Rep. Jim Jordan spewed enough Uranium One and HRC conspiracy theories during the House Judiciary hearing that even Attorney General had no stomach for it?
Rep. Jordan's shtick is to be the angriest man in Congress when the cameras are on. He knows his voters only watch Fox, and his job is to generate dramatic footage of a Republican in pursuit of "the truth about Hillary."
Really, it's getting old.
News broke that the Justice Department was indeed floating a possible special counsel to investigate the Uranium One deal.
But that news didn't satisfy Jordan, who used his time to try and force the DOJ to actually do the unthinkable. Use a book of oppo research funded by Steve Bannon, that holds no real conclusions or facts except for vicious innuendo to attack ones political rivals with.
He then read off his list of items pulled straight out of the Breitbart / Infowars fart jar of Hillary hate, that included James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Bill Clinton and of course the Steele dossier.
It's all crap, but the Freedom Caucus is nothing without screaming Fox News host Jeanne Pirro's approval, so off they go into conspiracy land.
Again he asked, "What's it gonna take to get a special counsel?"
AG Sessions actually shut him down, saying, "It would take a factual basis that meets the standards of the appointment of a special counsel."
Facts, Mr. Jordan, facts.
Sessions said, "You can have your idea but sometimes we have to study what the facts are and to evaluate whether it meets the standard required a special counsel."
Rep. Jordan whipped himself into a frenzy after he said, "What's it gonna take to get a special counsel?"
"Looks like there is not enough of a basis to appoint a special counsel."
PS. Vanity Fair has suggested this is all for show, and this "investigation" talk
could be interpreted as a sign that Sessions is trying to patch up his fractious relationship with the president, offering an olive branch (and possibly delaying his own dismissal) with the allure of a Clinton-focused investigation. Actually proceeding with a criminal investigation, however, to say nothing of appointing a special counsel, would spark widespread outrage. “If the AG bends to pressure from President Trump and his allies, and appoints a special counsel to investigate Trump’s vanquished rival, it could spell the end of the DOJ as an independent institution,” Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, wrote on Twitter. Sessions previously told the Senate Judiciary Committee, during testimony earlier this year, that he would not name a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton, even if ordered to do so by the president himself. “This country does not punish its political enemies,” he said.
There are other plausible explanations for the publication of the letter, beyond trying to pacify the president. Brian Fallon, who served as the Clinton campaign’s press secretary, suggested that it was released to distract from breaking revelations that Donald Trump Jr. communicated with WikiLeaks during the campaign. “Like clockwork, just as we learn of damning details of Donald Trump Jr.’s contacts with WikiLeaks, the Trump administration is firing up the fog machine to distract from the Mueller probe,” Fallon told The Washington Post.
Benjamin Wittes, editor of the Lawfare blog, argues Sessions’s letter is actually a convoluted way for the Justice Department to, ultimately, reaffirm its independence, by allowing the federal prosecutors to decide against an investigation.