THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR JULY 17, 2022 AT 4:53 PM
Paul Plante says:
So thanks to the Cape Charles Mirror and its coverage of this Made-For-Prime-time TV show called the JANUARY SIXTH COMMITTEE HEARINGS starring Virginia’s own Elaine Luria, we common folks here in America are having an opportunity to get treated to every SLIMY LAWYER TRICK there is in the book, and it is fat one, the book of SLIMY LAWYER TRICKS, that were employed by Bennie Thompson and Lizzie Cheney on June 28, 2022 in their continuing effort to hang Donald Trump out to dry, and get him indicted for the serious crime of insurrection to remove him as a threat to Joe Biden and the Democrat party when we had on PRIME-TIME TV the EXPLOSIVE TESTIMONY of Cassidy Hutchinson, a true “watershed moment” in both American politics and American history, as we can see from the Washington Post story titled “Jan. 6 committee subpoenas Secret Service for missing records” by Jacqueline Alemany and Maria Sacchetti on 15 July 2022, where we had as follows concerning the continuing ripples spreading out from the EXPLOSIVE TESTIMONY of Cassidy Hutchinson on June 28, 2022, as follows, to wit:
The text messages could provide insight into the actions of the agency and potentially those of President Donald Trump on the day of the insurrection.
Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified during a hearing last month that Trump wanted to lead the mob from the Ellipse to the Capitol, despite knowing they were armed, and said that she was told by an agent that Trump physically assailed the Secret Service agent who informed him he could not go to the Capitol.
end quotes
And that is it, people – Cassidy Hutchinson, who GRAND INQUISITOR Bennie Thompson, the chief WITCH HUNTER has already told us is “heroic,” which means we have to believe every single word she has uttered without question, to wit:
It hasn’t always been easy to get that information because the same people who drove the former president’s pressure campaign to overturn the election are now trying to cover up the truth about January 6th.
But thanks to the courage of certain individuals, the truth won’t be buried.
The American people won’t be left in the dark.
Our witness today, Ms. Cassidy Hutchinson, has embodied that courage.
end quotes
Now, one could argue conclusively that were Bennie Thompson a real prosecutor, rather than a political hack serving the needs of the Democrat party and Nancy Pelosi, by vouching for the credibility of Cassidy Hutchinson as a witness, which Bennie is clearly doing, that he would be engaging in PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT.
But since he is not a real prosecutor, and thus has no fetters nor bounds within which he must stay, Bennie is free to engage in every SLIMY and DESPICABLE DIRTY LAWYER’S TRICK he chooses to with impunity, because no laws bind Bennie Thompson or any of the other WITCH HUNTERS.
So, it is enough for Cassidy Hutchinson to say something happened, like she was told by somebody “that Trump physically assailed the Secret Service agent who informed him he could not go to the Capitol.”
WHAT ******* HORSE****, people!
And this is the steaming pile of horsecrap that WITCH HUNTER Pete Aguilar of California wants us to believe is “helping us protect democracy.”
No, people, and Pete, it is not!
You DO NOT protect democracy by burying it under a mountain of bull****, fabricated testimony and outright lies!
That is how you defend the DEMOCRAT PARTY, but the DEMOCRAT PARTY has absolutely nothing to do with democracy, at all!
So this is all a political joke and the American people are the victims of the joke being played on us by these WITCH HUNTERS with this contrived testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson, along with TRUTH, and JUSTICE and RULE OF LAW in America.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/a ... ent-646941
ADAM SCHIFF
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
RAW STORY
"Jan. 6 Committee wants Secret Service 'under oath' to explain deleted text messages: Schiff"
By David Edwards
24 JULY 2022
A member of the Jan. 6 Committee revealed that Secret Service agents and staff may be put under oath for interviews about the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
On Sunday, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) told CBS host Margaret Brennan that the committee is keen to recover deleted text messages that were sent by the Secret Service on Jan. 6.
"If they're hiring criminal defense counsel then they probably have a concern about their criminal liability," Schiff noted.
"We want to hear from these witnesses."
"Some we want to hear from again."
"We want to put them under oath if they weren't previously under oath so that we can understand exactly what was happening on Jan. 5th and Jan. 6th."
"We are now, for the first time, getting documents that we had requested long, long ago."
Schiff suggested that the committee could investigate the agency for failing to provide the documents in a timely manner.
"And furthermore, we want to obtain those text messages," he said, "if there's any way to retrieve them."
"But either way, we want to get answers as to why those were destroyed."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jan-6 ... 8b7074e73a
"Jan. 6 Committee wants Secret Service 'under oath' to explain deleted text messages: Schiff"
By David Edwards
24 JULY 2022
A member of the Jan. 6 Committee revealed that Secret Service agents and staff may be put under oath for interviews about the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
On Sunday, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) told CBS host Margaret Brennan that the committee is keen to recover deleted text messages that were sent by the Secret Service on Jan. 6.
"If they're hiring criminal defense counsel then they probably have a concern about their criminal liability," Schiff noted.
"We want to hear from these witnesses."
"Some we want to hear from again."
"We want to put them under oath if they weren't previously under oath so that we can understand exactly what was happening on Jan. 5th and Jan. 6th."
"We are now, for the first time, getting documents that we had requested long, long ago."
Schiff suggested that the committee could investigate the agency for failing to provide the documents in a timely manner.
"And furthermore, we want to obtain those text messages," he said, "if there's any way to retrieve them."
"But either way, we want to get answers as to why those were destroyed."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jan-6 ... 8b7074e73a
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
FOX NEWS
"Nadler feuded with Schiff, Pelosi over 'unconstitutional' impeachment of Donald Trump"
Kyle Morris, Andrew Murray
27 SEPTEMBER 2022
FIRST ON FOX: A new book reveals that House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., was at odds with how House Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's handling of impeachment proceedings against former President Trump, insisting that the methods used by the prominent Democrats were "unconstitutional" and could be used to attack the party.
The revelation comes in a book set to be released on October 18 titled, "Unchecked: The Untold Story Behind Congress's Botched Impeachments of Donald Trump," written by Politico Playbook co-author Rachael Bade and Washington Post reporter Karoun Demirjian.
The book chronicles the methods Democrats used to target Trump.
In October 2019, amid the Democrats' plan to hold a full House vote on a resolution outlining the structure of impeachment proceedings against Trump, Nadler, according to the book, took issue with how Schiff, who was tapped by Pelosi to lead impeachment efforts, was prepared to proceed with the impeachment without due process for Trump.
Worried about the situation and the likelihood that his Judiciary Committee would not be able to cross-examine witnesses as the committee had done traditionally, Nadler confronted Schiff about the planned process, and, according to the book, said: "It’s unfair, and it’s unprecedented, and it’s unconstitutional."
"I don’t appreciate your tone," Schiff allegedly responded.
"I worry you’re putting us in a box for our investigation."
