Tag Archives: Adam Schiff

Chairman Schiff lays it on the line

I have watched this soliloquy a couple of times. I consider it quite compelling.

The speaker is House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, a California Democrat who Donald Trump has ridiculed with a tasteless nickname. He also has bastardized his name.

Schiff responds in this video to his nine Republican committee colleagues who have signed a letter demanding his resignation from the committee chairmanship.

Schiff responded with a controlled sense of seething at the gall of his GOP colleagues, one of whom happens to be Devin Nunes, who chaired the committee until this year.

Schiff stands by his belief that there was “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russians who interfered with our electoral system. He recites chapter and verse the events of that campaign that has caused so much angst.

Hey, it’s only a little more than 5 minutes long. I found it fascinating. You might, too.

Congressional toxicity is flaring to dangerous level

So . . . just how toxic is the atmosphere in Congress, if not in all of Washington, D.C.?

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff provided a critical example.

Committee Republicans today demanded that Schiff resign as chairman of the committee. Donald Trump has called on Schiff to quit Congress altogether. GOP Intelligence Committee member Mike Conaway of Midland said Schiff no longer has the standing to lead the committee and said he should resign immediately.

Schiff has been a stern critic of Donald Trump. He maintains that the president’s campaign did collude with Russians despite special counsel Robert Mueller’s findings to the contrary.

Schiff then took the microphone after Conaway’s lecture and gave it right back to his GOP colleagues. He held firm on his assertion that there was collusion. “You might say that’s all OK,” Schiff said. “You might say that’s just what you need to do to win. But I don’t think it’s OK. I think it is immoral, I think it is unethical, I think it’s unpatriotic and, yes, I think it’s corrupt.”

Yes, it is highly toxic on Capitol Hill. The mood between Congress and the White House is equally toxic.

Why mention it? Because it seems different now than any era I can recall. President Bush 43 managed to maintain working relationships with the likes of Sen. Ted Kennedy; President Reagan famously befriended House Speaker Tip O’Neill, his after-hours drinking buddy; President Bush 41 also maintained strong friendships with House Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski; President Clinton managed to work with House Speaker Newt Gingrich to craft a balanced federal budget.

These days we hear Donald Trump calling Adam Schiff “pencil neck.” He is throwing out “traitorous” and “treasonous” terms to describe Democrats behavior during the special counsel’s probe into alleged collusion; and, yes, Democrats have tossed those terms at the White House, too.

Good government requires leaders of both political parties to find common ground. Dear reader, there ain’t a bit of commonality to be found these days. Anywhere!

It is going to get more divisive, more toxic the deeper we plow into the 2020 election season. After that remains anyone’s guess.

It is no fun — none at all — watching these men and women tear each others’ lungs out. Too many important matters are going unresolved because of the outright hatred one senses among politicians across the aisle that divides them.

Oops! Or so it should go for Rep. Schiff

U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff needs to invoke a four-letter utterance made famous by a Trump Cabinet official who once ran for president of the United States.

Oops! That’s what Energy Secretary Rick Perry said when he couldn’t think of the third agency he would shut down were he elected president in 2012.

Well, Chairman Schiff is now eating his words in an “oops” moment.

Stand down, Mr. Chairman

He said that he knew of “more than circumstantial evidence” that Donald Trump’s presidential campaign colluded with Russians who attacked our electoral system in 2016.

Except that special counsel Robert Mueller disagreed with Schiff. He filed his report over the weekend and concluded that he didn’t have enough to charge the Trump team with collusion.

House and Senate Republicans are steamed at Schiff. They say he owes Trump and apology. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has demanded that his fellow Californian resign from his Intel Committee chairmanship, if not from the House altogether.

That is an overreach. Perhaps he could apologize whenever the president says he’s sorry for fomenting lies about Barack Obama’s birth, or for mocking the New York Times reporter’s disability, or for saying the late John McCain was a “war hero only because he was captured” during the Vietnam War.

Schiff is standing behind his belief that there’s more to learn about collusion, although he said he accepts Mueller’s judgment.

The Intelligence Committee chairman needs to stand down on this collusion matter. Robert Mueller looked high and low for criminal behavior. He didn’t find it. I get that Schiff is unhappy with the result; so are many millions of other Americans . . . me included.

But that’s what we got.

As for the obstruction of justice matter, Mueller was decidedly non-committal.

