Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Democrats Use Schiff as Shiv to Stick Biden Over Classified Docs Debacle

Democrats Use Schiff as Shiv to Stick Biden Over Classified Docs Debacle

“I still would like to see Congress do its own assessment of — and receive an assessment from the intelligence community of whether there was an exposure to others of these documents, whether there was harm to national security, on the case of either set of documents with either president.”

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, gave a few surprising answers to Jonathan Karl on ABC’s This Week regarding the Biden classified document case.

I blogged the other day that Biden’s 2024 hope for a second term might not come to fruition thanks to…Democrats. There are rumblings behind closed doors. Did Schiff receive some talking points from the Democratic Party?

Again, I ask, will the classified document fiasco be the ammunition the Democrats use to kick Brandon to the curb?

Schiff agreed that Attorney Merrick Garland needed to appoint a special counsel to investigate the case.

Then Schiff said that Congress needs “to do its own assessment” of national security risks.

Notice how Schiff went soft on Biden, willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, unlike Trump when the FBI raided his residence at Mar-a-Lago.

It’s almost a sympathetic tone. He admitted the president would have to answer why he kept the documents quiet despite knowing about them before the midterms but will reserve judgment until he has all the information. You know, just like he did with Trump:

Congressman Schiff, you were on this show just after Attorney General Garland appointed a special counsel in the case of the Trump documents. You said it was the right move. Do you feel the same way about this special counsel?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, (D-CA): I do think it’s the right move. The attorney general has to make sure that not only is justice evenly applied, but the appearances of justice are also satisfactory to the public. And here, I don’t think he had any choice but to appoint a special counsel. And I think that special counsel will do the proper assessment.

I still would like to see Congress do its own assessment of — and receive an assessment from the intelligence community of whether there was an exposure to others of these documents, whether there was harm to national security, on the case of either set of documents with either president. But, yes, I think the special counsel was appropriately appointed.

Jonathan, if I could also, though, because my state is still trying to dig out from these terrible storms, I want to thank the president for making an emergency declaration and let Californians know that in the three most affected counties they can now apply for help in terms of rebuilding their homes and their businesses and that other counties need to report their damage as soon as possible so they can qualify for relief as well.

KARL: Yes, thank you for that.

Back to the – to the documents.

You raise the possibility of those national security assessment. Is it possible that national security was jeopardized here as – as many, including you, raised that possibility with the Mar-a-Lago documents?

SCHIFF: I don’t think we can exclude the possibility without knowing more of the facts. We have asked for an assessment in the intelligence community of the Mar-a-Lago documents. I think we ought to get that same assessment of the documents found in the – in the think tank, as well as the home of President Biden. I’d like to know what these documents were. I’d like to know what the IC’s assessment is, whether there was any risk of exposure and what the harm would be and whether any mitigation needs to be done. I think that would be appropriate and consistent with what we requested in the case of Mar-a-Lago.

KARL: The White House knew about this on November 2nd. So that was almost a full week before the midterm elections. We didn’t learn about it — the public wasn’t informed until this week and it was only after the story was, you know, was out there, reporters were asking questions.

Should they have been more forthcoming? Should this information have been revealed earlier?

SCHIFF: I think the administration will need to answer that question. I’m going to reserve judgment until they do. But I think it’s important to point out that the Biden approach was very different in the sense that it looks, as far as we can tell, that it was inadvertent that these documents were in these locations. When they were discovered, they were immediately provided to The Archives or to the Justice Department. There was no effort to hold on to them, no effort to conceal them, no effort to obstruct the Justice Department’s investigation. All of that is a very sharp contrast to Donald Trump’s handling of the situation.

So, as you point out, this is a very different matter. But, nonetheless, I think it’s appropriate for special counsel to look into both situations.

Karl had to give Schiff an opportunity to trash Republicans. He called them “hypocritical” due to their reaction to Biden’s documents by opening an investigation.

Someone tell Schiff the Republicans are playing by the rules the Democrats established when the government found classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

Does anyone honestly think if the Democrats still had the House, they would open an investigation? And if they did, would it be fair? Come on.

The Republicans also point out the hypocrisy of the government and Democrats because the FBI raided and tore apart Trump’s residence.

The FBI didn’t do anything like that with Biden:

KARL: Republicans are saying they are going to investigate — House Republican, the Oversight Committee chairman. Comer gave — sent a letter to the White House Counsel making a very specific list of requests. He wants to know what the documents were, they want internal communications between the Biden White House and the Penn Center where the documents were first found, a list of all people would worked there that would who would have potentially handled these documents and a few other requests. They seem, on the face of it, to be reasonable requests. Should the White House cooperate with the House Oversight Committee on this?

