All posts tagged "jim jordan"

GOP infighting erupts after Jim Jordan gives up the gavel

A GOP leader is going after his conference after Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) announced his plans to give up the House Judiciary Committee gavel.

According to a Thursday Politico article, House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) tore into his party for allowing waivers for veteran committee chairs to keep the gavel. His comments came after Jordan announced that he doesn't plan to seek waivers to stay on as the chair of the Judiciary Committee after leading it for eight years.

"I've never liked waivers," Emmer told Politico at the GOP midterm convention. He said that getting rid of waivers is "one of the things that helped the Republican majority stay more connected to Main Street."

Emmer, the number three Republican leader, has no power over the waivers. The 35-member GOP Steering Committee and the larger House Republican Conference have to decide whether to keep the rule, Politico noted. However, Emmer is a member of the Steering Committee.

However, he said he can only see "limited circumstances where it might make sense" to allow Republicans to hold onto a seat for more than three terms. Politico noted that several GOP chairs have applied for waivers, including in the Agriculture and Armed Services committees.

"I love our members who have been around for years and have institutional knowledge," Emmer said. "But unlike Democrats, we have turnover on the Republican side."

Emmer pointed out that Trump said at the Rose Garden, "We need to keep Jim right where he is," referring to Jordan. "Which was interesting because it's like — OK, but I think he’s termed out," Emmer said.

"Every two election cycles or so, you have close to 50 percent turnover in the Republican House," Emmer said. "You don't get that in the Senate. You get people who are serving as octogenarians, and they're showing no signs of leaving."

'Buy a sportcoat': Critics ridicule Jim Jordan after he walks away from Judiciary post

After Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) announced he plans to step down from a major leadership role, online critics are reacting with intrigue and mockery.

According to reporting by Politico on Wednesday, Jordan announced he will not seek a waiver to stay on as the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Jordan has held the role for eight years, and he would need a waiver of the GOP's three-term limit on leaders of the Judiciary Committee to keep the gavel.

"I'm just not going to do it," Jordan told Politico. "I'm focused on one thing, one thing only: winning. If the left wins, where they want to take the country is very, very scary."

He also revealed that he doesn't plan to return to lead Republicans on the House Oversight Committee, even though he has at least two terms of eligibility remaining there.

"No, I don't plan to do that," Jordan said about planning to stay on the Oversight Committee. "There's other people who are very interested in Oversight."

Jordan made the comments at the GOP midterm convention in Dallas. Meredith Lee Hill, a senior political reporter for Politico, flagged them as "very interesting comments from Jim Jordan for House GOP leadership."

Meanwhile, journalist Michael McGough told Jordan to "use the spare time to buy a sportcoat" in a post on X, referring to the GOP congressman's go-to look of a long-sleeve button-up with no coat.

"Is there a Polymarket [bet] for whether Jordan runs for leader?" asked political commentator Rachael Bade, suggesting Jordan might have his sights set on the House Speaker role. "If not, better start one!"

However, other reporters were quick to confirm who plans to replace Jordan on the Judiciary Committee. Politico reporter Mia McCarthy, who broke the news on Jordan's departure, wrote in a post on X that Rep. Laurel Lee (R-FL) is "planning to seek the top R position on the Judiciary Committee, her spokesperson tells me."

Fox News reporter Liz Elkind and Washington Sun reporter Reese Gorman also confirmed that Lee plans to step into Jordan's Judiciary job.

Earthquake as Jim Jordan surrenders his gavel: report

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) will give up his seat as the leader of the House Judiciary Committee after eight years with the gavel.

According to a Wednesday report by Politico, Jordan said on the sidelines of the GOP midterm convention that he doesn't plan to seek a waiver of the GOP's three-term limit for committee leadership of the Judiciary Committee. He also revealed that he doesn't plan to return as the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, but he didn't offer much reason why.

"I'm just not going to do it," Jordan told Politico.

Kasie Hunt backs Jim Jordan into a corner with his own words: 'Why does that not apply?'