Sidelined by Pelosi to handle impeachment proceedings in the House, the book claims Nadler made an "effort to get back into Pelosi’s good graces" and that his "aides sucked up to her staff relentlessly" in an attempt to show that his panel was prepared to step in and assist.
Striving to earn approval from Pelosi, Nadler hired attorneys and had his team pour through records and books from the impeachments of former Presidents Nixon and Johnson.
Those efforts worked and led Pelosi and Schiff to reconsider the Judiciary Committee's involvement in the process, although they had "their own ideas about how he should run his committee process," according to the book.
"She didn’t want the Judiciary panel to interview witnesses at all," the book's authors wrote.
"Pelosi simply didn’t trust the panel — which was stacked with liberal crusaders and hotheaded conservatives — to handle the rollout of the complex Ukraine narrative with the careful, compelling treatment it required."
"She couldn’t afford another Nadler screwup."
The Judiciary chairman could focus on the legal business of crafting the articles of impeachment and have academics testify, she allowed.
"But that was it."
Nadler's frustration with the pair of Democrats grew.
Research conducted by his team proved that presidents facing impeachment from Congress had been allowed to defend themselves before the House Judiciary Committee, with attorneys for the president having the opportunity to attend hearings, as well as cross-examine testifying witnesses or call their own.
That did not matter to Schiff, and the fact that Trump would not be able to face his accusers before being impeached did not sit right with Nadler, who warned Pelosi and Schiff of the ramifications it would have in the long run.
"If we’re going to impeach, we need to show the country that we gave the president ample opportunity to defend himself," Nadler told them, according to the book.
The book noted that Pelosi and Schiff were concerned with what Trump's attorneys would say at the hearings, worrying that it could upend Democratic messaging ahead of the 2020 presidential election and stifle Biden's election chances.
Nadler's staff made attempts to clarify that Trump's impeachment needed to look "more like Nixon," but Schiff's team stood opposed as they said, "F--- Donald Trump," the authors recalled.
"Stick close to the Nixon and Clinton cases," Nadler reportedly said amid criticism from prominent Republicans about the legality of Trump's impeachment.
"You have to arm yourself against these process complaints."
Tensions among the teams for Nadler and Schiff continued to rise as impeachment efforts ramped up, with Schiff's team making it clear that they did not take Nadler seriously.
During a meeting with members of Schiff's team, the book's authors recalled that Judiciary counsel Aaron Hiller said Nadler would "insist on these hearings," but Dan Goldman, who served as Schiff's lead counsel for the Democrats' first round of impeachment hearings against Trump and is now seeking to represent New York's 10th District in the House, scoffed at the idea.
"Jerry Nadler?"
"With him, everything is negotiable," Goldman reportedly said at the time.
Nadler's team reportedly griped in private over Schiff's handling of the process, calling him a "control freak" who wanted to lead the process for as long as he could, the book claims.
The book says tension among both teams reached a breaking point when Schiff sent Nadler a draft of the resolution laying out the rules for impeachment, which ignored his concerns about due process for the president.
"These lawless HPSCI bast--ds!" one Judiciary aide said, according to the book.
Another claimed: "It’s dumb."
"It’s illegal!"
Nadler and Schiff met once more about the resolution, with their disagreement growing deeper as Nadler amplified his concerns about Schiff's plans to handle things, the authors claimed.
"They’re going to argue we don’t have due process for Trump."
"Why make that argument real?" Nadler asked Schiff.
"I write the rules of my committee, not you," Nadler added.
"I resent you telling me how to run my committee."
"I don’t really care about your resentment," Schiff quipped.
"Neither the Speaker nor I agree."
Pelosi's involvement in the matter, as highlighted in the book, was one of making the impeachment against Trump a "national security issue."
"We need to make the case more strongly that this is a national security issue," Pelosi told her team, according to the book.
"Eighty percent plus say it’s not okay for the president to ask for foreign assistance [in an election] — despite Trump asserting that he can do it."
"I just think we need to make this case to rural voters, evangelicals, and Republicans."
During a meeting highlighted in the book, Pelosi played a clip of conservative commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano and insisted his words could be used to better sell the notion of impeachment to Republicans.
"We need to play up Napolitano saying he committed impeachable offenses," Pelosi allegedly declared.
"The public awareness on the details of this is very low …"
"So we need clarity and repetition over and over again."
"‘National security threat.’"
"‘Abuse of power.’"
"‘No one is above the law.’"
Regarding the GOP's outspoken criticism that Trump was not being treated fairly during the impeachment process, the book says Pelosi urged her team not to acknowledge their claims.
"Let’s not give them any attention," she said, according to the book.
In addition, Pelosi claimed, "Democrats are giving Trump more rights than the Democrats had under the Clinton impeachment."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 16d57dbc7d
"Nadler feuded with Schiff, Pelosi over 'unconstitutional' impeachment of Donald Trump"
Kyle Morris, Andrew Murray
27 SEPTEMBER 2022
FIRST ON FOX: A new book reveals that House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., was at odds with how House Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's handling of impeachment proceedings against former President Trump, insisting that the methods used by the prominent Democrats were "unconstitutional" and could be used to attack the party.
The revelation comes in a book set to be released on October 18 titled, "Unchecked: The Untold Story Behind Congress's Botched Impeachments of Donald Trump," written by Politico Playbook co-author Rachael Bade and Washington Post reporter Karoun Demirjian.
The book chronicles the methods Democrats used to target Trump.
In October 2019, amid the Democrats' plan to hold a full House vote on a resolution outlining the structure of impeachment proceedings against Trump, Nadler, according to the book, took issue with how Schiff, who was tapped by Pelosi to lead impeachment efforts, was prepared to proceed with the impeachment without due process for Trump.
Worried about the situation and the likelihood that his Judiciary Committee would not be able to cross-examine witnesses as the committee had done traditionally, Nadler confronted Schiff about the planned process, and, according to the book, said: "It’s unfair, and it’s unprecedented, and it’s unconstitutional."
"I don’t appreciate your tone," Schiff allegedly responded.
"I worry you’re putting us in a box for our investigation."
Sidelined by Pelosi to handle impeachment proceedings in the House, the book claims Nadler made an "effort to get back into Pelosi’s good graces" and that his "aides sucked up to her staff relentlessly" in an attempt to show that his panel was prepared to step in and assist.
Striving to earn approval from Pelosi, Nadler hired attorneys and had his team pour through records and books from the impeachments of former Presidents Nixon and Johnson.
Those efforts worked and led Pelosi and Schiff to reconsider the Judiciary Committee's involvement in the process, although they had "their own ideas about how he should run his committee process," according to the book.
"She didn’t want the Judiciary panel to interview witnesses at all," the book's authors wrote.
"Pelosi simply didn’t trust the panel — which was stacked with liberal crusaders and hotheaded conservatives — to handle the rollout of the complex Ukraine narrative with the careful, compelling treatment it required."
"She couldn’t afford another Nadler screwup."
