Adam Schiff Admits There’s No ‘Proof’ Of Trump-Russia Collusion [VIDEO]

[Dashinka 24,499]

Just now, ccneat said:

no because regardless of what senator Schiff actually said, the fake news tsunami took over and let folks believe what they wanted to believe 

Like that Schiff has been promoted to Senator?

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

1 minute ago, IAMX said:

The requirement of a trial is an extremely low standard, so if the burden of proof to get to a trial can't be met by these claims, they're garbage, as many of us already knew.

So you have:

1. prejudged the outcome of the investigation OR

2. you have information that you have not shared with us 

Edited June 19, 2017 by ccneat

[Dashinka 24,499]

1 minute ago, IAMX said:

The requirement of a trial is an extremely low standard, so if the burden of proof to get to a trial can't be met by these claims, they're garbage, as many of us already knew.

If there was nothing no reasonable prosecutor would act on with respect to the Hillary investigation, it seems there is less than nothing here.

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

5 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Like that Schiff has been promoted to Senator?

sorry Rep...give me some slack with tweets and investigations and recusals flying...it is just the Fog of war

[Dashinka 24,499]

Just now, ccneat said:

sorry Rep...give me some slack with tweets and investigations and recusals flying...it is just the Fog of war

Like a misspelling in a tweet, or adding seven more states to the union you can have some slack too.

 

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, ccneat said:

So you have:

1. prejudged the outcome of the investigation OR

2. you have information that you have not shared with us 

- Complete lack of proof of any of these Russia claims from the beginning (early-mid 2016) 

- Liberals asserting since the election the conclusion that Russians:

   ∙ Hacked the election

   ∙ Hacked the power grid

   ∙ Stole the election for Trump

   ∙ Meddled in the election

   ∙ Every single Trump admin person who ever talked to Russia or did business with the country whatsoever has been accused of conspiring with Russians for the above

 

And your complaint is, after over a year of no proof, and constant accusations, that other people have prejudged the outcome? 

 

Holy **** my sides dude. 

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

7 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

If there was nothing no reasonable prosecutor would act on with respect to the Hillary investigation, it seems there is less than nothing here.

 

Here is the context (CNSNews.com) – Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the ranking member of the House intelligence committee, said on Sunday he believes there is evidence of both collusion and obstruction stemming from the ongoing Russia investigation, “but I’m not prepared to say that there’s proof you could take to a jury.”

Martha Raddatz, hosting ABC’s “This Week,” told Schiff: “You said recently you thought there was evidence of collusion. What kind of evidence have you seen?” she asked.

“Well, I think there is evidence,” Schiff replied. “I can't go into the particulars of our closed investigation. But I also think there is also evidence of obstruction. But in both cases, I would say, whether there is some evidence doesn't mean there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Schiff said he doesn’t buy the idea, floated by Trump ally Newt Gingrich, that the president cannot commit obstruction by firing the FBI director, who serves at the president’s pleasure.

“If you look at James Comey's testimony, and we were trying this in a court of law, no judge would exclude that. That would all be relevant evidence as to potential obstruction.

“And the fact that the president can fire someone for good cause, or can fire someone with no cause, doesn't mean that he can fire someone for malicious cause. The fact that an employer can terminate an employee at will doesn't mean that he can fire an employee because the employee rejected his sexual advances,” Schiff said.

Raddatz noted that even Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has said there is no evidence of collusion. “So collusion between whom?” she asked. “Can you tell us that?”

Well, the allegation, of course, is that the Russians and the hacking and dumping of documents in the election had essentially relationships with Trump campaign people and coordinated those efforts. Now the FBI opened an investigation into that issue in July, well before Congress did. I think they did that for good reason in July. I think they maintain that investigation. It's ongoing for good reason as well.

But I'm not prepared to say that there's proof you could take to a jury. But I can say that there is enough that we ought to be investigating. Indeed, it would be negligent for us not to investigate.

[Dashinka 24,499]

1 minute ago, ccneat said:

Here is the context (CNSNews.com) – Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the ranking member of the House intelligence committee, said on Sunday he believes there is evidence of both collusion and obstruction stemming from the ongoing Russia investigation, “but I’m not prepared to say that there’s proof you could take to a jury.”

Martha Raddatz, hosting ABC’s “This Week,” told Schiff: “You said recently you thought there was evidence of collusion. What kind of evidence have you seen?” she asked.

“Well, I think there is evidence,” Schiff replied. “I can't go into the particulars of our closed investigation. But I also think there is also evidence of obstruction. But in both cases, I would say, whether there is some evidence doesn't mean there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Schiff said he doesn’t buy the idea, floated by Trump ally Newt Gingrich, that the president cannot commit obstruction by firing the FBI director, who serves at the president’s pleasure.

“If you look at James Comey's testimony, and we were trying this in a court of law, no judge would exclude that. That would all be relevant evidence as to potential obstruction.

