Schiff mimics Pelosi’s impeachment doubts…from ‘absolute proof’ to ‘absence of very graphic evidence’

(FILE PHOTO video screenshot)

House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff, a man whose unhealthy obsession with President Donald Trump has become the focal point of his life, inadvertently admitted Monday that he and his team of pseudo investigators have nothing substantive on the president.

He made the admission while speaking with CNN senior congressional correspondent Manu Raju about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s announcement that she doesn’t intend to pursue impeachment.

“I’m not for impeachment,” she bluntly said in an interview with The Washington Post published Monday afternoon. “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

Schiff concurred, telling Raju in statements made later that afternoon that “in the absence of very graphic evidence, it would be difficult to get the support of” the GOP-led Senate.

This unwitting admission provoked surprise among conservatives who’ve been hearing Democrats and their media allies clamor nonstop that Trump most certainly committed certain unnamed (and unidentified) crimes and must therefore be impeached for these mysterious crimes:

Just weeks earlier House Financial Services Committee chair Maxine Waters again reiterated her long-held belief that Trump is a criminal mastermind guilty of committing so-called high crimes.

“As you know I have been looking at this president before he was inaugurated, and I came out early talking about impeachment because I knew all about Manafort and Flynn and Sater and all of these people,” she said at the time to MSNBC host and mea culpa expert Chris Hayes.

Waters never once raised a single concern about then-businessman Trump before he announced his candidacy for office in the summer of 2015. Moreover, the conviction of Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort and his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, had zero to do with him. Flynn’s conviction was based on “process crimes,” while Manafort’s was based on shady actions he took years before he joined the president’s campaign.

As for Felix Sater, he’s a Russian-born real estate executive and longtime government informant who once worked with Cohen on an innocuous project to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. The lawyer’s convictions are unrelated to this deal.

Listen to Waters below:

HERE’S WHAT YOU’RE MISSING …

And regarding Schiff, after The New York Times ran a spurious report last year accusing Trump of having engaged in “suspect tax schemes” sometime in the past, he boasted to the media that there’s a legal precedent for impeaching the sitting president over past criminal activity.

Though over a year has passed since the Times ran its report and Schiff made his remarks, the president still hasn’t been charged with any crimes, let alone convicted.

Now flash back to early December, just a month or so after the Democrats retook the House.

“Top House Democrats have raised the prospect of impeachment or the real possibility of prison time for President Donald Trump if it’s proved that he directed illegal hush money payments to women, adding to the legal pressure on the president over the Russia investigation and other scandals,” the Associated Press reported at the time.

“There’s a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him, that he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time,” Schiff himself said at the time. “The bigger pardon question may come down the road as the next president has to determine whether to pardon Donald Trump.”

Only three months have passed since he made these remarks, and yet here he is now admitting there’s no “graphic evidence” of Trump committing any crimes. Why the change of heart? Could it be because these investigations have never been about justice but rather about winning elections?

Some of the president’s associates and supporters have warned that if Democrats prioritize harassing Trump over pursuing meaningful legislation, it could and will likely backfire on them by spurring the American people to hand the House back over to the Republicans.

And lo and behold, Pelosi and Schiff have suddenly decided to steer away from the path of impeachment. Is it just a coincidence, or is there more to this?

HERE’S WHAT YOU’RE MISSING …

Comments

Latest Articles