Schiff v. Ratcliffe: DNI Reports That Hunter Biden’s Laptop Is Not Believed To Be Part Of A Russian Disinformation Campaign

Recently, we discussed how House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff stated publicly that the recently disclosed laptop information from Hunter Biden was clearly part of a Russian intelligence operation. Schiff said that “we know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin.” This morning, John Ratcliffe, Director of National Intelligence, stated categorically that Hunter Biden’s laptop was not part of a Russian disinformation campaign.  What is most notable is that Ratcliffe has stated that Schiff and his Committee have not been given any intelligence to support Schiff’s conclusion.  The incident has raised lingering criticism of Schiff who previously told the public that he had clear evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia after that allegation was rejected in repeated investigations, including Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Schiff never produced the incriminating evidence and later it was shown that the widely cited Steele dossier was based on a source who was considered to be a Russian agent.

There is ample reason to suspicious about the timing of this disclosure. However, I have written that this serious concern is separate from the question of whether the emails are fabricated. The Biden campaign has not given the most obvious responses to such a scandal. It is important to keep in mind that Hillary Clinton and the DNC were actually hacked by Russian intelligence but the underlying emails were true.

Schiff now finds himself, again, in the position of supporting a claim of evidence of Russian collusion. He will have to show that this laptop discovery was engineered by Russian intelligence.  If the owner is speaking the truth, the computer was dropped off in April 2019 with the intent to be used in the 2020 campaign.

Ratcliffe stated in an interview that

“it’s funny that some of the people that complained the most about intelligence being politicized are the ones politicizing intelligence and unfortunately in this case, it is Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, who as you pointed out on Friday said that the intelligence community believes that Hunter Biden’s laptop and e-mails on it are part of some Russian disinformation campaign. Let me be clear, the intelligence community doesn’t believe that because there is no intelligence that supports and we shared no intelligence with chairman Schiff or any other member of Congress that Hunter Biden’s laptop is part of some Russian disinformation campaign. It’s simply not true.”

Ratcliffe accused Schiff of politicizing intelligence and stated “Don’t drag the intelligence community into this. Hunter Biden’s laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign and I think it’s clear the American people know that.”

Schiff should explain the basis for his conclusion that this is part of a Russian disinformation campaign. Someone is clearly misrepresenting the intelligence and the public should know the basis for these irreconcilable statements.

452 thoughts on “Schiff v. Ratcliffe: DNI Reports That Hunter Biden’s Laptop Is Not Believed To Be Part Of A Russian Disinformation Campaign”

  1. ‘THE THIRD PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE – SET TO TAKE PLACE ON THURSDAY – WAS ORIGINALLY SUPPOSED TO CENTER ON FOREIGN POLICY. BUT FOLLOWING THE RELEASE OF THE HUNTER BIDEN E-MAILS/LAPTOP DETAILS IN THE NEW YORK POST, THE WILDLY PARTISAN PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES COMMISSION ANNOUNCED THAT WOULD NO LONGER BE THE CASE, THE EFFECT BEING THE PROTECTION OF JOE AND HUNTER BIDEN.’

    On Friday the Debate Commission announced their topics for Friday, which are bizarrely similar to the first debate topics. The second debate will feature: Fighting COVID-19; American Families; Race in America; Climate Change; National Security; and Leadership.

    The first debate topics were: Covid-19; The Economy; Race and Violence in our Cities; The Integrity of the Election; The Supreme Court; and Trump and Biden’s Records.

    https://thenationalpulse.com/news/presidential-debate-commission-ditches-foreign-policy-focus-following-hunter-biden-laptop-leaks/

    1. Trump refused to participate in the second debate as scheduled, so this is only the second debate, not the third one.

      1. Trump refused to debate by Zoom.
        He wanted a debate, but commission said it was too dangerous to do in person.
        Then both Trump and Biden do in-person town hall meetings anyway. WTF?

      2. The corrupt dishonest Debate Commission got wind of the New York Post story about to drop. They went into coverup mode by unilaterally announcing the change in format to a virtual debate which they knew Trump campaign would object to.

        Then they immediately set up a friendly moderator to host Joe Biden in a friendly Townhall – a LIVE in PERSON Townhall!! The point of NOT having the debate IN PERSON was a lie. Both candidates went on to have IN PERSON Townhalls.