“And the fact that the president can fire someone for good cause, or can fire someone with no cause, doesn't mean that he can fire someone for malicious cause. The fact that an employer can terminate an employee at will doesn't mean that he can fire an employee because the employee rejected his sexual advances,” Schiff said.

Raddatz noted that even Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has said there is no evidence of collusion. “So collusion between whom?” she asked. “Can you tell us that?”

Well, the allegation, of course, is that the Russians and the hacking and dumping of documents in the election had essentially relationships with Trump campaign people and coordinated those efforts. Now the FBI opened an investigation into that issue in July, well before Congress did. I think they did that for good reason in July. I think they maintain that investigation. It's ongoing for good reason as well.

But I'm not prepared to say that there's proof you could take to a jury. But I can say that there is enough that we ought to be investigating. Indeed, it would be negligent for us not to investigate.

So Schiff doesn't understand the constitution?  This is not being tried in a court of law, and the president has powers Adam Schiff, James Comey, or a judge do not have.

 

All this says says is what I have been saying all along, the DNC needs to keep the narrative alive to obstruct Trump and the GOP congress, and to try and use all they can in 2018 and possibly beyond.

 

If you want to investigate coordination, why not look into the coordination the DNC had with their allies in the mainstream media?

 

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Just now, IAMX said:

- Complete lack of proof of any of these Russia claims from the beginning (early-mid 2016) 

- Liberals asserting since the election the conclusion that Russians:

   ∙ Hacked the election

   ∙ Hacked the power grid

   ∙ Stole the election for Trump

   ∙ Meddled in the election

   ∙ Every single Trump admin person who ever talked to Russia or did business with the country whatsoever has been accused of conspiring with Russians for the above

 

And your complaint is, after over a year of no proof, and constant accusations, that other people have prejudged the outcome? 

 

Holy **** my sides dude. 

 

Holy **** my sides as well

 

- Complete lack of proof of any of these Russia claims from the beginning (early-mid 2016) 

Nope...you should read more news 

- Liberals asserting since the election the conclusion that Russians:

   ∙ Hacked the election      DNC and Political Operatives office.  Ran am elaborate Spearfishing campaign targeting election officials and breached at least one local agency

 

   ∙ Hacked the power grid 

nope, red herring

   ∙ Stole the election for Trump

 really?  News to me.

   ∙ Meddled in the election

Fact

   ∙ Every single Trump admin person who ever talked to Russia or did business with the country whatsoever has been accused of conspiring with Russians for the above

what is a "Trump Admin Person" ?  Flynn?   Mr Liar Lair has been fired for lying and did take money from Turkey and Russia and  violated the law. 

 

And your complaint is, after over a year of no proof, and constant accusations, that other people have prejudged the outcome? 

Lets let the investigation run its course

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So Schiff doesn't understand the constitution?  This is not being tried in a court of law, and the president has powers Adam Schiff, James Comey, or a judge do not have.

 

 

 

 

are you putting the President above the other branches of government?  

[Dashinka 24,499]

2 minutes ago, ccneat said:

are you putting the President above the other branches of government?  

I am saying if the president wanted to truly end the Flynn investigation he could have with a pardon.  Congress or the courts do not have that power.  I guess now we will have to have them review and buy off now.

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

I am saying if the president wanted to truly end the Flynn investigation he could have with a pardon.  Congress or the courts do not have that power.  I guess now we will have to have them review and buy off now.

 

is he going to pardon crimes he has not been charged with?    I guess he could...I am not sure

[Dashinka 24,499]

Just now, ccneat said:

is he going to pardon crimes he has not been charged with?    I guess he could...I am not sure

You forget all the talk about President Obama possibly granting Hillary a blanket pardon?

 

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

You forget all the talk about President Obama possibly granting Hillary a blanket pardon?

 

 

Not really...how does that work?

[IAMX 3,055]

23 minutes ago, ccneat said:

Holy **** my sides as well

 

- Complete lack of proof of any of these Russia claims from the beginning (early-mid 2016) 

Nope...you should read more news 

- Liberals asserting since the election the conclusion that Russians:

   ∙ Hacked the election      DNC and Political Operatives office.  Ran am elaborate Spearfishing campaign targeting election officials and breached at least one local agency

 

   ∙ Hacked the power grid 

nope, red herring

   ∙ Stole the election for Trump

 really?  News to me.

   ∙ Meddled in the election

Fact

   ∙ Every single Trump admin person who ever talked to Russia or did business with the country whatsoever has been accused of conspiring with Russians for the above

what is a "Trump Admin Person" ?  Flynn?   Mr Liar Lair has been fired for lying and did take money from Turkey and Russia and  violated the law. 

 

And your complaint is, after over a year of no proof, and constant accusations, that other people have prejudged the outcome? 

Lets let the investigation run its course

At least one or two already have, the narrative is pretty slow at changing ain't it?