Fresh off being exposed for the liar that he is, Adam Schiff awoke from his tent outside CNN yesterday and made his way to the set to make a rather revealing admission. Namely, that he’s got absolutely nothing as far as evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia. Given his past insistence that “more than circumstantial evidence” exists, this is quite the turnaround. There’s a reason for it and we’ll get to that in a moment.
First, let’s flashback to Schiff’s prior contention.
A surprised Todd asked Schiff to concede that any suggestion of collusion was circumstantial evidence at best.
“Actually, no, Chuck,” Schiff said. “I can tell you that the case is more than that. And I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. … I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial, and is very much worthy of investigation.”
Schiff made similar comments in 2018 as well, but if you are paying attention, he’s beginning to slowly walk back the goalposts.
You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence. Now, there’s a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt,” Schiff said.
You see, there’s evidence in “plain sight,” yet he’s not confident he can prove it. Logically, those two things do not correlate. If you have “direct evidence,” as he said here just a few weeks ago, then you have the evidence to at least attempt to prove criminal conspiracy. Schiff wants to have it both ways.
Despite his former certainty, the backtracking continues with Schiff now punting the ball deeper. He was asked about Pelosi’s recent announcement to not support impeachment and his answer is revealing.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., rushed to the defense of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Monday, saying only “graphic evidence” would warrant an impeachment gamble against President Trump.
“In the absence of very graphic evidence, it would be difficult to get the support in the Senate needed to make an impeachment successful. Again, my feeling is let’s see what Bob Mueller produces. But the evidence would have to be pretty overwhelming,” Schiff told CNN.
This is a transparent ploy and should be recognized as such. What Schiff is really saying is that he has no actual evidence of collusion. He’s been bluffing for years, lying over and over on every major network, pushing a conspiracy theory that has fallen apart. Impeachment and a trial before the Senate would further reveal his lies, so he’s decided it’s better politically to just stick to harassing Trump from partisan investigations he can control.
This is like the bully on the playground who talks a big game but then when he gets punched in the mouth, makes an excuse to walk away. It’s predictable on Schiff’s part and reveals just now much of a snake he’s been on this issue. If Democrats truly had evidence of collusion, they’d welcome a Senate trial via impeachment because it would put the issue in front of the American people in a way the electorate can’t ignore. They are moving the goalposts on impeachment precisely because no such evidence exists and they know it.
As it has become clearer that Mueller isn’t going to take Trump down in a blaze of glory, Schiff has started to lash out more. He targeted Mueller this past weekend with criticism.
“Yes, I think it is a mistake, and I’ve said it all along that I don’t think Bob Mueller should rely on written answers,” Schiff said. “When you get written answers from a witness it’s really the lawyer’s answers as much as the client’s answer”…
…He said that he thinks Mueller feels some “time pressure” to conclude the investigation but said “the best way to get the truth would be to put the president under oath.”
His latter assertion about pressure holds no basis in fact as there’s been no hint that Mueller is being rushed. It’s just an excuse for Schiff to claim the Mueller report isn’t actually thorough after it’s finally dropped.
A subpoena of Trump is Schiff’s Hail Mary with five seconds on the clock. There’s no evidence of collusion. There’s not even any evidence of obstruction of justice. His final hope is that Trump would slip up and say something contradictory in an interview with the special counsel. Then they could possibly impeach him based on a process crime. With Mueller set to not haul Trump in for further questioning, Schiff is seeing his favored conspiracy take its last gasps and he’s not happy about it.
Pelosi, Schiff, and other Democrats are desperately trying to reset the board, but the truth is coming out. They simply don’t have the evidence.
The media has come up with three or four explanations of @SpeakerPelosi's disinterest in impeachment – the Clinton impeachment bounce, GOP senate majority, focus on other priorities, etc. Missing from their analysis is the simplest explanation: She has no case for impeachment…
— Jason Beale (@jabeale) March 12, 2019
I’ll leave you with a final question to ponder. Why did David French (and other conservative writers) call for the recently vindicated Devin Nunes to recuse himself, yet no such calls have happened from them toward Schiff? Even after Schiff has been proven a liar and baseless conspiracy theorist? That’s a question that deserves to be answered.
Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my other articles.
Please follow and share on Twitter: @bonchieredstate