        And Joe Biden was not asked a single question about the biggest story of the day: Hunter Biden’s emails! NOT ONE QUESTION.

        If you cannot see the corruption at work, then you are blind and stupid.

  2. The sad part is that the red scares of the 50s seem to have taught our media nothing. Joe McCarthy is reviled by the same people who are so power hungry that they adopt his tactics.

    It’s ok though because any minute now CNN will run a caption stating the Schiff “baselessly accuses Russian disinformation for Hunter’s laptop”. They the NYT and WaPo will publish headlines to the effect that “Without evidence, Schiff blames Hunter Biden laptop scandal on Russia.”

    I just know they will.

    1. One of the better websites providing insight into life under communist rule and the yellow press (prensa amarilla) is “Translating Cuba”. The English version is fairly decent but the Spanish version is rich in prose, artistic juxtaposition of words and humor.

      http://translatingcuba.com

      Translating Cuba is a compilation of translations of Cuban bloggers, independent journalists and human rights activists, primarily writing from the island. The authors included here share a number of characteristics. They:

      Write from the island of Cuba.
      Are independent, that is they are not paid by the Cuban government.
      Write under their own names.
      Their articles contain material of wide general interest.

      Yoani Sanchez is especially good

      https://www.14ymedio.com/blogs/generacion_y/

      1. Anything is possible. The ignorant have the tendency to prove their point with nonsense that lacks reason.

        Anything is possible. Tomorrow the sun could fall on Anonymous’ head. Why hasn’t he brought up that possibility as well?

        1. Many things aren’t possible. Maybe Allan fell on his head and doesn’t understand that.

          It’s impossible to find a whole number whose square is 2.

  3. Just because Schiffty would immediately deploy such a lie in service to more mischief against the Republicans doesn’t make it so! Reminds me of the fable of the Boy Who Cried Wolf . . . . He can only use it a couple times before everybody becomes wise to it!
    Schiffty has done a GREAT disservice to patriots who sincerely seek justice but prefer to remain anonymous. I for one will NOT believe a ‘ weaselblower ‘ or ‘ unnamed source ‘ referred to by the Left. I will only believe an individual testifying before a court of law with their hand on a Bible, stating their name and swearing to tell the TRUTH!

  4. Looking for collector items & will pay top dollar:

    *Hunter Biden’s crack pipe

    *Jack Ruby’s gun that killed Lee Harvey Oswald

    *Jeffrey Dahmer’s “Milwaukee Cannibal” refrigerator

    *Adam Shitiff’s favorite toilet paper, used

  5. I’m surprised Adam Shitiffs toadie Smallballs hasn’t chimed in on the lie. Imagine, it took just one brash outsider to be elected to office to get these guys to expose their corruption.

    I just hope the “shy” Trump voter will out number the fake mail in ballots the Democrats will dump a couple days after election day.

  6. “If the owner is speaking the truth, the computer was dropped off in April 2019 with the intent to be used in the 2020 campaign.”

    JT, is that typo?

    You’re saying that Hunter Biden dropped off 3 laptops with liquid damage to a computer repair shop in April 2019 “with the intent to be used in the 2020 campaign”?!

    No comprende’.

    1. No, he’s saying that someone pretending to be Hunter Biden dropped off 3 laptops with liquid damage to a computer repair shop in April 2019 “with the intent to be used in the 2020 campaign” “engineered by Russian intelligence”

      1. “No, he’s saying that someone pretending to be Hunter Biden dropped off 3 laptops with liquid damage to a computer repair shop in April 2019”

        really?

        Care to provide a quote from Turley’s article that confirms that lie, ChiCom?

        1. Mr. Turley, There is NO evidence Russians hacked Clinton or the DNC’s server. The owner of Crowdstrike testified in front of Congress there was NO evidence the server was even hacked. Why do you and others keep saying it was????

        2. You said you didn’t understand what “If the owner is speaking the truth, the computer was dropped off in April 2019 with the intent to be used in the 2020 campaign” meant, so I explained.

      2. And yet with this information in hand, they let the Impeachment sham go ahead? Unwrap the tinfoil from your antennae. This would have been perfect for use in the Impeachment. The public would have been focuses and the media could not bury the story. Not to mention it would have exonerated Trump.

      3. Let’s just say that some sex worked stole them from Hunter’s apartment after they rolled in the hay. Then her “manager” dropped it off. As hypothesis

        So what? The question is not how obtained, because, law enforcement uses privately stolen evidence routinely

        The question is — authentic or not?

        They’ve had 5 days to deny it and Biden campaign has not. You know why?

        The emails are authentic, that’s why. duh

  7. If it’s the Russians, it’s the best thing this Boris & Natasha gang have ever done. Somehow got a hold of Hunter’s stoner pics, emails and videos and then deposited them under his signature with an obscure computer repair guy who got frustrated with our do-it-wrong-if they-do it-at-all FBI and then shipped it off to Mayor Guiliani’s camp. This from a country that couldn’t do a workmanlike assassination of a dissident. Since even the dimwitted Dim Bernie Bros can understand a pay-for-play bribe from 50% Commission Joe, it’s:

    1. Marky Mark, you’re a liar.

      You invent pretend evidence that the computers were deposited under Biden’s signature, and the repair shop guy is legally blind and can’t verify it was Biden either.

      1. Anonymous:

        Guess you missed Rudy’s interview with Levin where he is said he is willing to produce the contract and put the signature under scrutiny. Sounds like a liar, right?

        1. Rudy’s a known liar.

          Have him produce it and state under oath how he got it, then question the person he got it from under oath.

          1. Oh, so no matter what the source, they’re known liars. There is no proof that can change your mind ’cause you’re paid to argue otherwise. BTW, and to quote Seinfeld, when referring to the data on that laptop that saved the republic, “they’re real and they’re spectacular.”

            1. Of course there’s proof that can change my mind. Rudy can present the original with the signature, he can testify under oath about who gave it to him, and that person can testify under oath about the day the paper was signed. But only a crazy person would assume that Rudy is telling the truth now, when he’s not under oath and he hasn’t presented the contract. Let him testify under oath.

              1. Anonymous, even if the “evidence” is authenticated, it is Hunter writing about a plan without Joe’s name on it or any proof he knew about the plan and a thank you for a meeting that may have taken place or maybe might take place in the future. So what?

                By the way, the supposed Chinese plan was done when Joe was a private citizen. We know Trump is in the WH now, and so are Jared and Ivanka and they are doing deals and borrowing money from foreign entities. WTF?

            2. There is no proof that can change your mind ’cause you’re paid to argue otherwise.

              mespo,
              Remember that the Big Guy told us they believe in truth not facts. Nothing is going to move the needle on these people. Even if Obama/Biden/IC/FBI/DOJ/Clinton/DNC, etc. all admitted under oath they actually did what the evidence proves to have been done, if they told the American people they did it to protect this country from what they perceived to be a threat to our democracy, they would be hailed as heroes. Yuri Bezmenov described these demoralized people to a tee. They are a lost generation that live in an alternate reality.

              1. “Remember that the Big Guy told us they believe in truth not facts.”
                ************************
                Yeah he’s very Aristotelian! Once he figures out who that is his minions can chew on this little ditty from the great Greek father of Stoicism: “To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true”.

                1. It doesn’t seem fair that the worst consequences of their reality winning is that a super-majority (those not with the power) lose everything. If our reality wins, then the super-majority has the power and the minority with the reins of government are held in check.

                2. mespo: “Yeah he’s very Aristotelian!”

                  I’m on your side, but why did you pick on Aristotle? (Or was that sarcastic?) By the way, Aristotle is not the father of Stoicism. Zeno is.

  8. Turley is a liar when he says ” The Biden campaign has not given the most obvious responses to such a scandal.”

    Last Wednesday, Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates said “Investigations by the press, during impeachment, and even by two Republican-led Senate committees whose work was decried as ‘not legitimate’ and political by a GOP colleague have all reached the same conclusion: that Joe Biden carried out official U.S. policy toward Ukraine and engaged in no wrongdoing. Trump administration officials have attested to these facts under oath.” “We have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.”

    Why does Turley ignore this?

    1. “We have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.”
      **************************
      Yeah I always book my bribers on my public daily planner. Keeps ’em straight. Never mind the unaccounted for two hours that day.

        1. Anonymous:

          I’ll do you one better. I’ll give you the analysis and you can check it yourself. Actually it was 3 hour blocks on the days in question. You can look it up yourself and here’ s the roadmap using the link at the bottom:

          “But Breitbart News contribute Peter Schweizer told conservative radio host Mark Levin on Wednesday evening that Biden’s schedule had enough gaps in it that day to hold other meetings.

          The date of the meeting would appear to be April 16 or 17. The Post reported that the email was sent on April 17, 2015:

          The never-before-revealed meeting is mentioned in a message of appreciation that Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser to the board of Burisma, allegedly sent Hunter Biden on April 17, 2015, about a year after Hunter joined the Burisma board at a reported salary of up to $50,000 a month.

          “Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure,” the email reads.

          The time of the email was 6:00 a.m. PDT — 9:00 a.m. EDT. It refers tossing Hunter Biden “yesterday,” so the meeting likely occurred on the 16th, though it could have happened early the 17th, or earlier in the week.

          Biden’s schedules for that week leave ample room for other meetings, in between speeches and official events.

          As Breitbart News reported earlier Wednesday, Biden has certainly taken other meetings that were not on his official schedule.

          Schweizer told Levin that the gaps in the schedule make Biden’s denial implausible.

          “Now, if you’re gonna have a sleazy meeting with somebody, are you gonna put that on your official schedule?” Levin asked.

          Schweizer laughed, and directed the public to the obamawhitehouse.archives.gov website.

          “You can look at Joe Biden’s schedule that day. You know what it has? It has two gaps that are three hours or more.”

          Here’s the link for the days in question:

          https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog?page=61

      1. And I leave a reminder of my twice weekly meeting with the mistress at the local NoTell Motel on the refrigerator where my wife and kids will see it, next to the grocery reminder and the envelope with the school lunch money.

    2. To Professor Turley: Your not getting the billion dollars until you fire Annonymous…..Whoops! I plagiarized Biden’s thought.

    3. Anon: “Trump administration officials have attested to these facts under oath.” ‘We have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.’”

      That statement is, at best, very sloppy writing. It implies that the “We” in the quote refers to “Trump administration officials.” That statement (“We have reviewed . . .”) was, in fact, made by Biden spokesman Andrew Bates. Imagine taking a mafia secretary’s word for the whereabouts of a hitman during the time of a murder.

      “. . . these facts . . .”

      Which “facts?” That testimony was months ago, long before the Hunter/Joe Biden laptop/email scandal. Which, of course, means that the testimony has nothing to do with this scandal.

      If you want to accuse someone of being a “liar,” you might want to first work on proper pronoun reference.

  9. I believe that Schiff is not only a liar, but is doing so with full knowledge that he will not face any consequences for it, and with a long term purpose in mind, beyond that of defeating President Trump. Unfortunately, the fraternal twin psychological issues of confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance live far too strongly in the minds of many liberal voters who refuse to listen to, or shut down if put in the position of hearing, any information that contradicts the view they have chosen.
    What Schiff is doing is giving these voters cover to disbelieve what is going on by being the ‘trustworthy’ (omg, it hurts to laugh this hard when I say that) official, the authority they can point to, who pronounces that this issue is “Russian disinformation”.
    What needs to be done, what should have been done long ago, was to discredit Schiff publicly and permanently, in the public’s eyes. Having done otherwise is a part of what has led to the current circumstance, where a large segment of the population accepts this mendacious, bug eyed creature’s statements as factual.

    1. Spot on. There is no ramification for his lying. Think about former Sen Harry Reid, who admitted he made up stories against Romney. Not only was he not criticized for lying, but some liberal pundits praised him.

      Don’t expect any of the liberal MSM is question him.

      1. How would someone else lying or not have any bearing on the fact that Schifff lies? Are you implying that that would somehow make it OK for Schiff to lie? If other people lie, does that suddenly excuse your own lying? If you lie, does that suddenly excuse other people’s lying? If one person lies, does that permit the entire world’s population to lie? What about other crimes? Please respond quickly, as I have my eyes on the ripe persimmons in my neighbor’s yard.

  10. Schiff said he had evidence. Shouldn’t he be prosecuted for not giving it to the Mueller investigation? Is he secretly covering for the Russians and/or Trump?
    Those silly questions are just how trivial anyone should treat Schiff. Those who voted for him should be ashamed.

    1. Judging from the material generated by Schiff’s Hollywood constituents
      such as their latest installment of soft porn featuring children “Cuties,” not only are his voters not ashamed and will never vote him out, more and more it’s looking like the reason is, ultimately they want what he and the biden family want, legalized sex between adults and young children.

  11. So why has Speaker Pelosi impaneled a committee to consider implementing the 25th Amendment if Joey Two Fingers Biden wins the Presidency? Not only to remove Biden due to mental incapacity, but to prevent Biden from charges and/or testifying. Biden and sonny ‘Dead Beat’ Hunter’s traitorous criminal activities were not performed in a corner, and the greedy money grubbers riding the train that extends throughout the swamp.

    1. And Joe Biden will slink off into the and move next to Harry Reid so they can compare how they became multi millionaires from government (dis)service.

  12. Sparrow, you are learning that it’s all about manufacturing talking points and memes which will be recycled endlessly by Natacha and MollyG and Gainesville, who haven’t figured out that they are marks.

    1. Nor have those three and others like them figured out that their posts generate laughs and contempt for the writers, rather than the doubt that they hope to create.

    2. This is accurate, it’s just that, as noted in the piece, that is beginning to become a losing strategy with a public that has easy access to most of the same information as the pundits, which is also made apparent by tech companies’ recent actions. I think the dems know it, too. Sending Obama out to campaign this late in the game would be a perfect example of that desperation. My question is more along the lines of what is invoking their fear response – they must be sitting on one gigantic pile of tinder, just waiting for an outsider to drop a match on it. Not all of us need be on board, just enough of us. I personally think enough of us are.

  13. In a December 2017 closed door interview before the House Intelligence Committee, recently declassified, Crowdstrike president Shawn Henry responding to a question from Adam Schiff about alleged Russian hacking of the DNC stated “There’s not evidence that they [emails] were actually exfiltrated. There’s circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated.”

    1. He also said “On the document dump, as you’ve referred to it, there was data that we know was taken off of the DCCC. And we’ve, I think, chronicled, documented that in the report. There is evidence of exfiltration, not conclusive, but indicators of exfiltration off the DNC. … let me also state that if somebody was monitoring an email server, they could read all the email. And there might not be evidence of it being exfiltrated, but they would have knowledge of what was in the email. … There would be ways to copy it. You courd take screenshots. You could copy it.”

      He also said “we had a high degree of confidence it was the Russian Government,” and in response to Rep. Stewart (UT),” who said “one question very quickly. There are some press reports or some people at least claim that this hack on the DNC did not — was not perpetrated by the Russians. How do you respond to that?,” Henry said “Everything in my experience, sir, having done this for many, many years, both in the government and in the private sector, says that it was the Russian Government.”

    2. and… there is the recently declassified briefing Brennan gave Obama in July 2016 that CIA had intelligence that Clinton was mounting the TRUMP/RUSSIA/COLLUSION campaign to draw attention away from her criminal email debacle.

      Turley has commented on both the Cloudstrike testimony and the Brennan briefing recently. It is puzzling that hehas stipulated Russian hacking of Clinton both yesterday and today.

  14. WSJ ran an excellent piece yesterday reminding readers why Trump won in 2016. Given the Democrats learned nothing from flyover country, Trump will win again for the same reasons.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/remember-the-forgotten-man-11603048669

    Remember the Forgotten Man?

    Elites’ curiosity about the motivations and mindset of Trump voters was notably short-lived.

    By Jason De Sena Trennert, Oct 18, 2020 3:17 pm ET

    After the initial shock of Donald Trump’s 2016 victory wore off, a few thoughtful people across the ideological spectrum attempted to wrap their heads around what happened. How did a brash, sometimes crude political neophyte beat everyone from Jeb Bush to Hillary Clinton at their own game on the world’s largest stage? Those more prone to introspection and self-awareness than denial and vindictiveness came to the conclusion that the country’s political and media elites had forgotten about the plight of the “average” American—the so-called Forgotten Man.

    The term, first coined by Yale social scientist William Graham Sumner (1840-1910), was used to describe the American who, too poor to have political influence and too rich to be considered worthy of a helping hand, was often taken for granted by the political classes. As Sumner so aptly noted, “he works, he votes, generally he prays—but he always pays.”

    There was a post-2016 awakening among those who realized they had ignored a big part of the country—the one that lives far from the corridors of power and the bright lights of cable television studios. Those who hadn’t read J.D. Vance’s “Hillbilly Elegy” before the election rushed to buy a copy. For a while, everyone seemed to understand the hidden pain of those in the so-called Rust Belt of the American Midwest who had paid the highest price for 50 years of social engineering at home and abroad.

    The costs of trade and immigration policies that favored big business were most often felt by the working class in “flyover country.” These policy changes came at a pace so rapid that people had little chance to adapt. Those same families sent their sons and daughters to fight in far off wars with few obvious connections to the national interest. Those who complained were either ignored or deemed xenophobic racists and “deplorables.” How dare they question the collective wisdom of highly educated experts? Never mind that those experts bore almost no consequences for the disastrous effects of their policies. To my knowledge, no politician, university professor, news anchor, military officer, or Wall Street titan has ever seen his job outsourced to a foreign land.

    For a while, the coastal elites made some attempt to empathize with those who don’t define themselves primarily as victims. But the effort to understand how and why President Trump won didn’t last very long. They may have died the day Mr. Trump fired James Comey as director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation—a direct hit on an established and entrenched political elite. Mr. Comey’s abrupt dismissal seemed to represent an existential threat to the order of things in Washington and New York. Instantly, the validity of Mr. Trump’s arguments on major issues like trade, immigration and foreign entanglements took a back seat to efforts to destroy him. The Forgotten Man was forgotten again, almost as quickly as he had been remembered.

    Four years later we are in the midst of a global pandemic that has reordered society again to the detriment of the little guy. Small businesses and their employees must follow the diktats of state and local governments without any assurances about their economic future. Those who can’t work from home see the pandemic as far more than an inconvenience. Debates over trade and immigration have been sidelined in favor of debates over lockdowns and masks, yet Democrats and Republicans alike are finally starting to realize that China was never the good-faith economic partner it was supposed to become when it was granted membership in the World Trade Organization.

    Many more forgotten men and women are also wondering about the costs of lockdowns imposed by a political elite largely insulated from their consequences. The lockdowns’ loudest cheerleaders work in jobs that are easily done from the safety and comfort of home. Pundits and politicians are unlikely ever to need unemployment benefits, or to watch a family business built over generations get wiped out in a matter of months. The forgotten men and women are also wondering why they get so little respect, as customers, from wealthy athletes, television commentators and celebrities who are quick to lecture them about their alleged moral failings, sometimes ascribed to them simply because of the color of their skin.

    As Henry David Thoreau wrote, most men lead lives of quiet desperation. We worry about paying our bills, keeping our kids happy and out of trouble, preserving our property, and protecting our families. Most of us don’t have ambitions greater than living free from want and fear. Most don’t want a European vacation or an apartment in San Francisco. We just want the freedom to say what we think and to worship as we choose. It is remarkable how many in power have forgotten the lessons of the upset of 2016, and the people who made it possible.

  15. I would like to know just why the elected representatives to Congress can get away with lying? Why have they carved out an exception to them that allows them to lie with no punishment? When they are sworn into office, aren’t they swearing to uphold the law? How is it that the head of the House Intelligence Committee can get away with lying for more than 3 years and he is still in office?
    Why?

    Why are they not held accountable by the so called House ‘Ethics’ Committee?
    Who are the fools who continue to elect their lying representatives?
    And what does that say about those who elected the lying Representative?

    1. Good questions.

      It’s illegal for other people to lie to Congress. It should be illegal for members of Congress to lie when in Congress.

      But you’re deluding yourself if you think that Republicans don’t lie just as much, if not more.

  16. Honestly, Mr.Schiff seems, in this case, to be inhabiting an alternative universe. Repeating the same discredited allegations over and over and over isn’t going to make them true.

    1. It doesn’t, but that’s the rhetorical strategy used by at least two of the partisan Democrats who post here.

Leave a Reply