The Judiciary chairman could focus on the legal business of crafting the articles of impeachment and have academics testify, she allowed.
"But that was it."
Nadler's frustration with the pair of Democrats grew.
Research conducted by his team proved that presidents facing impeachment from Congress had been allowed to defend themselves before the House Judiciary Committee, with attorneys for the president having the opportunity to attend hearings, as well as cross-examine testifying witnesses or call their own.
That did not matter to Schiff, and the fact that Trump would not be able to face his accusers before being impeached did not sit right with Nadler, who warned Pelosi and Schiff of the ramifications it would have in the long run.
"If we’re going to impeach, we need to show the country that we gave the president ample opportunity to defend himself," Nadler told them, according to the book.
The book noted that Pelosi and Schiff were concerned with what Trump's attorneys would say at the hearings, worrying that it could upend Democratic messaging ahead of the 2020 presidential election and stifle Biden's election chances.
Nadler's staff made attempts to clarify that Trump's impeachment needed to look "more like Nixon," but Schiff's team stood opposed as they said, "F--- Donald Trump," the authors recalled.
"Stick close to the Nixon and Clinton cases," Nadler reportedly said amid criticism from prominent Republicans about the legality of Trump's impeachment.
"You have to arm yourself against these process complaints."
Tensions among the teams for Nadler and Schiff continued to rise as impeachment efforts ramped up, with Schiff's team making it clear that they did not take Nadler seriously.
During a meeting with members of Schiff's team, the book's authors recalled that Judiciary counsel Aaron Hiller said Nadler would "insist on these hearings," but Dan Goldman, who served as Schiff's lead counsel for the Democrats' first round of impeachment hearings against Trump and is now seeking to represent New York's 10th District in the House, scoffed at the idea.
"Jerry Nadler?"
"With him, everything is negotiable," Goldman reportedly said at the time.
Nadler's team reportedly griped in private over Schiff's handling of the process, calling him a "control freak" who wanted to lead the process for as long as he could, the book claims.
The book says tension among both teams reached a breaking point when Schiff sent Nadler a draft of the resolution laying out the rules for impeachment, which ignored his concerns about due process for the president.
"These lawless HPSCI bast--ds!" one Judiciary aide said, according to the book.
Another claimed: "It’s dumb."
"It’s illegal!"
Nadler and Schiff met once more about the resolution, with their disagreement growing deeper as Nadler amplified his concerns about Schiff's plans to handle things, the authors claimed.
"They’re going to argue we don’t have due process for Trump."
"Why make that argument real?" Nadler asked Schiff.
"I write the rules of my committee, not you," Nadler added.
"I resent you telling me how to run my committee."
"I don’t really care about your resentment," Schiff quipped.
"Neither the Speaker nor I agree."
Pelosi's involvement in the matter, as highlighted in the book, was one of making the impeachment against Trump a "national security issue."
"We need to make the case more strongly that this is a national security issue," Pelosi told her team, according to the book.
"Eighty percent plus say it’s not okay for the president to ask for foreign assistance [in an election] — despite Trump asserting that he can do it."
"I just think we need to make this case to rural voters, evangelicals, and Republicans."
During a meeting highlighted in the book, Pelosi played a clip of conservative commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano and insisted his words could be used to better sell the notion of impeachment to Republicans.
"We need to play up Napolitano saying he committed impeachable offenses," Pelosi allegedly declared.
"The public awareness on the details of this is very low …"
"So we need clarity and repetition over and over again."
"‘National security threat.’"
"‘Abuse of power.’"
"‘No one is above the law.’"
Regarding the GOP's outspoken criticism that Trump was not being treated fairly during the impeachment process, the book says Pelosi urged her team not to acknowledge their claims.
"Let’s not give them any attention," she said, according to the book.
In addition, Pelosi claimed, "Democrats are giving Trump more rights than the Democrats had under the Clinton impeachment."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 16d57dbc7d
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
CNN
"Schiff says any criminal referral for Trump by the January 6 committee should be decided unanimously"
Daniella Diaz
6 NOVEMBER 2022
US Rep. Adam Schiff, who serves on the House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection, says that if the panel makes a criminal referral for former President Donald Trump related to the riot at the US Capitol, it should be made unanimously.
“We operate with a high degree of consensus and unanimity,” the California Democrat told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union” on Sunday.
“It will be certainly, I think, my recommendation, my feeling, that we should make referrals, but we will get to a decision as a committee, and we will all abide by that decision, and I will join our committee members if they feel differently.”
CNN reported earlier this year that although the bipartisan committee was in wide agreement that Trump committed a crime when he pushed a conspiracy to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election, panelists were split over what to do about it, including whether to make a criminal referral of Trump to the Justice Department, according to four sources connected to the committee.
The internal debate spilled into plain view in June when the committee’s chairman, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, repeatedly told a group of reporters at the Capitol that the panel would not be issuing any criminal referrals, a declaration that several of his fellow committee members were quick to push back on.
Schiff said Sunday he wouldn’t disclose information about the focus of the select committee’s public hearing Wednesday, which will likely be its last until the panel releases its final report.
“I think it’ll be potentially more sweeping than some of the other hearings, but it too will be in a very thematic – it will tell the story about a key element of Donald Trump’s plot to overturn the election,” he said.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, another January 6 panelist, said Sunday that the upcoming public hearing would share “details” learned by the committee since its last hearing in August.
The Maryland Democrat told NBC News that he expects Wednesday’s hearing to be the last presentation of its investigation, but he’s “hopeful” the committee will hold a hearing presenting recommendations to Congress.
Raskin added that the goal of Wednesday’s hearing is for panelists to reveal the newest findings in the investigation to supplement the broader narrative they presented in earlier hearings.
Discussing the 1:00 p.m. ET start time on Wednesday, Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California on Sunday noted, “In the past, Fox News does play our hearings if the hearing is in the daytime.”
“So that’s a factor in reaching an audience that is not watching CNN,” Lofgren, a member of the panel, told CNN’s Alex Marquardt.
Asked about when the final report might be available, Lofgren said, “I think we’ve gotten a lot of information out, but I think it’s highly unlikely that the final report could be done before early November.”
“It’s a huge amount of information,” she continued.
“We’re working hard to put it together."
"It may be possible to provide discrete pieces of evidence that have not yet been in the public arena, we’re not sure yet.”
Logren also said that former Vice President Mike Pence’s advisers have walked back his previous suggestion that he would give “due consideration” to an invitation to testify before the panel.
She cautioned that the committee didn’t have time for a “subpoena fight” with Pence or Trump before the select committee winds down at the end of the year.
“Given that select committees of this Congress – not just this select committee but all the select committees – exist only for the life of the Congress, if we were trying to get into a subpoena fight with either the former vice president or the former President, that litigation could not be concluded during the life of this Congress,” she said.
Schiff, when asked by Tapper about the committee obtaining Secret Service communications related to the riot, said the panel was still going through them.
