‘He’s a traitor’: Democrat leads attack on Jim Jordan after he’s revealed as Meadows texter by Jan 6 panel

Ohio congressman was texting Trump’s chief of staff arguments in favour of interfering in election certification

Jim Jordan defends 'good man' Mark Meadows during contempt debate

A Democratic congressman accused one of his Republican colleagues of committing treason on Wednesday as the fallout over the contents of text messages sent by members of Congress aligned with former President Donald Trump around January 6 continues.

Rep Ruben Gallego of Arizona, one of the several states where Mr Trump’s false claims of widespread fraud were centred, issued the accusation during an interview Wednesday evening on MSNBC’s Last Word.

“Look, Jim Jordan is a traitor,” he told presenter Lawrence O’Donnell.

“He’s a traitor to the Constitution of the United States. He has been a traitor to the Constitution of the United States for quite a while, and now we actually have it in text,” Mr Gallego added.

Treason is an extreme accusation to make of any American, especially a congressman. The charge is defined in the Constitution as "levying War against [the US], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” and is punishable by a minimum of five years in prison or much harsher penalties including capital punishment.

Only a few dozen people have been charged with it in US history; the Constitution also states that, “No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

The Independent has reached out to Mr Jordan’s office for comment on Mr Gallego’s remarks.

Mr Jordan was revealed in text messages released by Mark Meadows to the House select committee investigating January 6 to have been sharing arguments in favour of Mike Pence asserting that Electoral College votes from states where the Trump campaign had baselessly alleged fraud would not be accepted when Congress counted the votes to certify the presidential election.

That plan never materialised, though it became the operating plan of action for Mr Trump’s inner circle of allies meeting in the Willard Hotel in Washington DC in the weeks leading up to the attack on the Capitol.

A number of top Trump aides and advisers involved in the Willard Hotel “command center” have faced subpoenas from the January 6 committee, which has seen many witnesses cooperate under subpoena while others including Mr Meadows have defied the committee’s requests under argument of executive privilege.

The claims that records from Mr Trump’s White House are protected by executive privilege are likely to be decided by the Supreme Court after a federal appeals court blocked the former president’s request to halt the release of information to the committee.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in