Jim Jordan Demands Testimony Of Special Counsel In Hunter Biden Investigation


OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.

Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan is demanding the testimony of Special Counsel David Weiss, the man who is in charge of the Hunter Biden investigation.

The representative sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland in which he requested documents and testimony as part of the investigation his committee is having to see if the Department of Justice has been politicized, Fox News reported.

It comes the same week that the representative and the attorney general had a fiery exchange during a hearing in the House.

“Mr. Weiss asked to be made special counsel. I had promised that I would give him all the resources he needed and I made him special counsel,” the attorney general said at the hearing, but the representative had more questions.

“Mr. Garland, What changed on July 10th, 2023? David Weiss wrote to Senator Graham and said, I have not requested special counsel designation. August 11th, you announced that he’s now the special counsel. What happened in that 31 days?” he said.

“As I said publicly, days before my announcement, I think three days, Mr. Weiss had asked to become special counsel,” the attorney general said. “He explained that there were — he had reached the stage of his investigation where he thought that appropriate… I had promised to give him the resources he needed.”

“What stage are we in? … the beginning stage, the middle stage, the end stage? They keep hiding the ball stage? What stage? When?” the representative said.

“I’m not permitted to discuss an ongoing investigation,” the attorney general said.


“Isn’t that convenient?” the representative hit back. “Something changed in 31 to 32 days from July 10th to August 11th,” Jordan continued. “I think it’s that two whistleblowers came forward and a judge called B.S. on the plea deal. You guys tried to get past them.”

Fox News reported:

Garland tapped Weiss to serve as special counsel with jurisdiction over the Hunter Biden investigation and any other issues that have come up, or may come up, related to that probe.

Weiss, the U.S. attorney for Delaware, has been leading the Hunter Biden investigation for years — since 2018. His appointment as special counsel came amid allegations of politicization impacting prosecutorial decisions in the years-long investigation into the president’s son. 

In his first move as special counsel, Weiss charged Hunter Biden with making a false statement in the purchase of a firearm; making a false statement related to information required to be kept by a federal firearms licensed dealer; and one count of possession of a firearm by a person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance.

The entire hearing was contentious, but it got even more tense when Kentucky GOP Rep. Thomas Massie questioned Garland about whether FBI agents were “agitating in the crowd to go into the Capitol.” Garland stated that he was unaware of any federal government agents or assets doing so.

“If there were any, I don’t know how many — I don’t know whether there are any,” Garland said during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee. “I don’t have any personal knowledge of this matter.”

Below is a transcript of the exchange:

MASSIE: “You’re citing the Constitution. I’m going to cite it. It’s our constitutional duty to do oversight. Now in that video, that was your answer to a question to me two years ago, when I said, ‘How many agents or assets of the government were present on January 5 and January 6, and agitating in the crowd to go into the Capitol and how many went into the Capitol?’ Can you answer that now?”

Garland: “I don’t know the answer to that question.”

MASSIE: “Oh, last time, you don’t know how many there were or there were none?”


Garland: “I don’t know the answer to either of those questions. If there were any, I don’t know how many, and I don’t know whether there are any.”

MASSIE: “I think you may have just perjured yourself that you don’t know that there were any. You want to say that again, that you don’t know that there were any?” [crosstalk]

Garland: “I have no personal knowledge of this matter. I think what I said the last time —“ [crosstalk]

MASSIE: “You’ve had two years to find out, and the day — by the way that was in reference to Ray Epps, and yesterday you indicted him. Isn’t that a wonderful coincidence? On a misdemeanor. Meanwhile, you’re sending grandmas to prison. You’re putting people away for 20 years for merely filming, some people weren’t even there. Yet, you got the guy on video. He’s saying go into the Capitol. He’s directing people to the Capitol before the speech ends. He’s at the side of the first breach. You’ve got all the goods on him. 10 videos, and it’s an — it’s an indictment for a misdemeanor. The American public isn’t buying it. I yield the balance of my time to Chairman Jordan.”

Garland: “May I answer the question?”

Jordan: “I’m going to ask you one now. Let’s — we’ll let the gentleman —“


Garland: “Um —“

Jordan: “Go ahead, but —“

Garland: “In discovery, and the cases were filed with respect to January 6, the Justice Department prosecutors provided whatever information they had about the question that you’re asking. With respect to Mr. Epps, the FBI has said that he was not an employee or informant of — of the FBI. Mr. Epps has been charged. And there’s a proceeding, I believe, going on today on that subject.”

MASSIE: “The charge is a joke. I yield the chairman.”

Send this to a friend