Perhaps, though, Chairman Schiff ought to just say “oops!” and go on to the next thing, whatever it is.

Time for Schiff and others to put up ‘direct evidence’

U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said today he has seen “direct evidence” that the Donald Trump campaign “colluded” with Russians who sought to intervene in our 2016 presidential election.

Hmm. Direct evidence. Well, I believe there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence piling up all around the president and his campaign operatives.

The California Democratic chairman, though, keeps teasing us with sound bites alluding to direct evidence that the Trump team worked hand in glove with Russian goons who sought to bring dirt on Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee in 2016.

I am still awaiting special counsel Robert Mueller to deliver his report. It needs to be made public. Mueller’s lengthy and thorough investigation needs lay out clear evidence. I no longer want to hear from Schiff who makes statements about direct evidence but then cannot divulge the details of how he knows about such matters.

All this rhetorical teasing does is give Donald Trump ammo to fire back at his political foes.

POTUS disgraces himself — yet again! –with CPAC tirade

Mr. President, you keep outdoing yourself.

You stand before crowds of fervent supporters and fly off the rails. There you were again today in front of the Conservative Political Action Conference firing off an expletive-laden tirade against your foes.

You’re not sounding very “presidential,” Mr. President — and your performance today makes me wonder if I should even refer to you with that courtesy title. You haven’t earned it.

But I’ll do so out of respect for the office, even though I still cannot connect the words “President” and “Trump” consecutively.

How dare you mock the accent of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions! How dare you also refer to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff as “sh***y” Schiff.”

Get a grip, Mr. President

Mr. President, you don’t deserve the title you hold. I get that you were elected to it as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution. I so want to call you “my president.” Displays such as the one you put on today make it increasingly more difficult for me to bestow the respect to which your high office should entitle you.

You, sir, are a disgrace.

By all means, do what it takes, Chairman Schiff

U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has laid it on the line for Attorney General William Barr.

Release the findings put together by special counsel Robert Mueller . . . or else.

The “or else” involves forcing Mueller to testify before the House panel — presumably in public — about what he learned after investigating whether Donald Trump’s campaign for president in 2016 colluded with Russians who interfered in our election.

Schiff said he will subpoena Mueller, make him take an oath and then grill him in search of answers.

Make it public.

Of course, Barr has sent no obvious signal that he intends to keep the Mueller report secret when the special counsel presents it to him, presumably in short order. However, Schiff is taking no chances.

Nor should he. I’ve said all along that the Mueller report needs to be made public. He needs to release all that he can without revealing national secrets to the public that has paid good money — several million dollars, in fact — for him to look for the truth behind the alleged “collusion” with Russian operatives.

It’ s our money that paid for this probe. Thus, the results of the investigation are ours as well.

I am totally on board with Chairman Schiff tossing the “or else” threat to AG Barr.

Make the Mueller report public, Mr. Attorney General.

Or else.

Rep. Schiff does not deserve to have his name denigrated

I have tried seemingly forever to avoid criticizing public figures on at least two levels. That is, two aspects are off limits.

I avoid making fun of their physical appearance and also their name.

Donald Trump has managed during his meteoric political career to do precisely both of those things. He has poked fun/mocked a New York Times reporter’s physical disability; he has made snarky — and unfounded — remarks about the physical appearances of former Republican presidential primary foes Carly Fiorina and Rand Paul; he’s denigrated the appearances of women who have accused him of sexual assault.

Now he has bastardized U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff’s name with that vulgar tweet in which he refers to the incoming House Intelligence Committee chairman as “Little Adam Schitt.” The California Democrat has taken the hideous insult with a good bit of humor, but hasn’t dwelled on it. Those of us on the sidelines are making the big deal of it. As we should, in my humble view.

Even a few conservative voices are speaking out against Trump’s insult against Schiff. This came from radio talker Laura Ingraham:

“Being tough is great, we all love it. Tough, strong president. You don’t have to ridicule Adam Schiff’s name. It’s an unforced error. There’s no reason to do that.”

No, Laura: You all love it. I don’t.

Ingraham is giving the president the benefit of several doubts. She’s far more tepid in her criticism than I would be. Still, at least she has said something about it.

Trump’s use of Twitter to insult foes at this level reveals a serious flaw in his own emotional, intellectual and perhaps even psychological makeup.

