Jordan beefi ng up his defense of Trump

WASHINGTON — Rep. Jim Jordan has emerged as a top defender of President Donald Trump during the Justice Department’s Russia investigation, leading some to wonder whether the GOP insurgent known for causing heartburn to the party establishment has become a surrogate for the new establishment.

For Jordan, it’s straightforward: He believes that it was the Hillary Clinton campaign — not the Trump campaign — that worked with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election, namely by paying for the compilation of a dossier meant to embarrass Trump.

Former FBI director James Comey testified in June that some of the information in that dossier was “salacious and unverified,” but Jordan argues that the FBI nonetheless used it to obtain warrants to spy on Trump campaign officials — meaning that the entire investigation was launched by a dossier containing information that was not necessarily true.

Jordan began questioning the investigation last month, spurring headlines when he told Fox News that “everything points to the fact that there was an orchestrated plan to try to prevent Donald Trump from becoming the next president of the United States.”

He amplified those comments in January, publishing a piece with Rep. Mark Meadows, a North Carolina Republican, in the Washington Examiner that urged Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Trump’s Republican appointee, to step down because of Justice Department leaks regarding the case.

So ardent a critic of the Russian investigation is Jordan that CNN host John Berman, in a recent interview, questioned whether he was coordinating talking points with the White House.

“Of course not,” Jordan said.

Whether Jordan is demonstrating the dedication of a dogged true believer, or is motivated to get in good with the Trump administration, is up for debate.

A Capitol Hill Republican who declined to be named so he could speak candidly said that Jordan’s criticism of the Russia investigation is part of a larger effort aimed at positioning the Freedom Caucus, led by Jordan, for a leadership role in the next Congress. “If the FBI took an oppositionresearch document that was unsubstantiated, that was paid for by the Clinton campaign, and dressed it up like legitimate intelligence — you cannot do that in America.”

“This whole mop-up duty for the president is jockeying for the next Congress and leadership,” the Republican said.

But others say Jordan’s full–throated criticism of the investigation is sincere.

“If I know anything about Jim Jordan, it’s that he sticks to his guns, sticks to his principles,” said former Ohio GOP Chairman Matt Borges, who has been a critic of Trump. “I think he says that stuff because he believes it.”

Democrats say Jordan has veered from being reliably, if not predictably, on the right wing of the party to simply serving as a surrogate for Trump.

Ohio Democratic Party Chairman David Pepper said Jordan “is literally buying into the most extreme of the conspiracy theories.”

“It’s one thing just to have that opinion,” Pepper said. “But that’s not just his opinion. He’s actively involved in very concrete ways in being a roadblock to an investigation of something serious.”

Pepper said Jordan now appears to be just following the Trump talking points.

“This will be his legacy,” Pepper said of Jordan. “This is a key moment in history. We know another government interfered with our election, and he was one of the congressmen working to stop the American people from knowing what happened. … We all should want answers to what happened.”

Jordan, who lives in Urbana and represents one of the most conservative areas of Ohio, a district northwest of Columbus, “clearly understands Trump is popular with the Republican base, including in his own district, and he’s trying to identify with that,” said another Washington Republican. “There is a coordinated strategy on the House Republican side to muddy the waters on Russia, and he’s obviously happy to “If I know anything about Jim Jordan, it’s that he sticks to his guns, sticks to his principles. I think he says that stuff because he believes it.” play a leading role in that.”

But Jordan, in an interview, said the Russia investigation started under flawed circumstances. He has worked to point out problems with the investigation, including asserting that the FBI began its investigation based on a dossier compiled out of research paid for by the Clinton campaign.

“If the FBI took an opposition-research document that was unsubstantiated, that was paid for by the Clinton campaign, and dressed it up like legitimate intelligence — you cannot do that in America,” Jordan said.

The New York Times reported two weeks ago, citing current former U.S. and foreign officials, that the surfacing of hacked Democratic Party emails in June 2016 and the revelation from Australian officials that a member of the Trump campaign might have had inside information in April 2016 about the hack were driving factors that led the FBI to open an investigation that July.

Jordan also is concerned about text messages exchanged between two top FBI officers who were having an extramarital affair. One, Peter Strzok, ran the investigation of Clinton’s handling of emails on a private server while on secretary fo state, and the investigation into whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win the campaign.

The text messages, among other things, suggest a need to stop Trump from becoming president and refer to an “insurance policy” — Jordan thinks they’re talking about the dossier — aimed at keeping Trump from the White House.

“To date, we have not one bit of evidence that shows there was coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia to influence the election,” Jordan said. “But we have hard facts that say the Clinton campaign paid Russia to do what? Influence the election — to gather material to influence the election.”

And he says there’s evidence that “strongly suggests” that the FBI was trying to influence the election in Clinton’s favor.

This is far from the first time Jordan has become entrenched in a controversial congressional investigation. He was a key critic of accusations that the IRS unfairly denied taxexempt status to tea party organizations, and he was among the most vocal on the 2015 House investigation of 2012 attacks on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Rep. Warren Davidson, a Troy Republican, dismisses the notion that investigations by Jordan, a close ally, are partisan. Davidson said Jordan has been as hard on Sessions as he was on the attorneys general in the Democratic Obama administration, Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder.

“It seems like this is an investigation about Trump, and in reality, the purpose of this investigation is to understand how Russia tried to influence our elections,” Davidson said.

He added that Jordan’s investigations frequently touch on how one side “weaponizes government to go against political opponents.”

Meadows, chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, which Jordan helped found, echoes that theory. Jordan, he said, “believes the government should be there to serve the people but not pick winners and losers. … He’s been consistent with trying to make sure he holds the government accountable.” “This will be his legacy. This is a key moment in history. We know another government interfered with our election, and he was one of the congressmen working to stop the American people from knowing what happened. … We all should want answers to what happened.”