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) was backed into a corner on Thursday during a CNN interview when anchor Kasie Hunt asked him to respond to domestic abuse allegations involving a fellow GOP lawmaker from Jordan's home state.

Hunt asked Jordan to comment on Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) after reports that Miller, who was married to Sen. Bernie Moreno's daughter Emily Moreno, had allegedly scalded her with hot water and held a gun to her head.

Jordan initially responded to Hunt's question and said "this is a family matter."

"I know Max is a good man," Jordan said. "I was up campaigning for him. I hope he wins reelection. He's done a good job as a member of Congress, and we should all pray for his family. These are difficult times that they're going through."

But then Hunt pointed to his comments about former Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner. She played a Newsmax interview, showing what Jordan had said when allegations of sexual misconduct against Platner had surfaced.

"I want to play for you what you said when you were asked about Graham Platner, who faced allegations of abuse," Hunt said.

CNN cut to the interview with Jordan — with Hunt urging the Republican to comment on the difference between the two situations.

"That's always been the case with Democrats," Jordan said. "It's all about maintaining power. They will take any crazy position as long as it furthers their ability to, to win elections and get power and frankly, to go against anyone that goes against President Trump."

Hunt pushed back.

"Why does that not apply here, to Republicans who want to keep power in the seat?" Hunt asked.

Jordan tried to dodge the question, claiming he didn't remember the context of the question he was asked.

"I think I was dealing with just who he was as a candidate, and the crazy, antisemitic, anti-Israel, pro-Nazi positions that he has taken," Jordan said. "I think, is evidenced by the fact that he had a what, a Nazi tattoo on his chest."

Complete 'demolition of Jim Jordan': Jack Smith lawyers publish rebuttal to GOP-led attack

A letter from former special counsel Jack Smith's lawyers went public Friday, calling Rep. Jim Jordan's (R-OH) criminal referral a bad-faith attack on a "nonpartisan public servant."

Attorneys Lanny Breuer and Peter Koski wrote the letter July 22 to Jordan and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, calling the referral "spurious."

Legal journalist Roger Parloff posted a downloadable version Friday, calling it a "succinct demolition of Jim Jordan's bad-faith accusations."

Jordan referred Smith to the Justice Department last week, claiming Smith made false statements during his December 2025 deposition before the House Judiciary Committee. Smith had testified that his team had sought only call records from lawmakers during his investigations into Trump — call logs showing who called whom, with no message content.

Jordan said Smith should have volunteered that his team separately obtained texts from 44 members of Congress through a National Archives request for White House phones. He referred Smith under the federal false-statements law.

Smith's legal team carefully dissected Jordan's logic in the July 22 letter.

"During his testimony, Mr. Smith provided truthful, responsive answers and candidly discussed his work as Special Counsel," Breuer and Koski wrote. "Those answers are unimpeachably truthful. Notably, the referral letter does not contest the truthfulness of Mr. Smith's answers."

Jordan's fallback, the letter said, was an "unprecedented theory" — that Smith committed perjury "not because of what he said, but because of what he did not say."

"This dangerous theory of criminal liability has no limiting principle and risks ensnaring every witness who testifies before a congressional committee who does not proactively disclose information that is not responsive to a question asked," Breuer and Koski wrote.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals already rejected that theory, the letter noted, citing a ruling that held witnesses are not required to volunteer answers to questions they were never asked.

Former federal prosecutors have repeatedly criticized the legal theory put forth by Jordan.

"This referral letter is an embarrassment," CBS News quoted former federal prosecutor Kyle Freeny as saying.

"If they have bad questions, they do not get the answers that they want. It's almost like deposition 101," Freeny added.

Former prosecutor Gregory Rosen called the referral "legally untenable, if not ridiculous."

"If Congress wanted different answers, they should have asked different questions," Rosen said.

Jordan also argued the texts violated the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause, which protects lawmakers' official acts from scrutiny.

But the letter from Smith's lawyers dismantled that too, noting the messages were voluntarily sent by members of Congress to White House officials and did not involve any intrusion into legislative business.

