Lyin Adam Shifty Schiff

That article is almost 2 years old. Why are you questioning this now?

A lot has happened and been found since that Dec 2017 article.

Obviously

In the filing concerning Roger Stone last week, Mueller’s team reported that Stone traded emails about the hacking of Democratic emails with Guccifer 2.0 (a Russian intelligence cutout) and Wikileaks.

That meets your demand for evidence that fits Adam Schiff’s claims, please apologize to Congressman Schiff and give up on this thread.

3 Likes

They will probably have total access to everything that Bobby found. What are they supposed to uncover that Mueller did not? It just looks like Shifty will only accept a finding of guilt. No matter what the investigation shows. What’s the point in doing it all again unless he believes that Mueller was incompetent?

Please stop it. Your lack of understanding of this topic is showing.

Please stop it. Your lack of manners in general is showing.

But I will say this. And you heard it here first. If Shifty had any confidence that Mueller had some smoking gun, he would be planning impeachment. Not yet another investigation. Shifty is worried. And making a fool of himself.

1 Like

[quote=“altair1013, post:67, topic:145469, full:true”]

Please stop it. Your lack of manners in general is showing.

But I will say this. And you heard it here first. If Shifty had any confidence that Mueller had some smoking gun, he would be planning impeachment. Not yet another investigation. Shifty is worried. And making a fool of himself.
[/quote]What makes you think he isn’t planning impeachment? And what makes you think Mueller is sharing any of his info? That just isn’t happening.

  1. The topic was Trump/Russia collusion. Trump is neither Stone nor Russia.

  2. Can you show that at the time Stone knew or believed that Guccifer 2 was a Russian intelligence agency?

BTW, it has been publicly known and bragged about by Stone for a long time that Stone communicated with Guccifer 2…

image https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/cef49c1eb3d86b6ca618126d18c48299ed0e338a/c=51-0-1825-1334/local/-/media/2017/05/11/USATODAY/USATODAY/636300901670745689-AP-United-States-Russia.jpg?width=534&height=401&fit=crop

I wonder what was going on here? Only TASS was present to report and photograph this meeting.

Elect him President?

They brought a message from Vlad telling Trump to quit wearing striped ties. That’s only to signal a ‘drop’.

Bug eyed Schiff…

He may see the future. I think the only consequence trump will face is the shame of being the most dispicable person to ever sit in the Oval Office.

Can you post his comments in full where he says he has direct evidence? I’m not sure I’ve read that anywhere and you seem so certain he said it. Thank you.

The first sentence of the article in question reads:

House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff said Sunday that there is ample evidence Donald Trump’s presidential campaign colluded with Russia.

What you are doing is what Trump and his team have done for two years, which is moving the goal posts each time their position is shown to be false. Your demand for evidence that directly implicates Trump is entirely different than what Schiff said.

So once again, the evidence is clear that you had no basis for calling Schiff a liar. And once again, you need to apologize to Congressman Schiff and terminate this thread.

If we want to talk about liars and Russia, how about Donald Trump saying “I have no business in Russia” at a time when he was actively pursuing Trump Tower Moscow. Why don’t lies like that appear to trouble you?

1 Like

[Evidence in plain sight’ of Trump collusion with Russia, Schiff says](‘Evidence in plain sight’ of Trump collusion with Russia, Schiff says - POLITICO)

But yes, the first sentence does say the Trump campaign while the headline says Schiff was talking about Trump collusion, not the Trump campaign. Either they were different statements by Schiff or clickbait headline by fake news anti Trump media. Take your choice.

That’s a different headline than the NBC version offered by altair in the conversation you were responding to but, you found one that said what you needed. Good catch.

So your evidence that Schiff is lying is that you think he is? Brilliant!!

Schiff’s statement remains clear. You should have started a thread attacking Politico’s headline instead. You stilll owe Congressman Schiff an apology for calling him a liar.

You are grasping at straws when the evidence your attack on Congressman Schiff is in plain view.