7
   

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): You Might Say That's All OK. But I Don't Think It's OK.

 
 
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2019 08:45 pm
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): You Might Say That's All OK. But I Don't Think It's OK.

On Thursday, March 28, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), during a House Intelligence Committee open hearing, responded to Trump and Congressional Republican's calls for his resignation.

"You might say that's all OK. You might say that's just what you need to do to win. But I don't think it's OK. I think it's immoral. I think it's unethical. I think it's unpatriotic and, yes, I think it's corrupt - and evidence of collusion."

Published on March 28, 2019
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 7 • Views: 856 • Replies: 35

 
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2019 09:22 pm
Adam Schiff Lists All the Ways He Says Trump Campaign Colluded With Russia, Shuts Off Republican's Mic.


Published March 28, 2019
Quote:
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff presented all of the ways that members of President Donald Trump’s inner circle colluded with the Russians, both during and after the 2016 presidential campaign, in a public hearing Thursday.

The hearing was held less than one week after special counsel Robert Mueller issued a report on potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. The report has not yet been given to Congress, but Attorney General William Barr presented a four-page summary that noted that the special counsel does not plan to issue any further indictments.

Nevertheless, Schiff said Thursday that the evidence collected by the special counsel’s office demonstrated that President Donald Trump and his associates had behaved in a way that was unethical, corrupt and unpatriotic.

“My colleagues may think it’s OK that the Russians offered ‘dirt’ on a Democratic candidate for president as part of what was described as the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign. You might think that’s OK,” Schiff said to Republican lawmakers during the hearing. “My colleagues might think it’s OK that when that was offered to the son of the president, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the president’s son did not call the FBI, he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. No, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help of the Russians.”

Schiff went on: “You might think it’s OK that he took that meeting. You might think it’s OK that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience at running campaigns, took that meeting. You might think it’s OK that the president’s son-in-law also took that meeting. You might think it’s OK that they concealed it from the public.

"You might think it’s OK that their only disappointment from that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary Clinton wasn’t better. You might think it’s OK that when it was discovered, a year later, they then lied about that meeting and said that it was about adoptions. You might think that it’s OK that it was reported that the president helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s OK. I don’t.

“You might think it’s OK that the campaign chairman of a presidential campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian oligarch in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s OK, I don’t," Schiff continued, referring to reports that Manafort had offered briefings on the campaign to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska.

"You might think it’s OK that that campaign chairman offered polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s OK," Schiff added, referring to court documents demonstrating that Manafort had met Konstantin Kilimnik, a suspected member of Russian intelligence, in Madrid and gave him polling data on the 2016 presidential election.

"You might think it’s OK that the president himself called on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, if they were listening. You might think it’s OK that later that day the Russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s OK," Schiff said.

"You might think it’s OK that the president's son-in-law attempted to establish a secret back channel of communication with the Russians through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s OK," he added.

"You might think it’s OK that an associate of the president made direct contact with the GRU [Russian military intelligence], through Guccifer 2.0 and WikiLeaks, that is considered a hostile intelligence agency," Schiff continued, referring to Trump associate Roger Stone's communications with a hacker of Democratic National Committee data named Guccifer, as well as WikiLeaks." You might think it’s OK that a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile intelligence agency had to say in terms of dirt on his opponent.

“You might think it’s OK that the national security adviser designate secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador, undermining U.S. sanctions, and you might think it’s OK that he lied about it to the FBI,” Schiff said, referring to Michael Flynn. “You might say that’s all OK, that’s what you need to do to win. But I don’t think it’s OK.”

Schiff added: "Now I have always said that the question of whether this amounts to proof of conspiracy was another matter. Whether the special counsel could prove beyond a reasonable doubt the proof of that crime would be up to the special counsel, and I would accept his decision, and I do. But I do not think that conduct, criminal or not, is OK. And the day we do, think that's OK, is the day we look back and say that is the day that America lost its way."

The hearing grew heated shortly after Schiff's speech when the chairman refused to yield to allow Republicans to respond and shut off the microphone of one of the Republicans who was speaking. Nine Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee have signed a letter calling on Schiff to resign and presented it at Thursday’s hearing.

https://www.newsweek.com/adam-schiff-trump-collusion-russia-1378232
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 08:27 am
That's a nice list. Just a start, but a nice start.
revelette1
 
  3  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 08:38 am
Hopefully more brave democrats will join him and keep up the fight to both have the Mueller report sent to congress and second, to dispel the myth that said report exonerates Trump when Barr said the report did not exonerate him of obstruction.

Quote:
“While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” says Mueller’s report, according to one of the few direct quotations from the special counsel’s report included in Barr’s summary
.

https://www.vox.com/2019/3/28/18286356/trump-mueller-report-lies-grand-rapids-michigan-speech
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 09:46 am
@revelette1,
Quote:
Hopefully more brave democrats

Laughing Laughing Laughing
You got it bad. It is over and unproductive for this country and the Democratic party. So keep it up. another 4 years of Trump is what all this guarantees.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 09:49 am
@maporsche,
Quote:
That's a nice list. Just a start, but a nice start.