Blanche, Trump's former personal defense attorney in both of Smith's federal cases against him, would have received the congressional texts as part of that discovery process — yet never challenged their legality in court, the letter noted.

"If President Trump's attorneys thought that Mr. Smith and his team had done something unlawful or improper in obtaining these text messages, they could have filed a motion to that effect," Breuer and Koski wrote. "Notably, they did not."

"President Trump has repeatedly ordered that Mr. Smith be prosecuted and jailed," Breuer and Koski wrote. "That is not the rule of law."

'More egg on the faces of prosecutors': Expert blasts Trump DOJ's new prosecution threat

A legal expert told CNN on Thursday that President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers' attempts to prosecute former special counsel Jack Smith could backfire.

David Aronberg, former state attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, responded to Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, who has requested the Department of Justice consider criminal charges against Smith. Jordan has alleged that Smith misled Congress about the phone records obtained from members of Congress during the 2020 election investigation.

Smith, who formerly prosecuted Trump, now faces possible prosecution himself. The DOJ has said it will investigate all evidence of criminal conduct.

Trump has weighed in on Jordan's request, posting "Justice at last?" on his Truth Social platform.

Aronberg argued that Smith did not lie to Congress.

"They're trying to twist Jack Smith's words to make it look like he lied, but he did not," Aronberg said. "What we're seeing here is a political game, not a serious matter for the courts."

"If you want to blame Jack Smith for not proactively offering more information to anticipate what the senators and members of the House were thinking at the time, then so be it," Aronberg added. "But it's not a crime. And so this is political retribution, but it's not going anywhere. We saw what happened with Letitia James and James Comey already. This is going to result in more egg on the faces of prosecutors if they decide to."

'Laughably weak': GOP's criminal referral against Jack Smith dismissed as 'meaningless'

The House Judiciary Committee is referring former Special Counsel Jack Smith for criminal prosecution, but analysts are dismissing it.

On Wednesday, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) alleged that Smith "knowingly made false statements" and referred him to the Department of Justice for prosecution. Jordan, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, alleged in a letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche that "strong evidence" appears to show Smith lied during a December 17 testimony.

Smith is the prosecutor who brought two now-dismissed criminal cases against Trump relating to 2020 election interference and the retention of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. The December 17 testimony mentioned in Jordan's letter refers to a closed-door House Judiciary deposition where Smith defended prosecuting Trump.

Despite Jordan's strongly worded criminal referral against Smith, legal analysts, journalists, and Democratic lawmakers are dismissing it.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, slammed Jordan's criminal referral in a public statement. Raskin was particularly upset with Jordan for faulting Smith for not volunteering National Archives and Records Administration presidential information that Republicans never asked about.

"The Republicans fault Mr. Smith for not reading the minds of congressional investigators and for not volunteering information they didn't ask for," Raskin wrote. "This is absurd. Mr. Smith may be telegenic but he is not telepathic."

The House Judiciary Committee Democrats' X account similarly blasted the referral as "laughably weak" and "vindictive" in a post.

CNN political analyst Xochitl Hinojosa noted, "Trump called for Jack Smith's prosecution, so DOJ spent 20 months trying to find ANYTHING on Jack and failed," she wrote in a post on X. "Now we're seeing a desperate attempt to try to prosecute this longtime career prosecutor for following the facts and the law."

Around the time news of the referral came out, Politico legal reporter Kyle Cheney simply reposted what he wrote in 2025: "Periodic reminder that criminal referrals from Congress, other than for contempt, are substantively meaningless."

Jim Jordan backed into a corner to tame rebel Republican to end House meltdown: report

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) admitted Tuesday that he was in negotiations with a Republican lawmaker to try to end infighting within the party over immigration, Politico reported on Tuesday.

Jordan was hoping to strike a deal with Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who has led a group of staunch conservatives who believe Republicans have stalled on a border crackdown vote.

"The talks, Jordan said, have included potentially using a bill cracking down on so-called sanctuary cities that has already advanced out of the Judiciary Committee as a base, then adding elements of the much broader bill Roy is pushing," according to Politico.

"I think that’s just good policy and would be helpful, so we’re looking at that," Jordan told Politico.

It's unclear how Roy would respond, especially since he said Monday that "he was not yet satisfied with how party leaders were responding to his demands," Politico reported.

The House was expected to vote Tuesday on a procedural measure to reopen the floor.

Majority Leader Steve Scalise conceded the GOP is "not in agreement" on what comes next, according to Politico.

Moderates in the party were just as wary, demanding guestworker program protections for farms in return.

In a separate revolt, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) appeared to have defused frustration from other GOP holdouts after Rep. Anna Paulina Luna agreed to stand down — for now — over demands to attach the stalled SAVE America Act to must-pass legislation heading to the Senate, Politico reported.

Jim Jordan humiliated on Fox News after botching basic sports: 'I love World Cup Hockey!'

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) confused World Cup soccer and hockey during a live broadcast Friday on Fox News — and the internet didn't miss it.

Jordan apparently mixed up the current FIFA World Cup with MMA and hockey, confusing the sports events in the interview. He was asked about the upcoming match between Team USA and Bosnia and Herzegovina on July 1.

"I hope we go all the way to the championship and win it," Jordan said. "Golly, I mean, we're on a run. Look at the UFC fight where the American beat the Spanish guy in the main event. We're on a roll so let's hope the hockey team can do the same."

The anchors did not correct him, but repeated that it was the World Cup they were referring to.

Social media users mocked the MAGA lawmaker's comments.

"I love World Cup Hockey!" Mueller She Wrote, popular political social media account, wrote on Bluesky.

"You do not understand how f------ hard this made me laugh oh my god lmaooooo," writer Karlee Suszann posted on Bluesky.

"Jim Jordan on the World Cup: 'Look at the UFC fight where the American beat the Spanish guy in the main event. We're on a roll so let's hope the hockey team can do the same.' (The World Cup isn't a hockey event ...)," journalist Aaron Rupar wrote on X.

"LOL if you don't watch soccer, just say so and don't comment on it. Now Jordan looks like a dumb---," Marty Golingan, journalist and former OAN producer, wrote on X.

"It would definitely be bigger than the 'Miracle on Ice' if the US Hockey team wins the #FIFAWorldCup," journalist Robert Lusetich wrote on X.

Jim Jordan on the World Cup: "Look at the UFC fight where the American beat the Spanish guy in the main event. We're on a roll so let's hope the hockey team can do the same."

(The World Cup isn't a hockey event ...) pic.twitter.com/pSOjRS2p4D
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 26, 2026

Jim Jordan tells Fox News Trump just threw GOP victory in doubt: 'It's a standoff'

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan went on Fox News to warn that a key national security law is heading toward expiration Friday — and acknowledged that his own side may not be able to stop it.

FISA Section 702, which Jordan described as responsible for more than 50 percent of the nation's most sensitive intelligence, is set to expire this week. Democrats are blocking reauthorization unless President Trump removes Bill Pulte from his role as Acting Director of National Intelligence. Jordan admitted to host Maria Bartiromo the two sides are at an impasse.

"It's a standoff," Jordan said.

Pulte, who simultaneously serves as director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, was installed as Acting DNI by Trump over Democratic objections that he lacks an intelligence background. Democrats have made his removal a condition for their votes on reauthorization.

Jordan framed the Democratic position as political obstruction. "They're using this as leverage," he said. "This is typical Washington games. They want to play politics with national security."

He defended Pulte as someone Trump trusts "to get the intelligence community back on track and focused on real threats, not going after conservatives or political opponents."

But with the deadline days away and no deal in sight, Jordan's own description of the situation — a standoff — raises the possibility that a surveillance program Republicans have repeatedly called indispensable to national security could lapse because of a personnel dispute of the administration's own making.

pic.twitter.com/q2QFsy4Z1Q
— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) June 9, 2026