Jim Jordan Gives Insane Response When Asked Why His Whistleblowers Were Paid By Trump Ally

Jim Jordan did not have a good week, and his "weaponization" hearings with his so-called FBI whistleblowers could not have gone worse for him. During a press conference after his hearings, Jordan was asked if he thought it was ok that 2 of his 3 witnesses had been paid by a Trump ally named Kash Patel, Jordan immediately became defensive and claimed that it was totally ok because those men needed money. This man is clearly in over his head, as Farron Cousins explains.

Don't forget to like, comment, and share! And subscribe to stay connected!

Connect with Farron on Twitter

*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.

Republicans in Washington DC did not have a very good week at all. I know they tried to pretend they were having a good week with the Durham report that actually was a giant nothing burger. And, you know, they were, they were having their hearings with the, uh, so-called F B I whistleblowers. And that's when things really went to hell, especially for Jim Jordan. Cuz you see the public, the media isn't buying into his crap anymore. And that is starting to frustrate the heck at a Jim Jordan. Before we get to the idiotic little press conference he held, it's important to point out the fact that during his hearings this week, multiple democratic lawmakers, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Stacey Plaskitt, both called out Jordan and his so-called FBI whistleblowers for not actually being whistleblowers at all. They were disgruntled F B I employees, some of them who had their security clearances revoked because of course they expressed sympathies for the January 6th protestors.

They spread conspiracies on social media and one of them actually refused, refused an order to investigate January 6th capitol rioters. And that is why that individual lost his security clearance insubordination. That's a thing that happens. But Jim Jordan is heralding these people as some kind of, you know, outspoken people risking it all, putting it all on the line. And by God they've risked so much to be here. And that's just what happened in the hearings. It was the press conference after the hearings where things truly went off the rails for Jim Jordan because a reporter reminded Jim Jordan that we really can't trust these people because at least two of the three have been paid by Donald Trump, ally Kosh Patel. And here is how Jim Jordan responded when confronted with that information. Take a look. We're

Talking a lot about, in the point of this press conference, the point of the hearing is to talk about how the FBI is politicized. But do you think it's appropriate for some of these whistleblowers, including two who will be at your hearing today to be paid by one of the former president's closest advisors, cash to tell who's active

They got a family, how they supposed to feed their family 450 days. The FBI has kept these, uh, has kept Mr. O Boyle in, in limbo where he can't work without pay. He's got four kids. He was selected to come to this special, uh, unit they were forming here in Virginia. He moves his family and the day he gets here, the day he gets here, they say, Hey, we're suspending your clearance. And they won't let him get access to his furniture, his clothes, and he's got a two week old newborn child. I mean, you gotta be kidding me. Of course they're gonna, they're gonna do whatever they can to feed their family and I don't fault them for that. And just one more

Thing. Uh,

They gotta feed their families. I mean, who cares if they're being paid by the guy that we are just trying to protect or, I mean, I know it's a total conflict of interest. Uh, but I mean, do you want their kids to go hungry? Is that what you want? Liberals? You want children to not have food. So what's a little under the table? Money between friends. How if you gotta feed your kids, you gotta feed your kids. Jim Jordan is so painfully comically bad at this. Like there's a million other things you could have come up with on the spur of the moment other than they got kids to feed. Do go, darn it, dog nabbit, whatever stupid thing you're trying to say there. Like, yeah, it would mean a lot more that you're trying to protect his kids if you weren't a member of a party that right now is trying to strip, uh, snap benefits from 3 million children across the country, sending 3 million children into hunger.

So I don't believe for a second that you actually give a about kids having enough to eat because your party is literally trying to take food off the table of children across the country. Right now. What you're trying to do is deflect from the fact that your star witnesses who have provided no evidence to back up anything they've said, you're covering for the fact that Donald Trump's people paid these guys. And yes, that does immediately throw anything they say into question.