Ehhh....

No I'm going to say no there. Jim Jordan, while also PROBLEMATIC does not rise to the level or degree of a Chip Roy in my own estimation. (note: I hate that word and the frequency and connotation it has in modern discourse)

Is there a distinct pattern of poor follow- through, a loss of direction during later stages of investigatory committee work, and perhaps a capitulation to the corrupt mores of D.C. culture when penalties are the question at hand? Sure.

Too many strongly worded letters? Yes. Too performative and not actionable enough? Definitely. Is there plenty of other questionable evidence pointing to Jordan's motivations and gaps in his alignment with Trump and MAGA writ-large? Yeah of course.

But I just don't see the same person Matt Gaetz repeatedly praised as his political mentor as rising to the level of villainy of Roy.

At the end of the day I think Jordan is mostly earnest, or he tries to be. Controversial, yes, sometimes misaligned, yes, but outright subversive and always willing to revert to a Neocon stance on any vote or issue? Not quite that far. But in Chip Roy's case it is a yes to all.

Chip Roy I would argue is closer to Dan Crenshaw than Jim Jordan. So, while I'm not fond of some of Jordan's work especially in this last session of Congress (and let me call out James Comer for those same reasons also) I think that in general he's trustworthy enough to call an ally.

Roy is controlled opposition pure and simple. Just a difference of opinion, godspeed.