sided with Russia over advice of his own security services going as far as to say basically putin said he didn't so I believe him over my country's intelligence services 

5 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Uh, I believe that is what is called a "joke", and to take it seriously is the height of ridiculousness.  Obviously a punch line in the Trump Show- if you watch the footage of it,  you would know. You would also know that he said the PRESS would reward them, not Trump. 

 

Plus, if you do truly believe that Trump was a Russian asset, he would not need to make such a public plea. He would have other, more nefarious and secret, means at his disposal to contact his masters in Moscow. 

Whatever the merits of your comment about Trump's appeal to the Russians, would you also say he was joking when he said he believed Putin even though American intelligence agencies said differently? And he held a private meeting with Putin with the only other person from his team being a translator?

 

President Trump went to 'extraordinary lengths' to hide details of Putin meetings, report says

 

President Donald Trump went to "extraordinary lengths" to keep details from his conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin secret – even from officials within his own administration, The Washington Post reported this weekend, citing unnamed sources.

After meeting with Putin at the 2017 Group of 20summit in Hamburg, Germany, Trump took his interpreter's notes and told him not to discuss the meeting with anyone, including other U.S. officials, the Post reported.

The paper said Trump's handling of the Hamburg meeting was "part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States’ main adversaries."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/13/trump-putin-meetings-interpreter-notes/2565471002/

21 hours ago, riclag said:

“The subpoenas, which Jordan formally signed Thursday, are linked to a long-held GOP claim that federal agencies “targeted” parents.

 

Whistleblowers: FBI targeted parents via terrorism tools despite Garland's testimony that it didn't happen!

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-targeted-parents-via-terrorism-tools-despite-garland-testimony

 

To me its all about how credible fbi whistleblower's are! This is some of the evidence JJ will use to hold garland and his DOJ accountable to the Americans who voted for Gop oversight.

Imop If it was the other parties WB’s the msm would all be shouting how brave and trustworthy they are to come forward!

Is fox news really accredited? Hard to believe. 

13 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Is fox news really accredited? Hard to believe. 

They dropped their fair and balanced mantra a few years ago when it couldn't be sustained any longer. Media matters is website based almost entirely on calling out Fox lies.

3 hours ago, gargamon said:

Is fox news really accredited? Hard to believe. 

Very reputable news company except when taken to court and the defence is no reasonable person believes what we say ???? 

5 hours ago, gargamon said:

Is fox news really accredited? Hard to believe. 

Probably not in your eyes judging by your question and answer!
One would be hard pressed to find  reporting of fbi whistleblowers being used to testify ,to support the oversight committees chairman claim. All for the American people to decide . 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-republicans-whistleblowers-fbi-investigations-outraged-parents

Edited February 5, 20233 yr by riclag

36 minutes ago, riclag said:

Probably not in your eyes judging by your question and answer!
One would be hard pressed to find  reporting of fbi whistleblowers being used to testify ,to support the oversight committees chairman claim. All for the American people to decide . 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-republicans-whistleblowers-fbi-investigations-outraged-parents

Maybe because it's been debunked long time ago, and also because no one trusts the GOP led committee for telling the truth

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/04/attorney-general-never-called-concerned-parents-domestic-terrorists/

Edited February 5, 20233 yr by candide

10 hours ago, Dave0206 said:

Can you imagine how fox news and others would respond if Biden was to say " Russia if you're listening find dirt on my opponent I'm sure you will be well rewarded " or praise putin and take the side of Russia " he said he didn't do it and I believe him " not a bad result for Russia having another country say we believe you not our own security services 

If DT was president when this balloon business happened he probably would have gone on television to say "Xi said it is nothing, and I believe him."  I don't buy this for one second:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-says-report-chinese-balloon-during-his-admin-fake-disinformation-1779049

 

Fox is not news, we shouldn't call it that.   "Fakes News" anyone?

 

 

Edited February 5, 20233 yr by bendejo

6 hours ago, riclag said:

Probably not in your eyes judging by your question and answer!
One would be hard pressed to find  reporting of fbi whistleblowers being used to testify ,to support the oversight committees chairman claim. All for the American people to decide . 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-republicans-whistleblowers-fbi-investigations-outraged-parents

Isn't Jim Jordan the guy who tried to cover up a sex scandal? I'll give you a hint: the answer is "yes".

18 hours ago, Dave0206 said:

Very reputable news company except when taken to court and the defence is no reasonable person believes what we say ???? 

Yes and NO REASONALBE person would believe their #1 Liar.  Obviously millions of their viewers have no interest in truth....just being entertained by world class whiners and bs artist who are all in for a buck and know the more outrageous the BS the more eyeballs and $$.  Sad that so many grown adults are unable to separate truth from fiction.

 

Fox is an entertainment company according to them...not sure why they are even allowed to us the word news,

https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-karen-mcdougal-case-tucker-carlson-2020-9

Despicable hypocrite who refused to comply with a bipartisan subpoena is now conducting investigation of the political rivals using subpoenas. The kind of indecency that the GOP loves and in return reward him to be chair of Judiciary Committee. GOP is really sinking lower and lower in decency and morality.