SCHIFF: Well, those requests are completely hypocritical when you consider what he said about the Mar-a-Lago situation. I think Congress ought to handle both situations the same way, and that is we ought to get a briefing from the intelligence community about any potential risks to national security of where those documents were and what they contained. But Congress shouldn’t try to interfere with the investigations. I think, sadly, that’s what Mr. Comer’s object is. He showed no interest in investigating the far more serious situation with about 100 classified documents at Mar-a-Lago with evidence in the public domain of obstruction. Now he is suddenly interested in investigating President Biden.

I think Congress needs to be consistent here and take the same approach. I don’t think we ought to be doing things that are willy intended to interfere with the Justice Department’s work.

KARL: So you don’t think the White House should cooperate with the – the committee on this? I mean you fought mightily –

SCHIFF: Well, I didn’t say – I didn’t –

KARL: And then they, for the most part, did not. But you don’t —

SCHIFF: Jonathan —

KARL: Yes?

SCHIFF: I never said the White House shouldn’t cooperate. What I said was Congress ought to ask consistently, and we shouldn’t try willfully to interfere with what the Justice Department is doing. That’s what I think Mr. Comer is intending.

But, yes, I think the Biden administration ought to cooperate with any appropriate inquiry from Congress.

KARL: You’ve endorsed President Biden’s re-election. He hasn’t announced yet, but we expect he will. Does any of this complicate his efforts to — to mount a re-election campaign and make a stark contrast with Donald Trump?

SCHIFF: I think there are so many stark contrasts with Donald Trump, on policy, on decency, on a devotion to the truth, on his handling of foreign policy, on his domestic policy priorities, on his accomplishments in attacking climate change, in getting a bipartisan infrastructure bill done when Trump talked about it for four years but did nothing, when Trump misused millions, hundreds of millions of dollars in aid meant for an ally at war, Ukraine, to try to extort that country into helping his campaign; in contrast, Joe Biden helping Ukraine fight against a Russian invasion of their lands.

So there are lots of sharp contrasts for Joe Biden in the next election.

KARL: All right, Congressman Schiff, thank you for joining us.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

The Gentle Grizzly | January 16, 2023 at 8:06 am

Friday, the 20th, doth approach.

This is so obvious. Throw 46 under the bus, use that to keep 45 from 2024.

The entire executive branch is rotten.

    mailman in reply to amwick. | January 16, 2023 at 9:03 am

    If Trump isnt the next Republican nominee its going to be much worse with DeathSantis as the nominee. But these intellectual power houses in the Democrat party have backed themselves in to a corner by playing all their cards against Trump.

In 1996, Biden purchased four acres of secluded, lakefront land in the upscale suburb of Wilmington, Delaware, and built this 6,850-square-foot home. According to Zillow, the lot was purchased back then for $350,000 and the property is now estimated to be worth more than $1 million, though a real estate expert put that figure closer to $2 million. During his vice presidency, he rented out a cottage on the property to the Secret Service for $2,200 a month.

… and Hunter rented it at $598,920 a year ? Hunter could own it in 2 to 4 years. Joe claims he got a lot less on his taxes.

    NotCoach in reply to Neo. | January 16, 2023 at 9:55 am

    … and Hunter rented it at $598,920 a year ? Hunter could own it in 2 to 4 years. Joe claims he got a lot less on his taxes.

    Pretty obvious money laundering that would get any normal person into trouble.

    henrybowman in reply to Neo. | January 16, 2023 at 4:30 pm

    One working theory is that crackhead Hunter wrote in his annual rent on the monthly line. Now, I don’t know anyone who thinks of his rent in annual terms off the top of his head, but then again, I don’t know anyone who sells horseshit daubings for a half million a pop, either.

When Democrats like Schiff and CNN start talking like this,, think about what LBJ did in 1968 when he decided not to run

    I was still crapping my diaper at that time. Please elucidate.

      NotCoach in reply to Paul. | January 16, 2023 at 11:13 am

      Leftist loons took over the party by 1968, and Johnson decided not to fight that battle.

      NotCoach in reply to Paul. | January 16, 2023 at 11:19 am

      But his health was poor as well, and that part of it shouldn’t be downplayed. His poor health played a major role in the decision not to run. He died only 4 years after leaving the office. If he would have won reelection he would have died only two days after a new president was sworn in 1972. That is assuming another term didn’t shorten his lifespan.

      henrybowman in reply to Paul. | January 16, 2023 at 4:58 pm

      Best Democrat Convention ever!

      WWF (IRL) in the streets of Chicago: the “Hippies” vs. the “Hardhats.” The Hippies smoked weed, chanted, marched and whined about the candidates being selected in smoke-filled rooms instead of “by tEh peEulZ” in public primaries. The Hardhats busied themselves with clearing the streets of “degenerate longhairs” with hard, bar-shaped objects and good old American laborers’ fists. Society hadn’t yet progressed to the use of molotovs as an integral part of such tantrums, but for its time, the carnage was magnificent.

      Hubert Humphrey emerged out of the smoke, and was spectacularly tumbled off a cliff in a landslide victory for Nixon, with George “Segregation Forever” Wallace getting significant votes but not enough to swing the results.

      With egg on its face, the DNC made a sOlemM vOw that henceforth its candidates would be chosen “by tEh peEulZ” in public primaries. This persevered for only as long as it took the DNC to develop its current protocol, which was to hold dozens of primaries to give the voters the illusion they were involved, then throwing the primary results away and selecting their candidates in coke-filled rooms.

The situation is hopeless. It is one thing to steal. It is another to be exposed and suffer no consequences. After suppression of the laptop story, Biden allowed his son to sell paintings for half a mil a pop. He laughably had the press Secretary explain how certain ethical controls were put on this. The press corps sat like potted plants and accepted this. It is all over.

Sooner or later your idiot has outlived his usefulness, and must be kicked to curb – the better to run him over with the bus.

“former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee”

Best part of the article

The focus of the discussion is all wrong. They are talking about the intelligence risk of the documents instead of the illegality of Brandon removing such documents. He had no declassification authority as VP while Trump has plausible claim of declassification justifying his position of being in possession of such documents. I wonder when the FBI will be raiding “car-a-lago”…

    Interested Party in reply to slagothar. | January 16, 2023 at 2:41 pm

    Again, declassification doesn’t seem relevant to his possession. He has a right to his documents under the PRA. It does potentially expose him to risk over not caring for the documents correctly though.

    Milhouse in reply to slagothar. | January 16, 2023 at 2:59 pm

    “He had no declassification authority as VP”

    Unless 0bama gave him such authority, just as W Bush gave Cheney. We don’t know whether he did so.

      henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | January 16, 2023 at 5:18 pm

      That dog not having yet barked is all the evidence you need to know there is no dog.

        The Biden handlers can’t ask Obama to lie for them and claim that the P gave the VP declassification authority, because Obama really doesn’t like Joe and isn’t about to stick his neck out an inch for him. Much the same for having O claim that he declassified everything Joe took, because Dems have howled for months now that Trump didn’t leave a paper trail for his declassifications. Also, having Biden declassify any documents they find in his multiple homes and offices doesn’t help a bit since he *possessed* them for four years+ without authority, and he can’t go back in time to retroactively declassify them without a DeLorean

        They made this bed with lies. Now they get to lie in it.

The Gentle Grizzly | January 16, 2023 at 1:27 pm

“ He had no declassification authority …”

But but… they just knew he’d be president SOME day…!

Jan 21st is coming up and Kamala is waiting.

BierceAmbrose | January 16, 2023 at 3:46 pm

“and receive an assessment from the intelligence community of whether there was…”

What is the value of an assessment from the “intelligence community” that wrote an open letter declaring The Prodigal Son’s laptop as “having all the ear marks of a Russian disinformation op.” (And being experts in “disinformation ops”, they knew that line would be understood as “We declare it a disinformation op.” Much trade craft in how they dropped that hit.)

These are the same guys who testified to 57 flavors of why Russian Collusion was a thing. They didn’t call the timing or outcome of the Russian Ukraine invasion, the taking of Hong Kong, or responses to the gun-running out of Benghazi.

Why would we listen to these guys? Shifty wants them to speak up because he knows they’ll say whatever’s good for the team: his and theirs.

“whether there was harm to national security”

Well their spin on why SCIF lying around in a CCP-Funded think tank would solve a lot of energy problems. We’ll see if they’re green and red, vs. just red. (Yes, I’m saying they’re compromised; neither through ideology nor overtly. They’re compromised through opportunistic ambition — they’ll do anything convenient.)

They are going to use Schiff as a shiv to stick Biden? Good choice. Schiff has a lot experience shoving and sticking things in various places.

Keep the timeline in mind:

May: Biden retroactively waives DJT’s executive privilege “for him.”
June: FBI tells DJT to install a lock on the room for his documents.
August 8: FBI raids DJT over same documents OKed in June.
September 18: Biden interview: DJT “totally irresponsible.”
November 2: Date Biden lawyers claim finding first Biden docs.
November 4: National Archives reports Biden docs to DOJ.
November 8: Election.
January 9: Biden breach disclosed to public.

Gee… a full two months between the discovery of the documents and the public disclosure. The second most transparent administration in history!

Now… what if there were a similar invisible hiatus between the purported discovery of the Biden stash and the actual knowledge of it? Say, July? Or even April? Hm that would explain a lot more of this timeline.

And remember what the Washington Post haughtily lectured us back in September:

A single locked door — even one with only one key — hardly meets the exacting specifications required by federal regulations to physically store classified documents. Documents classified at the top secret level, for example, are required to be stored in a “security container” approved by the General Services Administration. The container must be inspected every two hours by a person with clearance to review top secret material or feature an intrusion alarm that meets specific requirements.

Did Biden’s Corvette come with a security-vetted GSA Trunk Monkey? Working Americans deserve to know!

So Schiff is a tool. We knew that already. He’s the quarter-inch socket in the Dems playbook.

Schitt is such an intel expert he’s getting kicked off of the intel committee.