During a Thursday hearing of a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) adeptly exposed some of the glaring gaps in the investigative work being led in large part by Jim Jordan, the infamous Ohio Republican who chairs Judiciary in this Congress.
The point of the hearing where Swalwell was speaking was to examine compliance — or the lack thereof — by federal departments with pushes from Jordan’s corner for information. Swalwell argued that the real point of Republicans’ underlying efforts was just to essentially run interference for Trump.
“It’s about the client that the law firm of Insurrection, LLP, chaired by Jim Jordan, represents,” Swalwell commented, discussing the proceedings. “That’s Donald Trump. It’s a firm with just one client. And so we’re here today because Donald Trump has been indicted on 37 counts for stealing and sharing classified information, and so this is an effort to defend him in the court of public opinion — to taint the jury in the case against him.”
“And so I’m embarrassed for Chairman Jordan,” Swalwell continued. “Because we were promised that the crime of the century was coming from John Durham, and then we learned that John Durham took two cases to trial, and he lost both of them.” Swalwell also alleged that the infamous House panel investigating the so-called weaponization of the federal government is an effort at “obstruction of justice” on Trump’s behalf. Jordan leads that committee, which is a subcommittee that’s part of the House Judiciary panel.
Going on, Swalwell also discussed how even Bill Barr — who served as Attorney General during the Trump era — has since come around to acknowledging the basic legitimacy of the Justice Department’s criminal probe of Trump related to the sensitive government docs that he harbored after leaving D.C. And yet, Republicans keep pushing, ignoring even the facts of how Trump seemed to admit on tape that he’d not taken sweeping declassification action when still president, meaning the materials he had with him after office would have been still protected. Check out Swalwell’s commentary below:
