- The Washington Times - Monday, September 30, 2019

Rep. Jim Jordan says Jake Tapper and other journalists are doing intellectual “gymnastics” during discussions about Hunter Biden’s $50,000-per-month gig with a Ukrainian energy company.

The Ohio Republican and CNN’s “State of the Union” host engaged in an explosive interview on Sunday in which both men seemed astonished at the other’s position.

At issue was President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, along with the credibility of a CIA whistleblower who acted without having first-hand information.

“My guess is, if you ask the American people, when they look at what happened with [former Vice President Joseph R.] Biden’s son — he got paid $50,000 dollars, Jake. [He received] $50,000 a month for several years. Come on,” Mr. Jordan said Sunday. “The Vice President’s son gets paid $50,000 a month and gets hired by a company in an industry he has no experience in and, ‘oh, that’s fine,’ and all you folks in the press and Democrats, ‘oh, no problem here.’ Try taking that message to the American people. … I wonder what Hunter Biden did in those board meetings. Did he just look at his phone and check out the sports scores? But he’s getting paid $50,000, and then when the company that’s paying him that money is under investigation — guess what? Daddy comes running to the rescue [to get the prosecutor fired].”

Mr. Tapper then raised his voice while saying, “That’s not what happened!”

“The European Union, the Obama administration, the International Monetary Fund, pro-clean government activists in Ukraine thought that the prosecutor was not prosecuting corruption,” the reporter continued, Mediaite reported. “[Hunter] was paid by Burisma, but Joe Biden was trying to get a prosecutor who was not pursuing corruption fired.

“It’s amazing what gymnastics you guys will go through to defend [Biden.]” Mr. Jordan replied.

“It’s not gymnastics,” Mr. Tapper, exasperated, said. “It’s facts!”

Mr. Jordan maintained that it was wise to be skeptical of the whistleblower because the individual did not have first-hand information when the report was filed, and an Aug. 26 letter from the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community noted “some indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the Complainant in favor of a rival political candidate.”

The letter by Inspector General Michael Atkinson added that “such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern ‘seems credible.’”

• Douglas Ernst can be reached at dernst@washingtontimes.com.

Copyright © 2023 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide