We’re backtracking a bit, but Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, had an epiphany last week: it’s not good to hurl accusations without any evidence. The California Democrat was speaking with CNN’s Chris Cuomo, where he was discussing the recent allegations that former National Security Adviser Susan Rice was behind the unmasking of at least one Trump official working on the transition team. Of course, you saw the Left/Right split. The liberal media thought this was a right wing distraction from the ongoing Congressional probes into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence during the 2016 election. The rest of us were concerned about the allegations since they involved the Obama administration’s favorite liar, who took to the Sunday morning talk shows to say that the 2012 Benghazi attack was due to a spontaneous reaction to an offensive YouTube video. That was false; the administration knew it was a terrorist attack. One that was well planned by a group affiliated with al-Qaeda. It totally undercut President Obama’s assertion that the terror group was on the run. The release of Hillary Clinton’s emails further revealed that the then-secretary of state knew Benghazi was a terrorist attack.
In March, Rice said on PBS that she had no idea about the unmasking, but later said on MSNBC this month that unmasking was part of her job.
“We only do it to protect the American people and to do our jobs,” she said later on, while denying that she leaked anything. She also said that this wasn’t politically motivated.
Schiff called the allegations against Rice as nothing more than unsubstantiated gossip from the “Breitbart crowd.”
“The first is the accusation against Susan Rice by the Breitbart crowd and by people here within this building that are tossing around slanderous accusations without evidence,” he said to Cuomo.
Well, isn’t that interesting. There is zero evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with Russian intelligence to sink Clinton, but that’s all you hear from the Left. The system was rigged against Clinton. That has to be the reason (if you’re a liberal), not because she was unlikable, inauthentic, had no economic message, and was an abysmal campaigner—with a rather lofty assumption that the Obama coalition would align with her. Did it not register that she might have some work in that department when core constituencies in that coalition were more enthused and energized by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in the primaries?
Schiff has also heavily insinuated that there is circumstantial evidence of collusion, while also saying that there’s direct evidence of deception. Strong stuff, until he admitted last week that there was no definitive proof of Russian collusion with the Trump camp. Even Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee admit that they may never find a smoking gun that could open the way for impeachment or to further hamstring the Trump administration from governing.
You can’t hurl allegations against Susan Rice without evidence, but you can insinuate that Trump is a Russian agent without evidence because he’s a Republican. Yeah—that sounds like liberal thinking to me.