“You all have been unable to pin anybody down about what we know to be true now” Jim Jordan Questions Credibility of Informant’s Claims Against Joe Biden
WIN MCNAMEE/GETTY IMAGES; SAUL LOEB/POOL/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES
In a recent Fox News interview, Representative Jim Jordan from Ohio acknowledged the possibility that Alexander Smirnov, a former FBI informant, might have provided false information in attempts to link President Joe Biden to corrupt business activities. This admission came after host Maria Bartiromo highlighted that Smirnov had been arrested twice for making false statements, casting doubt on the credibility of the intelligence he provided, which had been used by Republicans to criticize Biden.
Bartiromo questioned the lack of legal consequences for Christopher Steele, who also provided unverified information to the FBI, to which Jordan responded by emphasizing the discrepancy in how Steele continued to receive payments despite the FBI’s awareness of his misleading information. Jordan pointed out that Smirnov, unlike Steele, faced legal action for his falsehoods, raising questions about the consistency of accountability, told ABC.
“Chairman Jordan, I find it really stunning that Smirnov gets indicted, and they say that it’s because he got information from Russians, and it was not true,” Bartiromo said. “You all have been unable to pin anybody down about what we know to be true now, that the Russia collusion story was a lie and that Steele dossier was made up.”
Jordan also mentioned David Weiss, the prosecutor involved in the Hunter Biden investigation, noting that Weiss had access to the information provided by Smirnov since 2020 but seemingly did not act on it until recently. This delay prompted Jordan to question the efficiency and priorities of the investigation over the past few years.
Despite these concerns, Jordan expressed uncertainty about the truthfulness of Smirnov’s claims regarding Biden’s business dealings. He reflected on past allegations of misconduct, such as the Trump-Russia collusion narrative and the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s laptop, both of which were ultimately discredited. Jordan’s comments suggest a pattern of dubious allegations surfacing during election cycles, casting skepticism on the latest claims brought forward by Smirnov.
This situation underscores the challenges of discerning truth in politically charged investigations and the importance of maintaining integrity and consistency in legal and investigative processes, especially when dealing with high-profile figures and sensitive accusations.
