[I’ll post my comment on top. Other than the people within the FBI and the White House that aided and abetted Hillary Clinton’s dirty trick, there is no more corrupt figure in the Russiagate hoax than Adam Schiff. He has spent years lying about it, demagoguing it for personal and political gain, and yet the media never demanded that Schiff actually make good on any of these claims. In a properly functioning republic, Schiff would be trying to avoid prison rather than prepping a run for the Senate. — Ed]

Todd: “But you admit it’s a circum — all you have right now is a circumstantial case.?”
Schiff: “Actually, no, Chuck. I can tell you that the case is more than that. And I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. So, again, I think — “
Todd: “So you have seen direct evidence of collusion?”
Schiff: “I don’t want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and — and is very much worthy of investigation, so — “
(…)
DICKERSON: “There has been a report from CNN Wednesday night that the FBI was looking into collusion with the Russians in the Trump campaign in terms of spreading information about Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Do you have any information to back that up?”
Schiff: “I’m not sure that I can comment on that. I can say that I think that the investigation that the Director talked about it our Monday hearing is justified. I think there is a sufficient basis for that investigation not only to have been initiated, but for it to continue at this point. And I don’t have a concern with other members characterizing the the evidence as they have, and many of them have said they think there’s no evidence of collusion. I disagree with those members as I don’t think that’s accurate, and I feel an obligation to say so.”
(…)
Schiff: “So they can call it a fishing expedition, they can call it a witch hunt, it’s all an aligned message with the White House, but nonetheless, real evidence is coming forward that just can’t be ignored.”
(…)
Schiff: “So we do know a lot more. I think that claims that there was no evidence of collusion have long since fallen away. The question now is, what is the quantum of proof here?”
(…)
Schiff: “Christopher Steele may have found out, even before our own intelligence agencies, that the Russians were, in fact, aiming to help Donald Trump in the election. That has now been borne out by ample evidence.”
(…)
Schiff: “I think you see the most palpable evidence of collusion in terms of violating the Logan Act.”
(…)
Schiff: “Look, I don’t think you can seriously argue that the Russians weren’t trying to help Trump and hurt Clinton, as well as sow discord in the United States. The evidence is quite overwhelming on this. It was the early conclusion of the intelligence community, but that’s only been furthered by all of the evidence we’ve seen in our investigation.”
(…)
TAPPER: “…and put out a statement in a report, basically saying that they found no evidence of collusion between the Trump team and the Russian government. Have Democrats found any evidence of collusion?”
Schiff: “Yes, we have.”
(…)
BRENNAN: “Can you agree that there has been no evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy that has been presented thus far between the Trump campaign and Russia?”
Schiff: “No, I don’t agree with that at all. I think there’s plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight.”
(…)
Schiff: “That it is very possible that the best evidence is yet to come. (…) But look, you can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of colludsion.”
(…)
Schiff: “George, there’s ample evidence of collusion of the campaign and its…”
(…)
BRENNAN: “The Senate Intel Chairman also said, at this point, no evidence of collusion at this point. Have you seen, do you have direct evidence of collusion with Russia?”
Schiff: “Well, I think there is direct evidence. (…) …while there is abundant evidence of collusion.”
(…)
Schiff: “But as I’ve said along, there’s plenty of evidence of collusion.”
(…)
GEIST: “And you said on this show and others that there’s direct evidence of collusion. Were you wrong about that now that you’ve seen these summary of the council’s report?”
Schiff: “No.”
(…)
Schiff: “Because I was saying no collusion, they’re just wrong — “
McCAIN: “You’ve been saying that on TV for years.”
Schiff: “I will tell you, and I’ve also been saying, as you know, that the evidence is in plain sight.”