Why isn’t Schiff charged with lying to Congress?

[Always in His Presence]

What is you point? Either you are accusing Schiff of altering texts, or you are not.

Yes, in pointing out the truth - I along with people much more powerful than I are indeed accusing Schiff of once again altering evidence. Why? Because that is EXACTLY what he did.

Why little ole me is so very important to you, I don't know, but it doesn't change the facts.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Adam Schiff Keeps Lying | National Review

Schiff most famously claimed that Congress had not only uncovered a criminal conspiracy by the president’s 2016 campaign but also that he himself was in personal possession of a “smoking gun.” Schiff never shared any corroboration with the public. When The View’s Meghan McCain asked him about it, Schiff declared that the confirmation had been in “plain sight” the whole time, which was the opposite of his claim that he had uncovered a seditious and clandestine conspiracy.
​

So, Adam Schiff Doctored Text Messages for Anti-Trump Witch Hunt Jan 6th Committee?

So, Adam Schiff Doctored Text Messages for Anti-Trump Witch Hunt Jan 6th Committee?
​

Newly Released Documents Prove Adam Schiff Lied About Trump-Russia Collusion | NewsRadio 740 KTRH | Michael Berry

“...from the earliest days of the collusion narrative, Mr. Schiff insisted that he had evidence proving the plot. In March 2017 on MSNBC, Mr. Schiff teased that he couldn’t “go into particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. ”In December 2017 he told CNN that collusion was a fact: “The Russians offered help, the campaign accepted help. The Russians gave help and the President made full use of that help.” In April 2018, Mr. Schiff released his response to Mr. Nunes’s report, stating that its finding of no collusion “was unsupported by the facts and the investigative record.” None of this was true, and Mr. Schiff knew it.

​

 

[JustOneWay]

Yes, in pointing out the truth - I along with people much more powerful than I are indeed accusing Schiff of once again altering evidence. Why? Because that is EXACTLY what he did..

Finally, we are back to my original post before you waffled between accusing and not accusing - prove that Schiff actually was the one who altered the text, as opposed to being the one who read it. Otherwise you should recant you accusation that Schiff altered evidence.
You are not pointing out truth, you are pointing out accusations and hearsay.

Why little ole me is so very important to you, I don't know, but it doesn't change the facts.

You are not important me at all. Your fast and loose approach to so-called facts are what brings me to your posts.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Finally, we are back to my original post before you waffled between accusing and not accusing - prove that Schiff actually was the one who altered the text, as opposed to being the one who read it. Otherwise you should recant you accusation that Schiff altered evidence.
You are not pointing out truth, you are pointing out accusations and hearsay.

Nope - debate does not go just one way - I've answered your questions - now please answer mine.

Was the evidence altered?

Who is the person in charge?

Who is Jordan speaking directly to?

Does Schiff have a history of doing the same?

When you do answer as clearly as you require others to answer yours - we will continue.

 

[JustOneWay]

Nope - debate does not go just one way - I've answered your questions - now please answer mine.



When you do answer as clearly as you require others to answer yours - we will continue.

This has been thoroughly answered by others here, so I won't discus the minutiae. If removing a part of a tweet and adding a period is altering, then yes that happened. The rest of your points really don't matter, and even if Schiff has done something similar in the past, that is not proof he did so here. Sorry, I operate on facts, and unless you can provide actual evidence that Schiff personally altered the text, there is nothing more to say.

This is not debate. Far from it. If you post baseless accusations I will call you out.

 

[Always in His Presence]

This is not debate. Far from it. You post baseless accusations I will call you out.

Have at it - but as demonstrated repeatedly with links - you are mistaken.

Now add to the facts, the issue is that Adam has not denied doing it. Viola! the truth!

 

[JustOneWay]

Have at it - but as demonstrated repeatedly with links - you are mistaken.

Now add to the facts, the issue is that Adam has not denied doing it. Viola! the truth!

Not admitting to something is not proof of doing something. The logic you use is flawed.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Not admitting to something is not proof of doing something. The logic you use is flawed.

If he had evidence that Jim Jordan was incorrect, he would say it and that would be the end of it. Yet he does not dispute Jim Jordan's accusation - does he? Has Adam said he didn't do it?

Why exactly are you avoiding my repeated questions? Makes me wonder why you are doing so much to avoid them. Interesting

 

[Always in His Presence]

Opinion | What Are the Consequences for Adam Schiff’s Lies?

Regarding your editorial “All the Schiff Transcripts” (May 13): In the good old days if a member of Congress was caught in a major lie, knowingly misleading Congress and the American public, there were consequences. His own party would denounce him, the electorate would surely vote him out of office but perhaps he would resign in disgrace beforehand. But not today. Rep. Adam Schiff was playing to the base with a calculated lie, cheered on by fellow party members and supported by most of the media. He is a hero—to some. There are not, nor will there be, consequences for him. How times have changed. Any wonder the approval rating of Congress is at such an abysmally low rating?​

 

[Always in His Presence]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v...ing_no_prior_contact_with_whistleblower.html#!

Sam Stein: Adam Schiff "Expressed Regret" For Lying About Having No Prior Contact With Whistleblower
​

Adam has a record of lying to Congress

 

[JustOneWay]

As you avoiding my repeated questions? Makes me wonder why you are doing so much to avoid them. Interesting

I answered the questions which deserved an answer, and ignored the ones you could easy provide like Jordon or who's in charge. I am not wasting my time answering irrelevant questions where the answer is undeniable. Now that I've told you, you need not 'wonder' any longer.

 

[JustOneWay]

Opinion | What Are the Consequences for Adam Schiff’s Lies?

Regarding your editorial “All the Schiff Transcripts” (May 13): In the good old days if a member of Congress was caught in a major lie, knowingly misleading Congress and the American public, there were consequences. His own party would denounce him, the electorate would surely vote him out of office but perhaps he would resign in disgrace beforehand. But not today. Rep. Adam Schiff was playing to the base with a calculated lie, cheered on by fellow party members and supported by most of the media. He is a hero—to some. There are not, nor will there be, consequences for him. How times have changed. Any wonder the approval rating of Congress is at such an abysmally low rating?​

Opinion

 

[Always in His Presence]

I answered the questions which deserved an answer, and ignored the ones you could easy provide like Jordon or who's in charge. I am not wasting my time answering irrelevant questions where the answer is undeniable. Now that I've told you, you need not 'wonder' any longer.

Ma authority - got it. Have a good day.

 

[Always in His Presence]

I answered the questions which deserved an answer, and ignored the ones you could easy provide like Jordon or who's in charge. I am not wasting my time answering irrelevant questions where the answer is undeniable. Now that I've told you, you need not 'wonder' any longer.

Third and final attempt - hey, you never know....

Was the evidence altered?

Who is the person in charge?

Who is Jordan speaking directly to?

Does Schiff have a history of doing the same?

 

[JustOneWay]

Ma authority - got it. Have a good day. The Trump camp could have used you.

I would never work for liars.

 

[Always in His Presence]

I would never work for liars.

I didn't say you worked for Schiff.

 

[rambot]

And Adam Schiff is not a friend to truth and honesty.

How was the message changed and misrepresented?

 

[JustOneWay]

Third and final attempt - hey, you never know....

Was the evidence altered?

Who is the person in charge?

Who is Jordan speaking directly to?

Does Schiff have a history of doing the same?

Already answered. I can only post my answers, and I cannot control how you read them.

 

[JustOneWay]

I didn't say you worked for Schiff.

Neither did I.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Already answered. I can only post my answers, and I cannot control how you read them.

Please. Point to the post where you directly answered these questions and I will immediately offer my public apologies.