Why is Trump being persecuted for winning an election? You don't have a truthful answer, based on fact, do you?
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 10:48 am
@coldjoint,
Quote:
Why is Trump being persecuted for winning an election?

He isn't being "persecuted" for winning an election or for any other reason other than his (and his minions') suspicious conduct. Do you think Clinton was investigated because he won an election or do you accept that Congress and the Justice Department have the responsibility to determine whether or not a president has committed a crime when possible illegal conduct is suspected or alleged?
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 10:53 am
@hightor,
Quote:
suspicious conduct.

Almost 3 years and 30 million was not enough? It is persecution. Your constant whine does not change the truth. Period.
neptuneblue
 
  3  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 10:56 am
@coldjoint,
Lol! Truth. Funny you should mention that...


It's not like Trump tells much of it. Maybe if he told the truth, he wouldn't
be called a liar as often as he is.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 11:58 am
@neptuneblue,
Quote:
It's not like Trump tells much of it.

Let's see. Trump told the truth about the economy, Trump told the truth about being a strong ally of Israel. Trump told the truth about taking back any land ISIS held. Those are things that matter, not accusations and fairy tales.

None of his lies have hurt this country. Assholes like Schiff are trying to tear us apart, and he has you helping him.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 12:18 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
Almost 3 years and 30 million was not enough?

How about the $52 million Starr probe? Over six years five independent counsels investigating Clinton administration spent a total of $95.3 million. Thorough investigations aren't cheap.

Mueller's team uncovered criminal behavior and secured indictments and convictions. They also provided more details about Russian efforts to subvert the '16 election. And the results of the investigation were a gift to Trump. So what are you complaining about?
NSFW (view)
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 12:52 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

Mueller's team uncovered criminal behavior and secured indictments and convictions. They also provided more details about Russian efforts to subvert the '16 election. And the results of the investigation were a gift to Trump. So what are you complaining about?


It's crazy that with all the lying to the FBI and the investigators that Mueller wasn't able to secure enough information to make a case.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 01:25 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
Russian collusion did not happen.

Yeah it did. (Remember when you guys were insisting, "It's not illegal.") It just didn't rise to the level of conspiracy. Why did Don Jr. go to the Trump Tower meeting to meet with Russians?

Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 02:37 pm
@Real Music,
This was all investigated and no indictments were forth coming. The only answer is that Mueller was involved with Russian collusion. Or there was no collusion with Russia and this whole investigation was put in place by the Obama admin, the DNC with collusion from a foreign spy and the MSM to get even for Hillary losing.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 03:00 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
Why did Don Jr. go to the Trump Tower meeting to meet with Russians?

Who cares? They had everything wrong about it. It meant 0.
Quote:
It just didn't rise to the level of conspiracy.

What does that tell you? It tells me there was no conspiracy.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 10:02 pm
Nadler says Mueller report should be released to Congress without redactions.


Published March 29, 2019
Quote:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler said on Friday that Attorney General William Barr should send Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report to Congress without redactions.

“As I informed the Attorney General earlier this week, Congress requires the full and complete Mueller report,
without redactions, as well as access to the underlying evidence, by April 2.

That deadline still stands,” Nadler said in a statement after Barr said he would release the report by mid-April after making redactions.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-nadler/nadler-says-mueller-report-should-be-released-to-congress-without-redactions-idUSKCN1RA2G7?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 10:24 pm
@Real Music,
Quote:
Nadler says Mueller report should be released to Congress without redactions.

Nadler is full of ****. That is a legal impossibility. People will believe anything. What wont these idiots fall for? And they call Trump supporters stupid? Drunk
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  0  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 10:42 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Quote:
Why is Trump being persecuted for winning an election?

He isn't being "persecuted" for winning an election or for any other reason other than his (and his minions') suspicious conduct. Do you think Clinton was investigated because he won an election or do you accept that Congress and the Justice Department have the responsibility to determine whether or not a president has committed a crime when possible illegal conduct is suspected or alleged?

State any one single particle of evidence that president Trump colluded with the Russians to cheat in the election. One doesn't hold an independent counsel investigation anytime anybody alleges anything. You hold it when there is significant evidence that the crime in question may have taken place.

Now, the House, Senate, and Special Counsel investigations all say that the president did not cooperate with the Russians to cheat in the election. In fact, the Special Counsel investigation says that the Russians made several offers all of which were refused. But, go ahead and pore over the minutia of the report when it comes out, and hold every pebble up to the light, turning it this way and that to see if you can see a little glint of light. I see that you're glad that the president isn't a traitor.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Fri 29 Mar, 2019 11:52 pm
@Baldimo,
Ah-hahahahahahahahaha . . . **** like this cracks me up. The Republican-controlled Congress requested that the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions at that time, appoint a special counsel. Sessions was known to have met with the Russian Ambassador during the campaign, so he recused himself and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mr. Mueller, a life-long and highly respected Republican. His brief was to find out if there had been any links or coordination between Plump's campaign and the Russians. The brief did not make Plump himself a target.

But people like you, who love to eat Plump's **** sandwich propaganda go around blaming Mr. Obama and the Democrats. What a bunch of weenies.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): You Might Say That's All OK. But I Don't Think It's OK.
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/15/2019 at 01:57:35