“We are still going through them because they are very voluminous."
"I will say they’re not a substitute for having the text messages that were apparently erased from those devices, and we are still investigating how that came about and why that came about."
"And I hope and believe the Justice Department on that issue is also looking at whether laws were broken and the destruction of that evidence,” Schiff said.
“But we do have a mountain of information that we need to go through.”
Thompson said earlier this month that the communications turned over to the January 6 committee included “a combination of a number of text messages, radio traffic, that kind of thing."
"Just thousands of exhibits.”
He added that the texts that were handed over were “primarily” from the day before and during the riot.
Meanwhile, Democratic Rep. Pete Aguilar of California, another member of the committee, reemphasized the panel’s desire to obtain further testimony from former US Secret Service Assistant Director Tony Ornato, who retired last month.
“We remain deeply wanting to hear from him,” he said Sunday on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”
Ornato has met with the committee twice but has not agreed to a meeting since former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson told the committee Ornato had told her Trump was irate upon learning his security detail wouldn’t take him to the US Capitol the day of the insurrection.
Lawmakers push back on Trump
Schiff, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, added his voice Sunday to a growing group of lawmakers pushing back on Trump’s claim that he could simply declassify classified documents by “thinking about it.”
“No, that’s not how it works."
"Those comments don’t demonstrate much intelligence of any kind,” he told Tapper.
“If you could simply declassify by thinking about it, then frankly, if that’s his view, he’s even more dangerous than we may have thought.”
He continued: “With that view, he could simply spout off on anything he read in a Presidential Daily Brief or anything he was briefed on by the CIA director to a visiting Russian delegation or any other delegation and simply say, ‘Well, I thought about it and therefore, when the words came out of my mouth, they were declassified.’”
Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 3 Republican in the chamber, also rejected Trump’s claim on Sunday, telling ABC News that he doesn’t “think a president can declassify documents by saying so.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... aeb555d690
"Schiff says any criminal referral for Trump by the January 6 committee should be decided unanimously"
Daniella Diaz
6 NOVEMBER 2022
US Rep. Adam Schiff, who serves on the House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection, says that if the panel makes a criminal referral for former President Donald Trump related to the riot at the US Capitol, it should be made unanimously.
“We operate with a high degree of consensus and unanimity,” the California Democrat told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union” on Sunday.
“It will be certainly, I think, my recommendation, my feeling, that we should make referrals, but we will get to a decision as a committee, and we will all abide by that decision, and I will join our committee members if they feel differently.”
CNN reported earlier this year that although the bipartisan committee was in wide agreement that Trump committed a crime when he pushed a conspiracy to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election, panelists were split over what to do about it, including whether to make a criminal referral of Trump to the Justice Department, according to four sources connected to the committee.
The internal debate spilled into plain view in June when the committee’s chairman, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, repeatedly told a group of reporters at the Capitol that the panel would not be issuing any criminal referrals, a declaration that several of his fellow committee members were quick to push back on.
Schiff said Sunday he wouldn’t disclose information about the focus of the select committee’s public hearing Wednesday, which will likely be its last until the panel releases its final report.
“I think it’ll be potentially more sweeping than some of the other hearings, but it too will be in a very thematic – it will tell the story about a key element of Donald Trump’s plot to overturn the election,” he said.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, another January 6 panelist, said Sunday that the upcoming public hearing would share “details” learned by the committee since its last hearing in August.
The Maryland Democrat told NBC News that he expects Wednesday’s hearing to be the last presentation of its investigation, but he’s “hopeful” the committee will hold a hearing presenting recommendations to Congress.
Raskin added that the goal of Wednesday’s hearing is for panelists to reveal the newest findings in the investigation to supplement the broader narrative they presented in earlier hearings.
Discussing the 1:00 p.m. ET start time on Wednesday, Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California on Sunday noted, “In the past, Fox News does play our hearings if the hearing is in the daytime.”
“So that’s a factor in reaching an audience that is not watching CNN,” Lofgren, a member of the panel, told CNN’s Alex Marquardt.
Asked about when the final report might be available, Lofgren said, “I think we’ve gotten a lot of information out, but I think it’s highly unlikely that the final report could be done before early November.”
“It’s a huge amount of information,” she continued.
“We’re working hard to put it together."
"It may be possible to provide discrete pieces of evidence that have not yet been in the public arena, we’re not sure yet.”
Logren also said that former Vice President Mike Pence’s advisers have walked back his previous suggestion that he would give “due consideration” to an invitation to testify before the panel.
She cautioned that the committee didn’t have time for a “subpoena fight” with Pence or Trump before the select committee winds down at the end of the year.
“Given that select committees of this Congress – not just this select committee but all the select committees – exist only for the life of the Congress, if we were trying to get into a subpoena fight with either the former vice president or the former President, that litigation could not be concluded during the life of this Congress,” she said.
Schiff, when asked by Tapper about the committee obtaining Secret Service communications related to the riot, said the panel was still going through them.
“We are still going through them because they are very voluminous."
"I will say they’re not a substitute for having the text messages that were apparently erased from those devices, and we are still investigating how that came about and why that came about."
"And I hope and believe the Justice Department on that issue is also looking at whether laws were broken and the destruction of that evidence,” Schiff said.
“But we do have a mountain of information that we need to go through.”
Thompson said earlier this month that the communications turned over to the January 6 committee included “a combination of a number of text messages, radio traffic, that kind of thing."
"Just thousands of exhibits.”
He added that the texts that were handed over were “primarily” from the day before and during the riot.
Meanwhile, Democratic Rep. Pete Aguilar of California, another member of the committee, reemphasized the panel’s desire to obtain further testimony from former US Secret Service Assistant Director Tony Ornato, who retired last month.
“We remain deeply wanting to hear from him,” he said Sunday on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”
Ornato has met with the committee twice but has not agreed to a meeting since former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson told the committee Ornato had told her Trump was irate upon learning his security detail wouldn’t take him to the US Capitol the day of the insurrection.
Lawmakers push back on Trump
Schiff, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, added his voice Sunday to a growing group of lawmakers pushing back on Trump’s claim that he could simply declassify classified documents by “thinking about it.”
“No, that’s not how it works."
"Those comments don’t demonstrate much intelligence of any kind,” he told Tapper.
“If you could simply declassify by thinking about it, then frankly, if that’s his view, he’s even more dangerous than we may have thought.”
He continued: “With that view, he could simply spout off on anything he read in a Presidential Daily Brief or anything he was briefed on by the CIA director to a visiting Russian delegation or any other delegation and simply say, ‘Well, I thought about it and therefore, when the words came out of my mouth, they were declassified.’”
Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 3 Republican in the chamber, also rejected Trump’s claim on Sunday, telling ABC News that he doesn’t “think a president can declassify documents by saying so.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... aeb555d690
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
POLITICO
"Schiff passes on Dem leadership bid as Pelosi's future stays murky"
By Sarah Ferris and Nicholas Wu
16 NOVEMBER 2022
Adam Schiff has decided not to seek a top House Democratic leadership post in the next Congress and is instead turning his focus to a potential Senate run, according to multiple people familiar with his decision.
The California Democrat has privately weighed his future in recent months, meeting with Democratic colleagues to gauge support for a potential House leadership bid.
Schiff had mulled a bid for the caucus’ No. 1 role — likely to be minority leader, as Republicans are just one seat away from flipping the House after last Tuesday’s election — though he had not officially jumped into the race.
One of the party’s top fundraisers, Schiff honed his brand as an anti-Donald Trump crusader as Intelligence Committee chair and a manager of the former president's first impeachment.
Now he's instead looking toward a Senate campaign in 2024, with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) expected to not seek another term.
One potential wrinkle for Schiff there: California Gov. Gavin Newsom has committed to naming a Black woman to Feinstein's Senate seat if she chooses to retire before her term is over.
Privately, several Democrats acknowledged it was unlikely Schiff could make up ground to threaten the current frontrunner for the caucus' top post, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).
While Jeffries has steadily built up support, a huge question continues to hang over him — and the entire caucus: Whether Speaker Nancy Pelosi will decide to step down as party leader after 20 years.
Pelosi is widely expected to announce her decision this week, as soon as control of the House is officially called for Republicans.
Schiff’s future in the House will look different in at least one major way next year: House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has vowed to block him from serving as the intelligence panel's top Democrat.
Schiff has faced withering GOP criticism for his handling of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 6ea67090ae
"Schiff passes on Dem leadership bid as Pelosi's future stays murky"
By Sarah Ferris and Nicholas Wu
16 NOVEMBER 2022
Adam Schiff has decided not to seek a top House Democratic leadership post in the next Congress and is instead turning his focus to a potential Senate run, according to multiple people familiar with his decision.
The California Democrat has privately weighed his future in recent months, meeting with Democratic colleagues to gauge support for a potential House leadership bid.
Schiff had mulled a bid for the caucus’ No. 1 role — likely to be minority leader, as Republicans are just one seat away from flipping the House after last Tuesday’s election — though he had not officially jumped into the race.
One of the party’s top fundraisers, Schiff honed his brand as an anti-Donald Trump crusader as Intelligence Committee chair and a manager of the former president's first impeachment.
Now he's instead looking toward a Senate campaign in 2024, with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) expected to not seek another term.
One potential wrinkle for Schiff there: California Gov. Gavin Newsom has committed to naming a Black woman to Feinstein's Senate seat if she chooses to retire before her term is over.
Privately, several Democrats acknowledged it was unlikely Schiff could make up ground to threaten the current frontrunner for the caucus' top post, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).
While Jeffries has steadily built up support, a huge question continues to hang over him — and the entire caucus: Whether Speaker Nancy Pelosi will decide to step down as party leader after 20 years.
Pelosi is widely expected to announce her decision this week, as soon as control of the House is officially called for Republicans.
Schiff’s future in the House will look different in at least one major way next year: House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has vowed to block him from serving as the intelligence panel's top Democrat.
Schiff has faced withering GOP criticism for his handling of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 6ea67090ae
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
THE HILL
"Schiff knocks McCarthy’s threat of removal from Intelligence Committee"
Julia Mueller
27 NOVEMBER 2022
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on Sunday hit back at House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) for vowing to oust Schiff from the House Intelligence Committee for his handling of the investigation into alleged ties between former President Trump’s campaign and Russia.
“McCarthy’s problem is not with what I have said about Russia."
"McCarthy’s problem is, he can’t get to 218 without Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar and Matt Gaetz."
"And so he will do whatever they ask."
"And, right now, they’re asking for me to be removed from our committees."
"And he’s willing to do it."
"He’s willing to do anything they ask."
"And that’s the problem,” Schiff said on CNN’s “State of the Union,” referring to conservative Republican representatives from Georgia, Arizona and Florida, respectively.
McCarthy is vying to become Speaker when the next Congress convenes and has been vocal about his plans for if he takes the top spot, vowing to remove Schiff and Democratic Reps. Eric Swalwell (Calif.) and Ilhan Omar (Minn.) from their committee positions.
McCarthy won the House GOP nomination to be Speaker in a 188-31 vote, but he needs to secure a majority of a floor vote among the full lower chamber to secure the gavel.
“Kevin McCarthy has no ideology."
"He has no core set of beliefs."
"It’s very hard not only to get to 218 that way — it’s even more difficult to keep 218."
"That’s his problem,” Schiff said on Sunday.
“So, he will misrepresent my record."
"He will misrepresent Eric Swalwell or Ilhan Omar, whatever he needs to do to get the votes of the QAnon caucus within his conference.”
Schiff’s comments come a week after Omar swung back at McCarthy over his plans to oust her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, accusing the GOP of wielding “fear, xenophobia, Islamophobia and racism” to target her and promulgate hatred toward “Muslim and African voices.”
Schiff on Sunday also swung back at McCarthy’s criticisms of his Trump-Russia probe, defending his assertions that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
“McCarthy apparently doesn’t think it’s collusion if your campaign manager is giving inside polling data and battle strategy in key states to an agent of Russian intelligence, while the Russians are helping your campaign, but most Americans would call that collusion,” Schiff said.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... b76deb2e44
"Schiff knocks McCarthy’s threat of removal from Intelligence Committee"
Julia Mueller
27 NOVEMBER 2022
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on Sunday hit back at House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) for vowing to oust Schiff from the House Intelligence Committee for his handling of the investigation into alleged ties between former President Trump’s campaign and Russia.
“McCarthy’s problem is not with what I have said about Russia."
"McCarthy’s problem is, he can’t get to 218 without Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar and Matt Gaetz."
"And so he will do whatever they ask."
"And, right now, they’re asking for me to be removed from our committees."
"And he’s willing to do it."
"He’s willing to do anything they ask."
"And that’s the problem,” Schiff said on CNN’s “State of the Union,” referring to conservative Republican representatives from Georgia, Arizona and Florida, respectively.
McCarthy is vying to become Speaker when the next Congress convenes and has been vocal about his plans for if he takes the top spot, vowing to remove Schiff and Democratic Reps. Eric Swalwell (Calif.) and Ilhan Omar (Minn.) from their committee positions.
McCarthy won the House GOP nomination to be Speaker in a 188-31 vote, but he needs to secure a majority of a floor vote among the full lower chamber to secure the gavel.
“Kevin McCarthy has no ideology."
"He has no core set of beliefs."
"It’s very hard not only to get to 218 that way — it’s even more difficult to keep 218."
"That’s his problem,” Schiff said on Sunday.
“So, he will misrepresent my record."
"He will misrepresent Eric Swalwell or Ilhan Omar, whatever he needs to do to get the votes of the QAnon caucus within his conference.”
