Here, via excerpts from Erin Kelly’s article at USA Today, is the latest incarnation of Adam Schiff telling us Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election:

 There is “ample evidence” that the Trump campaign colluded with Russians, but only special counsel Robert Mueller can decide if it’s enough to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee said Wednesday.

“There is already, in my view, ample evidence in the public domain on the issue of collusion if you’re willing to see it,” Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif, told reporters at a newsmaker breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. “If you want to blind yourself, then you can look the other way.”

The article then notes that Schiff goes on to cite the following as his basis for the “collusion” claim:

-Former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about talking in April 2016 to a professor with close ties to the Kremlin who told Papadopoulos that Moscow had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton.

Papadopoulos talked to a professor?  Wow.  Can someone show me the law against meeting with a professor with close ties to the Kremlin?  Next?

-Donald Trump Jr., Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort met with a Russian attorney at Trump Tower in June 2016 after being promised “dirt” on Clinton.

So they met with a Russian attorney – who had nothing to offer them, by the way…not that it matters, because there is no law against meeting with a Russian attorney to get dirt on Hillary Clinton.  Next?

-In July 2017,…..

forget that altogether.  It was a half year after the election took place, and therefore cannot possibly involve collusion during the campaign.

-Then-candidate Trump publicly asked the Russians in July 2016 to hack Clinton and find her “30,000 emails that are missing” from the personal email server she used while secretary of State.

Yep, Trump did say that.  In public, not in private, to a large crowd.  As a sarcastic throw-off comment.  Not even a good try, Adam.

-Former White House national security adviser Michael Flynn held secret conversations with Russian officials in December 2016….

whoops, isn’t that the month AFTER the campaign ended.  You can’t fill in the emptiness of your claim by loading it with stuff that had nothing to do with what you’re accusing Trump of and expect people to take you seriously.

And, finally, we have:

“All of this is evidence of collusion,” said Schiff, a former federal prosecutor. “Now, I’ve never said that there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s for Bob Mueller to decide. But to say there’s no evidence of collusion, you’d have to ignore all this.”

Uh, ignore WHAT?  Your re-recitation of the same old going-nowhere BS you’ve been spouting for the past year?

What a putz.

Hey, I have a great idea:  how about if Adam Schiff just shuts the %&*# up?


  • I read a commentary today that seemed to sum up what is going on in this investigation. The last few paragraphs I thought really nailed it.

    This is an investigation with no evidence of a crime, apart from politically motivated, anti-Trump investigators relying on a Hillary-funded dossier.

    Also contrary to every single person talking on MSNBC, Steele’s dossier is not like a neighbor who hates you telling the police you’re cooking meth in your basement. The police still have to investigate, don’t they?

    First of all, if after 18 months of police work, the only evidence that you’re cooking meth in your basement is STILL your neighbor’s bald accusation, reasonable people will conclude that your neighbor is a liar. That’s what the Steele dossier is. It was the only evidence of Trump’s collusion with Russia 18 months ago, and it’s the only evidence of Trump’s collusion with Russia today.

    Moreover, it’s not just the informant who hates the target. The investigators do, too. This is more like a police officer calling the police on his wife, sending himself on the call, shooting her, then writing up the police report concluding it was a justified shooting.

    When your entire investigation turns on a handful of people with corrupt motives, maybe it’s time to call off the investigation.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *