Speaker 1: All right.
We've got to get to something really, really important.
This needs to be I am going to show you a video that justifies launching a new investigation
into Republican Congressman Jim Jordan and whether he was an accomplice in a greater
way than we already knew to the January 6th riots.
Think back a week to when Nancy Pelosi said Jim Jordan and Jim Banks can't be on this
committee investigating the January 6th riots.
And at the time, I said Jim Jordan is more likely a witness or a coconspirator than he
can really in any realistic way be an investigator of what took place on January 6th.
He appeared yesterday on Fox News with Bret Bair and Bret Baier asked him, did you speak
to Trump on January 6th?
And Jim Jordan is caught obviously trying to obfuscate.
You've got to see this.
Let's listen to it line by line.
OK, here we go.
Speaker 2: I mean, he's obviously going to go down a number of different roads about
who knew what when, who was talking to coordinators of the protests, did you talk to the former
president that day?
I've talked to the former president umpteen times.
Thousands.
I mean, I may not.
Speaker 1: OK, did you talk to the president on January 6th?
And Jordan says, I've talked to the president umpteen times.
And Brett Bair tries to clarify exactly the date on which he's referring to the former
Speaker 2: president umpteen times thousands.
I mean, I may not that I mean, on January, countless, countless times I talked to the
president.
I never talk about what we talk about.
Speaker 1: OK, so he still now he says, I talked to the president.
He's still not saying on that day, but it seems to be what he's conceding here.
Speaker 2: That's appropriate because I can only talk about what happens in Republican
conferences, talk to the president numerous times.
I continue to talk to the president on January six.
Congressman.
Yes.
I mean, I talk to the president.
I've talked to the president, so I can't remember.
Speaker 1: So he seems to be realizing he can't just lie and say no.
And he seems to be realizing I is going to keep asking the question.
So he tries to slide it in and says yes, meaning yes.
I did speak to Trump on January six, but I've talked to him so many times, I can't even
remember all the times I've talked to him Speaker 2: for all the days I've talked to
him, but I've certainly talked to the president.
Yeah.
And on that day was can you share any of the inside of what he was thinking about that
day?
Speaker 1: Very clear question.
What's the relevance?
The relevance is I alone can fix it.
The book from Carol Lenegan Philip Rucker says it has multiple sources who say Trump
was basically giddy on January 6th.
The reason Trump didn't send in the National Guard is he loved what was going on.
He was giddy.
He was absolutely loving it.
And my guess is that when Jim Jordan spoke to Trump, Trump expressed being thrilled about
what was going on.
Now, what Jim Jordan said, we don't know.
But it's obvious why Jim Jordan doesn't want to talk about what that conversation was like,
a Speaker 2: breath of people.
We need to come testify.
Are the people who can testify to the fundamental questions?
Speaker 1: Well, one of those people might be Jim Jordan.
What exactly was Trump's mental state when you spoke to him?
Was he giddy about the riots?
Speaker 2: Why didn't the United States Capitol, the People's House, have an appropriate security
posture on that day?
And what have we done?
Those are the people we need to hear from those that's information and testimony we
need to get.
That's what we should focus on.
But I don't think that Bennie Thompson, the chairman of this committee, said
Speaker 1: the question wasn't about Bennie Thompson.
You know, the question was about your conversation with Trump.
Speaker 2: Things on the table until we raised this issue about the speaker's office is the
one who knows what the security posture and why it was the way it was once we raised that
question, said, well, everything's on the table.
Speaker 1: OK, so he clearly doesn't want to talk about what he said to Donald Trump.
Now, what do we know about Jim Jordan?
Well, we know that Jim Jordan was part of a meeting of House Republicans that took place
in advance of January 6th about how to overturn the election.
We know Jim Jordan was there.
It's been widely reported.
We are aware that on December 21st of twenty twenty, Marjorie Taylor Green, Matt Gaits,
Jim Jordan, Mo Brooks and Louie Gohmert, really a cast of characters were spotted at the White
House.
And the reports are that they met with Donald Trump.
So we know Jim Jordan met with Trump about how to overturn the results in advance of
January six.
We know that Jim Jordan voted against certifying the results and we now know that Jim Jordan,
through his obfuscation and his distraction, we know that Jim Jordan also spoke to Donald
Trump on January six.
We also know that Trump was reportedly giddy on January 6th about the riots.
We also know that Donald Trump was responsible for the military not getting to the capital
as quickly as they could have on January 6th.
And here is the slow drip about the truth of Jordan's potential role on January 6th.
My guess is that Jordan's fingerprints are all over the January 6th riots.
I'm sure there was lots of locker room talk about it.
And the idea I mean, imagine Jim Jordan tried to argue his way into being an investigator
of the January 6th riots.
Good for Nancy Pelosi for saying you can't be on the panel, Jim.
And the reality is we now know it is that this guy is almost certainly a witness to
the inciting of that in his conversation with Donald Trump.
And he may even be an accomplice in what took place on January 6th.
Unbelievable.
Truly unbelievable