Schiff’s comments come a week after Omar swung back at McCarthy over his plans to oust her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, accusing the GOP of wielding “fear, xenophobia, Islamophobia and racism” to target her and promulgate hatred toward “Muslim and African voices.”
Schiff on Sunday also swung back at McCarthy’s criticisms of his Trump-Russia probe, defending his assertions that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
“McCarthy apparently doesn’t think it’s collusion if your campaign manager is giving inside polling data and battle strategy in key states to an agent of Russian intelligence, while the Russians are helping your campaign, but most Americans would call that collusion,” Schiff said.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... b76deb2e44
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
"Adam Schiff: Jan. 6 committee will 'scrub' evidence before final report"
Brady Knox
27 NOVEMBER 2022
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said that the Jan. 6 committee will have to "scrub" some evidence from its final report before Republicans take over the House next year.
In an appearance on CNN's State of the Union, Schiff discussed the activities of the House Jan. 6 committee, on which he sits.
CNN host Dana Bash reminded Schiff that Ohio Republican Jim Jordan will be made head of the Judiciary Committee in a few months and has promised to go through all the evidence left out of the final report.
Asking if all evidence will be made public, Schiff insisted there will be transparency — to a point.
"The evidence will all be made public," Schiff said.
"Now, we will have to make sure that we scrub that evidence for personally identifiable information, that the evidence that we provide protects people's security, it doesn't put them at risk."
"So, there are things that we're going to have to do along those lines."
Renewed doubt has been cast on the committee after several staffers expressed their grievances over the direction it was headed, fueled by concerns about Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY).
Due to her influence, they claimed, the committee's focus was too much on former President Donald Trump's actions during the riot, while findings examining intelligence and law enforcement failures were going to be excluded from the final report entirely.
Schiff rejected the characterizations, saying Cheney has performed well on the committee.
"I have never viewed it that way."
"And I think her role on the committee has been indispensable."
"I have tremendous respect for her and for Adam Kinzinger," Schiff said, referencing the only other Republican on the committee.
"They have shown a lot of courage and backbone, something in very short supply in the GOP these days."
"So the committee would not have been the same without both of their participation, and I have nothing but respect for both of them."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... b76deb2e44
"Adam Schiff: Jan. 6 committee will 'scrub' evidence before final report"
Brady Knox
27 NOVEMBER 2022
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said that the Jan. 6 committee will have to "scrub" some evidence from its final report before Republicans take over the House next year.
In an appearance on CNN's State of the Union, Schiff discussed the activities of the House Jan. 6 committee, on which he sits.
CNN host Dana Bash reminded Schiff that Ohio Republican Jim Jordan will be made head of the Judiciary Committee in a few months and has promised to go through all the evidence left out of the final report.
Asking if all evidence will be made public, Schiff insisted there will be transparency — to a point.
"The evidence will all be made public," Schiff said.
"Now, we will have to make sure that we scrub that evidence for personally identifiable information, that the evidence that we provide protects people's security, it doesn't put them at risk."
"So, there are things that we're going to have to do along those lines."
Renewed doubt has been cast on the committee after several staffers expressed their grievances over the direction it was headed, fueled by concerns about Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY).
Due to her influence, they claimed, the committee's focus was too much on former President Donald Trump's actions during the riot, while findings examining intelligence and law enforcement failures were going to be excluded from the final report entirely.
Schiff rejected the characterizations, saying Cheney has performed well on the committee.
"I have never viewed it that way."
"And I think her role on the committee has been indispensable."
"I have tremendous respect for her and for Adam Kinzinger," Schiff said, referencing the only other Republican on the committee.
"They have shown a lot of courage and backbone, something in very short supply in the GOP these days."
"So the committee would not have been the same without both of their participation, and I have nothing but respect for both of them."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... b76deb2e44
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
FOX NEWS
"Adam Schiff dragged after ‘Twitter Files’ shows he asked site to suspend journo: ‘Expel Schiff from Congress'"
Story by Gabriel Hays
4 JANUARY 2023
Critics of Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., were outraged after reading Elon Musk and journalist Matt Taibbi’s latest "Twitter Files" entry alleging that Schiff lobbied Twitter to suspend journalists from the platform.
Published Tuesday, the latest round of the Twitter Files – internal documents revealing how Twitter engaged in censorship and promoted disinformation in tandem with government agencies for the past few years – revealed that Schiff’s office asked Twitter to remove journalist Paul Sperry and others from the site.
Taibbi, who published the Twitter Files post-by-post to Twitter at the behest of Musk, provided documentation showing that "the office for Democrat and House Intel Committee chief Adam Schiff" asked "Twitter to ban journalist Paul Sperry."
The document Taibbi shared featured correspondence between the "House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee" – Schiff’s office – and Twitter, which included a request to "Suspend the many accounts, including @GregRubini and @paulsperry, which repeatedly promoted false QAnon conspiracies and harassed [REDACTED]."
As Taibbi’s documentation indicated however, Twitter was reluctant to fulfill such a request, responding, "we’ll review the accounts again but I believe [REDACTED] mentioned only one qualified for suspension."
In response to Schiff’s office demanding Twitter remove "any and all content" as well as "quotes, retweets, and reactions to that content" concerning its staff members, Twitter flat-out refused.
A Twitter staffer responded, "no, this isn’t feasible/we don’t do this."
Sperry, an author and New York Post columnist, was later suspended from Twitter for unrelated reasons, telling conservative commentator Glenn Beck in August 2022 it was due to tweets of his about the FBI’s raid on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence.
However, Sperry was reinstated to Twitter this week and immediately responded to the latest Twitter Files revelations.
He claimed that the real reason Schiff sought his suspension was because, at the time, Sperry was reporting on the whistleblower who exposed the phone call to Ukraine that prompted Trump’s first impeachment.
On Tuesday evening, Sperry wrote, "Around the same time Adam Schiff's office was lobbying Twitter to have me banned, Schiff's chief of staff Patrick Boland was making threats to my employer http://RealClearInvestigations.com about my stories exposing Schiff's impeachment whistleblower & his ties to Schiff's staffer."
In another tweet, Sperry linked to his 2019 article, and captioned it, saying, "Here's the real reason House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff secretly lobbied Twitter to have me
banned -- he was angry I outed his anonymous impeachment ‘whistleblower.’"
Conservatives were appalled at Schiff’s apparent attempts to silence Sperry on Twitter, and used the platform to rip into the lawmaker.
UFC champion Jake Shields felt as though Schiff should get a taste of his own medicine, tweeting, "I would like to request Elon Musk remove Adam Schiff from twitter."
Breitbart News Pentagon correspondent Kristina Wong summed up the shocking censorship story, tweeting, "Then-Intel Committee Chairman Adam Schiff’s office wanted Twitter to shut down one of the most effective journalists pushing back on his phony Russia collusion narrative."
"How very anti-freedom of the press this is."
