Jim Jordan sums up Democrat ‘desperation’ in one tweet

Democrats have thus far presented witnesses in their impeachment inquiry that have zero firsthand knowledge of anything and mainly waste their testimonies giving their opinions on the president, rather than any solid evidence of wrongdoing.

Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan is one of many Republicans clearly unimpressed with and tired of the whole affair, and he expressed just that on Twitter Wednesday in reaction to the testimony of David Holmes.

“A 40 minute opening statement from a guy who overheard a phone call that was ‘a couple minutes.’ THIS is the Democrats’ last ditch effort? Talk about desperate,” Jordan tweeted.

Luckily, lawmakers like Jordan have not been shy about their opinions throughout the impeachment inquiry. They have gotten witnesses to admit their testimonies are based on mere presumptions and eviscerated the various “bombshells” Democrats have thrown out.

At Wednesday’s hearing, Devin Nunes called out the effort led by Adam Schiff for exactly what it is — fantasy.

“I now yield to Mr. Schiff for ‘Storytime Hour,'” Nunes said when yielding over his time.

Jordan’s tweet, though, perfectly calls out the Democrats for what they are through this whole process — desperate. They are grasping at straws to make something, anything, stick, but their house of cards is falling.

State Department staffer David Holmes testified that he was “deeply disappointed” by President Donald Trump’s phone call with the Ukraine president.

“Upon reading the transcript, I was deeply disappointed to see that the president raised none of what I understood to be our interagency agreed-upon foreign policy priorities in Ukraine and instead raised the Biden/Burisma investigation,” he said.

His testimony was again just more whining about Trump’s approach to foreign policy. There has still been nothing substantial presented at these hearings.

Jordan and Holmes clashed during Wednesday’s hearing. Jordan took issue with the fact that Holmes described the Trump/Ukraine phone call as a “touchstone moment” in his life because he believed he witnessed something illegal, but he hasn’t done anything significant about it until now.

Jordan brought up the fact that Ambassador William Taylor outlined numerous conversations with individuals about concerns over the call, but not one of those conversations was with Holmes. Holmes argued it was obvious everyone knew a quid pro quo was happening. After Schiff tried cutting Jordan off several times as Jordan pushed back against Holmes presenting his opinion, rather than fact, the congressman described the non-answer as “filibuster.”

Holmes put on no appearance of non-bias during his testimony. He even openly rolled his eyes and laughed at Jordan.

Check out Jordan questioning Holmes below:


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles