Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff went on repeated media tours and sounded off on the House floor following the 2016 election, claiming there was “plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight” regarding the Trump campaign and Russia — a false claim originally approved and advanced by failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
Schiff’s thoroughly discredited claims now appear to be even more damning in light of the release of the final version of special counsel John Durham’s report.
Legal scholar and George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley has called on Schiff to account for his apparent lies, suggesting that “this would be a good time for former House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff to reveal that evidence he said showed the Russian collusion …”
Here are but a few of the televised instances in which Schiff claimed there was evidence of collusion:
TheBlaze indicated Monday that Durham’s final report paints Schiff, at best, as a maligner.
Durham said the FBI utilized “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence” to open the investigation into the Trump campaign but did not follow the same standard when approaching alleged election interference in relation to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
Durham also found that the FBI “did not and could not corroborate any of the substantive allegations” made in the infamous Steele dossier of lurid accusations against then-candidate Donald Trump, and “neither U.S. nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”
“As noted, it was not until mid-September that the Crossfire Hurricane investigators received several of the Steele Reports. Within days of their receipt, the unvetted and unverified Steele Reports were used to support probable cause in the FBI’s FISA applications targeting [Carter] Page, a U.S. citizen who, for a period of time, had been an advisor to Trump,” the report says.
The Durham report further revealed that the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign was virtually baseless and that most of those involved and responsible knew that to be the case, including then-Vice President Joe Biden, then-President Barack Obama, CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey, and other partisans briefed on the so-called “Clinton Plan” on Aug. 3, 2016.
These revelations and those accompanying them in the report altogether appear to indicate that the confidence behind Schiff’s assertions was either similarly baseless or based on a sense that the actual truth would not ultimately come out.
Turley previously intimated that there might be something to the latter possibility, given Schiff’s vigorous and long-standing opposition to Durham’s investigation.
For instance, in November 2020, Schiff suggested congressional probes were bad for the country, despite having himself celebrated the initial Trump-Russia collusion investigation, reported Fox News Digital.
Schiff, who led the impeachment efforts against former President Donald Trump, suggested that concerted efforts to ascertain what really happened amounted to an “obstruction of the transition” of then-President-elect Joe Biden into power, then accused Republicans of “tearing down our democracy.”
In December 2020, the California Democrat appeared even more uneasy about the prospect that someone might discover it had all been a crock.
Schiff spoke out against then-Attorney General William Barr’s selection of John Durham to serve as special counsel and questioned whether Barr even had the authority to do so. He went farther to suggest that Biden’s attorney general should shut down the probe, which he claimed was “politically motivated,” reported the Daily Caller.
“I would presume the next attorney general will look to see if there is any merit to the work that John Durham is doing and make a rational decision about whether that should continue at any level,” said the former House Intelligence Committee chair.
Prior to fighting the Durham investigation, Schiff played defense for the FBI, claiming on Feb. 2, 2018, that “FBI and DOJ officials did not ‘abuse’ the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) process, omit material information, or subvert this vital tool to spy on the Trump campaign,” adding that “DOJ met the rigor, transparency, and evidentiary basis needed to meet FISA’s probable cause requirement.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!