Good grief, the president is free to criticize people’s policies, their public statements, their actions in front of their constituents.

But their appearance? Their family name?

Disgraceful.

It’s official: Trump is incorrigible

It’s been known for a while now, but I’ll just weigh in anyway.

Donald John “Insulter in Chief” Trump is utterly an incorrigible overgrown juvenile delinquent.

He’s been known to hang disparaging nicknames on political foes. He’s gone beyond the realm of decency with this one.

Trump has referred in a Twitter taunt to the incoming U.S. House Intelligence Committee chairman, Adam Schiff, as “Little Adam Schitt.”

Isn’t that a knee-slapper? No. It isn’t. It’s a vulgar epithet that Trump appears to have slung at the California Democratic lawmaker on purpose.

Politico reports that Schiff had a response: “Schiff fired back 35 minutes later, quoting the president’s post and writing on Twitter: ‘Wow, Mr. President, that’s a good one. Was that like your answers to Mr. Mueller’s questions, or did you write this one yourself?'”

Trump sought to make some reference to Schiff’s criticism of the appointment of Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general, suggesting that special counsel Robert Mueller should have been confirmed by the Senate before he started his investigation into alleged collusion with Russian government goons who attacked our election system in 2016.

But … of course the topic of discussion has centered on the vulgar response Trump provided.

To think that the president’s political “base” continues to adore him.

Astonishing.

Trump shrinks a big office

I wish I had thought of this, but since I didn’t I’ll deliver appropriate credit to the source of this piece of wisdom.

It comes from U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who fired off this tweet today about Donald J. Trump Sr.:

“The President would have left American students in a foreign jail because their families didn’t lavish sufficient praise on him. How can someone in such a big office be so small?”

What a great question, even though it’s more or less a rhetorical inquiry. Here’s another twist on it: How can Trump shrink the high office he won a year ago in one of those most stunning political upsets in U.S. history? I think it shrunk the very moment he took the oath of office.

POTUS shrinks his office

The object of Schiff’s retort concerns the Twitter tussle that Trump entered with LaVar Ball, the father of one of three UCLA student/athletes who were charged with shoplifting at a high-end store in the People’s Republic of China.

Trump talked to Chinese leaders while visiting that country and reportedly persuaded them to release the young men instead of convicting them and sentencing them to potentially years-long prison sentences. LaVar Ball then tweeted that Trump didn’t do anything to obtain the release of his son and the other athletes.

Then the president decided to fire back at Ball — a man known for his big mouth and outsized public presence in the lives of his athletically gifted sons.

He said he “should have left them in jail” because LaVar Ball didn’t lavish enough praise on the president for his efforts.

That is one way a small man can occupy such a big office. Indeed, Trump is managing to shrink the office itself with his persistently petulant behavior.

Trump has turned this remarkable “skill” into an art form.

Stop the tease, Rep. Schiff, about ‘circumstantial evidence’

Now it’s a leading congressional Democrat who’s teasing the public with something — still unknown — relating to whether the Donald J. Trump presidential campaign was in cahoots with the Russians to influence the 2016 election.

Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told NBC’s Chuck Todd that the committee has “more than circumstantial evidence” that the campaign and the Russians conspired to swing the election in Trump’s favor.

Really, Rep. Schiff? But you can’t tell us anything because it’s, um, classified. Is that right?

Imagine the buzz such a statement is making. No, you don’t have to imagine it. It’s all over the media.

It’s getting a bit testy in Washington, D.C., these days.

Neil Gorsuch is going through a grueling confirmation hearing to become the next Supreme Court justice; the president is twisting arms among House Republicans to get them to approve a GOP alternative to the Affordable Care Act; a terrorist struck in London, killing and injuring several bystanders; Republicans are calling for a special prosecutor to examine the Russia story; and the Intelligence Committee’s Republican chairman, Devin Nunes, blabbed to the president that his office in New York might have been the object of “incidental” surveillance by someone.

In the meantime, the FBI director has shot down in flames the president’s assertion that Barack Obama bugged Trump Tower.

Now we hear from the House Intelligence panel’s top Democrat that the committee might have the goods on whether the Trump campaign committed a potentially treasonous act by colluding with Russians goons who attacked our democratic electoral process.

Rep. Schiff has now acted in a sort of Trumpian fashion by teasing us with a morsel that might evolve into a full-course political meal.

Or … it might be a lot of nothing.

Which is it?