The Spectator contributing editor Stephen L. Miller commented sarcastically, "Adam Schiff just using his 1A rights."
Journalist Adam Housley wrote, "This is disturbing."
"I don’t care what political party you follow…this cannot be accepted."
"@AdamSchiff needs to answer."
RealClearInvestigations senior writer Mark Hemingway tweeted, "Of course, Sperry's real crime was doing vital reporting exposing the mistruths about Russia collusion, a subject Schiff lied about for years."
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton asked if this constituted "Another reason to expel Schiff from Congress?"
Conservative actor Randy Quaid quipped, "Schiff is a piece of Schiff!"
Conservative pundit and lawyer Will Chamberlain offered a solution, tweeting, "Adam Schiff should be expelled from Congress."
Author Jim Hanson remarked, "The only surprising thing here Is they didn't just wipe everyone out."
"The sickening thing is @RepAdamSchiff abused his office and oath to the Constitution with this malfeasance."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... e713ef206f
"Adam Schiff dragged after ‘Twitter Files’ shows he asked site to suspend journo: ‘Expel Schiff from Congress'"
Story by Gabriel Hays
4 JANUARY 2023
Critics of Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., were outraged after reading Elon Musk and journalist Matt Taibbi’s latest "Twitter Files" entry alleging that Schiff lobbied Twitter to suspend journalists from the platform.
Published Tuesday, the latest round of the Twitter Files – internal documents revealing how Twitter engaged in censorship and promoted disinformation in tandem with government agencies for the past few years – revealed that Schiff’s office asked Twitter to remove journalist Paul Sperry and others from the site.
Taibbi, who published the Twitter Files post-by-post to Twitter at the behest of Musk, provided documentation showing that "the office for Democrat and House Intel Committee chief Adam Schiff" asked "Twitter to ban journalist Paul Sperry."
The document Taibbi shared featured correspondence between the "House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee" – Schiff’s office – and Twitter, which included a request to "Suspend the many accounts, including @GregRubini and @paulsperry, which repeatedly promoted false QAnon conspiracies and harassed [REDACTED]."
As Taibbi’s documentation indicated however, Twitter was reluctant to fulfill such a request, responding, "we’ll review the accounts again but I believe [REDACTED] mentioned only one qualified for suspension."
In response to Schiff’s office demanding Twitter remove "any and all content" as well as "quotes, retweets, and reactions to that content" concerning its staff members, Twitter flat-out refused.
A Twitter staffer responded, "no, this isn’t feasible/we don’t do this."
Sperry, an author and New York Post columnist, was later suspended from Twitter for unrelated reasons, telling conservative commentator Glenn Beck in August 2022 it was due to tweets of his about the FBI’s raid on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence.
However, Sperry was reinstated to Twitter this week and immediately responded to the latest Twitter Files revelations.
He claimed that the real reason Schiff sought his suspension was because, at the time, Sperry was reporting on the whistleblower who exposed the phone call to Ukraine that prompted Trump’s first impeachment.
On Tuesday evening, Sperry wrote, "Around the same time Adam Schiff's office was lobbying Twitter to have me banned, Schiff's chief of staff Patrick Boland was making threats to my employer http://RealClearInvestigations.com about my stories exposing Schiff's impeachment whistleblower & his ties to Schiff's staffer."
In another tweet, Sperry linked to his 2019 article, and captioned it, saying, "Here's the real reason House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff secretly lobbied Twitter to have me
banned -- he was angry I outed his anonymous impeachment ‘whistleblower.’"
Conservatives were appalled at Schiff’s apparent attempts to silence Sperry on Twitter, and used the platform to rip into the lawmaker.
UFC champion Jake Shields felt as though Schiff should get a taste of his own medicine, tweeting, "I would like to request Elon Musk remove Adam Schiff from twitter."
Breitbart News Pentagon correspondent Kristina Wong summed up the shocking censorship story, tweeting, "Then-Intel Committee Chairman Adam Schiff’s office wanted Twitter to shut down one of the most effective journalists pushing back on his phony Russia collusion narrative."
"How very anti-freedom of the press this is."
The Spectator contributing editor Stephen L. Miller commented sarcastically, "Adam Schiff just using his 1A rights."
Journalist Adam Housley wrote, "This is disturbing."
"I don’t care what political party you follow…this cannot be accepted."
"@AdamSchiff needs to answer."
RealClearInvestigations senior writer Mark Hemingway tweeted, "Of course, Sperry's real crime was doing vital reporting exposing the mistruths about Russia collusion, a subject Schiff lied about for years."
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton asked if this constituted "Another reason to expel Schiff from Congress?"
Conservative actor Randy Quaid quipped, "Schiff is a piece of Schiff!"
Conservative pundit and lawyer Will Chamberlain offered a solution, tweeting, "Adam Schiff should be expelled from Congress."
Author Jim Hanson remarked, "The only surprising thing here Is they didn't just wipe everyone out."
"The sickening thing is @RepAdamSchiff abused his office and oath to the Constitution with this malfeasance."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... e713ef206f
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
Mediaite
"Adam Schiff: We Can’t ‘Exclude the Possibility’ Biden’s Handling of Documents Endangered National Security"
Story by Ken Meyer
15 JANUARY 2023
Congressman Adam Schiff (R-CA) is allowing for the possibly that the President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents endangered America’s national security.
Schiff joined ABC News’ Jon Karl on Sunday, where he was asked if he approves Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision to appoint a special counsel to investigate the discovery of classified materials found at Biden’s home and former office.
The congressman called it “the right move,” saying “the attorney general has to make sure that not only is justice evenly applied, but the appearances of justice are also satisfactory to the public.”
“I don’t think he had any choice but to appoint a special counsel,” Schiff said.
“And I think that special counsel will do the proper assessment.”
Schiff went on to call for a national security risk assessment on Biden’s documents case, plus the documents Donald Trump improperly kept at Mar-a-Lago.
This prompted Karl to ask if Schiff thought national security was possibly “jeopardized” by Biden just as Trump might’ve done.
“I don’t think we can exclude the possibility without knowing more of the facts,” said Schiff.
“We have asked for an assessment in the intelligence community of the Mar-a-Lago documents."
"I think we ought to get that same assessment of the documents found in the think tank, as well as the home of President Biden.”
Karl asked if the White House should’ve been more forthcoming about the documents’ discovery, given how it happened just days before the midterm elections.
“I think the administration will need to answer that question."
"I’m going to reserve judgment until they do,” Schiff said.
He continued by pointing out that Biden has been complying with the investigations into his handling of documents, unlike Trump, whose residence was raided by the FBI after he refused to comply with a subpoenaed demand for the return of his documents.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 24f8f29819
"Adam Schiff: We Can’t ‘Exclude the Possibility’ Biden’s Handling of Documents Endangered National Security"
Story by Ken Meyer
15 JANUARY 2023
Congressman Adam Schiff (R-CA) is allowing for the possibly that the President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents endangered America’s national security.
