Rep. Adam Schiff is hanging on to his “collusion delusion” like an angry pit bull hangs on to a bone.

Most recently, Schiff claims that “We’re also looking at persistent allegations that the Russians have been laundering money through the Trump organization. I don’t know that that’s true.” (at 1:33 in the video above)

Of course he knows that’s not true. But he is skilled at the art of deception and lies roll off his tongue with such ease that people believe him.

Does he really believe Robert Mueller and his 17 angry Democrats would have failed to uncover such a key development during a 22-month-long, intensive investigation? He should be forced to produce his basis for making such a reckless statement on national television.

He knows there will be nothing in Mueller’s report with which to indict President Trump. He is throwing out raw meat to justify the continuation of this farce into the election season.

Schiff’s singleminded, monomaniacal pursuit of the President is reminiscent of a nearly universally despised lawmaker in American history.

He has become like Sen. Joe McCarthy (R-WI) whose severe obsession with ridding the government of communists in the late 1940s and early 1950s made him the symbol of the “Red Scare.”  “His accusations were so intimidating that few people dared to speak out against him.” McCarthy became consumed by his need to route out communism. His actions became more and more ruthless and unhinged over the years. 

By the time he began his assault on the US Army in 1954, his obsession had taken total control of him. The “Army-McCarthy hearings” were broadcast on national television. McCarthy’s unrestrained attacks against witnesses resulted in the famous exchange between he and Boston lawyer Joseph Welch, whom the Army had hired for their defense. After an unreasonable line of questioning about a young lawyer who worked for his law firm, “Welch responded with the immortal lines that ultimately ended McCarthy’s career: “Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness.” When McCarthy tried to continue his attack, Welch angrily interrupted, “Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?””

This led to McCarthy’s censure by the Senate, an unusual measure at the time, and eventually, to his downfall. Biographers believe his untimely death in 1957 at the age of 48 was due to alcoholism. They say he died a “broken man.”

You can almost imagine Trump’s attorney, Jay Sekulow, saying the same thing to Schiff. “Until this moment, Congressman, I think I never really gauged your cruelty of your recklessness. Let us not assassinate the President any further, Congressman. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?”

Schiff has emerged as the face of the Democrats’ persecution of President Trump. He is the media’s “go-to” lawmaker in all things related to Trump. Just as McCarthy is known as the symbol of the Red Scare,” Schiff will be remembered by history as the symbol of the “Trump/Russian collusion” scandal. The only difference between the two men is that there was some basis of truth to McCarthy’s allegations during the early days of the Cold War.

(For a detailed account of Schiff’s actions, please read Peddling The False Trump/Russian Collusion Story Has Become Adam Schiff’s Calling Card And He Just Can’t Quit It.)

Schiff’s vitriolic attacks and lies are welcomed by the left and despised by those on the right which is to be expected. The unknown and critical question is how his gross overreach will play out with independents, the voters who decide elections.

From the moment Donald Trump became a serious contender in the 2016 election, he has been under constant scrutiny. First, the FBI opened a counterintelligence probe in which many improprieties took place. Then, after Trump fired James Comey, then-acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe opened a second criminal investigation. Finally, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s appointed Robert Mueller to the Special Counsel, whose investigation has, so far, found no evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians to win the presidency.

Will swing voters consider the House Democrat’s professed “concern for the rule of law” to be a sham, as well as a cruel and unusual abuse of power? Do they find Schiff’s continued insistence of Russian collusion when three years of investigations show otherwise, to be a bridge too far?

Will the six new House probes, including both active investigations and those which are still in the planning stages, come back to haunt them?

Let’s put this question to the reasonable man test.

Yes, Yes and Yes.