Schiff joined ABC News’ Jon Karl on Sunday, where he was asked if he approves Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision to appoint a special counsel to investigate the discovery of classified materials found at Biden’s home and former office.
The congressman called it “the right move,” saying “the attorney general has to make sure that not only is justice evenly applied, but the appearances of justice are also satisfactory to the public.”
“I don’t think he had any choice but to appoint a special counsel,” Schiff said.
“And I think that special counsel will do the proper assessment.”
Schiff went on to call for a national security risk assessment on Biden’s documents case, plus the documents Donald Trump improperly kept at Mar-a-Lago.
This prompted Karl to ask if Schiff thought national security was possibly “jeopardized” by Biden just as Trump might’ve done.
“I don’t think we can exclude the possibility without knowing more of the facts,” said Schiff.
“We have asked for an assessment in the intelligence community of the Mar-a-Lago documents."
"I think we ought to get that same assessment of the documents found in the think tank, as well as the home of President Biden.”
Karl asked if the White House should’ve been more forthcoming about the documents’ discovery, given how it happened just days before the midterm elections.
“I think the administration will need to answer that question."
"I’m going to reserve judgment until they do,” Schiff said.
He continued by pointing out that Biden has been complying with the investigations into his handling of documents, unlike Trump, whose residence was raided by the FBI after he refused to comply with a subpoenaed demand for the return of his documents.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 24f8f29819
Re: ADAM SCHIFF
FOX NEWS
"Schiff hit with ethics complaint one day into Senate campaign for using Trump impeachment video"
Story by Aaron Kliegman
27 JANUARY 2023
An ethics watchdog group on Friday asked the Office of Congressional Ethics investigate Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., for using footage from the Senate floor in an ad announcing his run for the Senate.
The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) sent a complaint to the OCE's chief counsel that asked for an immediate probe into whether Schiff "abused official resources for political purposes" by using the video.
Schiff announced Thursday that he's running for the Senate in 2024, via a video that was shared on his Twitter account.
That video includes footage of Schiff speaking on the Senate floor during impeachment proceedings against former President Donald Trump.
"This is a clear violation of House ethics rules and federal law," said Kendra Arnold, executive director of FACT.
"Rep. Schiff has been in Congress for over two decades and undoubtedly knows that official government resources cannot be used for political purposes."
"Rep. Schiff must immediately take down the video and cease distribution of the footage, and the Office of Congressional Ethics should move swiftly to investigate and sanction Rep. Schiff for this breach."
House members are prohibited from using House and Senate floor video for campaign purposes, according to FACT.
"Federal law states that 'appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law,'" the complaint said.
"To enforce this law, the ethics rules prohibit members from using any official resource for campaign or political purposes."
"'Official resources' includes anything funded by taxpayers, such as a member's official website, social media accounts, and photographs and video from the House or Senate floor."
"To make it abundantly clear," the complaint added, "both the House ethics rules and Senate rules specifically identify congressional video of floor proceedings as official resources that members are prohibited from using for political purposes."
Some journalists have speculated on social media that Schiff may have found a legal workaround by using third-party news footage of the Senate floor – in this case, footage from NBC.
However, FACT argues House ethics rules clearly prohibit members from using either House or Senate video or photographs, because both are official government resources.
This apparently includes footage or a photo of floor proceedings, even it was reposted from a third-party source, such as a news organization.
"Members may not re-use an image of a floor proceeding published by a third-party, if the member could not use that image in the first instance," the House Ethics Committee stated in a 2017 report.
The complaint makes the case that the rule is broad and prohibits members not only from using the video but also from reposting from sources or using video obtained from news outlets.
"This is an important rule because it not only protects taxpayer-funded resources from abuse, but it also protects the integrity of official proceedings by reducing the incentive for members to make political speeches during official proceedings," the complaint said.
"One issue the House Ethics Manual acknowledges is the public perception that incumbents are simply using their office to run for re-election or to run for a higher office, and the reason for that perception is quite evident in Rep. Schiff's actions."
"Moreover, his use of official resources does not reflect credibly on the House."
Schiff's office didn't respond to a request for comment, nor did the Office of Congressional Ethics.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 2bf481a294
"Schiff hit with ethics complaint one day into Senate campaign for using Trump impeachment video"
Story by Aaron Kliegman
27 JANUARY 2023
An ethics watchdog group on Friday asked the Office of Congressional Ethics investigate Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., for using footage from the Senate floor in an ad announcing his run for the Senate.
The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) sent a complaint to the OCE's chief counsel that asked for an immediate probe into whether Schiff "abused official resources for political purposes" by using the video.
Schiff announced Thursday that he's running for the Senate in 2024, via a video that was shared on his Twitter account.
That video includes footage of Schiff speaking on the Senate floor during impeachment proceedings against former President Donald Trump.
"This is a clear violation of House ethics rules and federal law," said Kendra Arnold, executive director of FACT.
"Rep. Schiff has been in Congress for over two decades and undoubtedly knows that official government resources cannot be used for political purposes."
"Rep. Schiff must immediately take down the video and cease distribution of the footage, and the Office of Congressional Ethics should move swiftly to investigate and sanction Rep. Schiff for this breach."
House members are prohibited from using House and Senate floor video for campaign purposes, according to FACT.
"Federal law states that 'appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law,'" the complaint said.
"To enforce this law, the ethics rules prohibit members from using any official resource for campaign or political purposes."
"'Official resources' includes anything funded by taxpayers, such as a member's official website, social media accounts, and photographs and video from the House or Senate floor."
"To make it abundantly clear," the complaint added, "both the House ethics rules and Senate rules specifically identify congressional video of floor proceedings as official resources that members are prohibited from using for political purposes."
Some journalists have speculated on social media that Schiff may have found a legal workaround by using third-party news footage of the Senate floor – in this case, footage from NBC.
However, FACT argues House ethics rules clearly prohibit members from using either House or Senate video or photographs, because both are official government resources.
This apparently includes footage or a photo of floor proceedings, even it was reposted from a third-party source, such as a news organization.
"Members may not re-use an image of a floor proceeding published by a third-party, if the member could not use that image in the first instance," the House Ethics Committee stated in a 2017 report.
The complaint makes the case that the rule is broad and prohibits members not only from using the video but also from reposting from sources or using video obtained from news outlets.
"This is an important rule because it not only protects taxpayer-funded resources from abuse, but it also protects the integrity of official proceedings by reducing the incentive for members to make political speeches during official proceedings," the complaint said.
"One issue the House Ethics Manual acknowledges is the public perception that incumbents are simply using their office to run for re-election or to run for a higher office, and the reason for that perception is quite evident in Rep. Schiff's actions."
"Moreover, his use of official resources does not reflect credibly on the House."
Schiff's office didn't respond to a request for comment, nor did the Office of Congressional Ethics.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 2bf481a294