In a current episode of Meet the Press, Russia collusion hoaxer Senator-elect Adam Schiff voiced his loud disapproval of President-elect Trump’s cupboard picks—aside from one: Marco Rubio.
Kristen Welker opened the phase by probing Schiff in regards to the ongoing investigation into Congressman Matt Gaetz.
Schiff insisted that the report ought to be made public, arguing that taxpayers deserve transparency relating to the actions of their elected officers.
Kristen Welker:
Let’s begin off by speaking about Matt Gaetz… The Home Ethics Committee has launched this investigation. Particulars of it began to leak out this week to some members on Capitol Hill. However do you suppose that report ought to be made public?Adam Schiff:
I do suppose it ought to be made public. I don’t suppose that when somebody decides to keep away from public accountability, they merely depart Congress and make all of it go away. The taxpayers paid for that evaluation and that report. I believe they’ve a proper to see it.Kristen Welker:
Do you suppose it will likely be made public? Do you have got any indication?Adam Schiff:
I don’t know. It looks as if on a party-line foundation, Republicans are saying, “No, the general public has no proper to see this,” and what’s extra, “We don’t need the general public to see this.” Nevertheless it underscores to me why the President’s lack of background checks for his nominees is flawed. He might have nonetheless determined to appoint Matt Gaetz, but when they did an intensive vetting, he might have determined to not.That vetting course of, having the FBI evaluation potential nominees, will not be solely to guard the general public curiosity; it’s to guard the President-elect’s curiosity to make it possible for he’s not embarrassed by nominating somebody like Matt Gaetz.
So I believe it exhibits a flaw within the course of that he even received nominated. Maybe with respect to Hegseth as nicely, had an intensive investigation been achieved, it might need influenced the President-elect’s determination to appoint him within the first place.
Because the dialog shifted to Trump’s cupboard picks, serial liar Schiff wasted no time launching right into a tirade towards nominees Pam Bondi and Tulsi Gabbard, each of whom he painted as dangerously unqualified.
His criticisms of Bondi centered on her unapologetic assist for election integrity and her willingness to name out prosecutors weaponizing their places of work for political acquire.
In the meantime, Gabbard, a vocal critic of countless wars, was derided for her so-called “Kremlin speaking factors” and “fondness for Bashar al-Assad”—accusations recycled straight from the Democrat Celebration’s biggest hits of smear ways.
Gabbard, a fight veteran and former Democratic congresswoman, has been a thorn within the facet of the institution for years. Her opposition to reckless international coverage interventions and her calls for presidency accountability have made her a goal of relentless character assassination.
Kristen Welker:
Let me ask you massive image. Clearly, President-elect Trump has now stated he desires to choose Pam Bondi to function his legal professional normal. He has swept the battleground states. He received the favored vote. Republicans have management of the Home and the Senate. Do you suppose that the President-elect ought to have his picks confirmed?Adam Schiff:
Properly, I believe the President has a proper to appoint anybody who’s certified, who has common sense and good character. Does that imply he’s assured the Senate approval of whoever he nominates? A few of these nominations are deeply problematic.I’ll have an interest within the affirmation course of. Will Pam Bondi proceed to inform the massive lie even beneath oath? Is she going to proceed to say that the Justice Division ought to be prosecuting prosecutors who introduced legitimate proof earlier than a grand jury?
A grand jury discovered possible trigger to imagine Donald Trump dedicated crimes. That’s not a foundation to go after them. So she’s going to need to reply robust questions.
Tulsi Gabbard issues me a fantastic deal—that somebody who has echoed Kremlin speaking factors, somebody who has appeared to make frequent trigger with somebody like Bashar al-Assad, who gasses his personal folks, and somebody who has no expertise in any respect, not even on the intelligence committee in Congress, ought to be working these companies. They’re going to have robust inquiries to reply.
[…]
Kristen Welker:
Let’s speak about your former colleague, who you simply talked about, Tulsi Gabbard. She’s been picked as Director of Nationwide Intelligence. Simply final week, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz stated Gabbard was “possible a Russian asset.” Do you share these issues, or is that overstated?Adam Schiff:
Properly, I wouldn’t describe her that approach. However I might say this: She has actually echoed speaking factors for the Kremlin. She appeared to have taken Putin’s facet when he invaded Ukraine. And her fondness for Bashar al-Assad, somebody who’s gassing his personal folks, calls her judgment deeply into query.So right here you have got somebody with very questionable judgment and no expertise. That’s not a fantastic recipe for working the companies. The issue is, if our international allies don’t belief the top of our intelligence companies, they’ll cease sharing info with us, and that makes our nation much less secure. So I’ve profound issues about her.
Regardless of his staunch opposition to Trump’s nominees, Schiff was fast to bathe reward on Senator Marco Rubio, calling him “unquestionably certified” for his position.
Kristen Welker:
Senator-elect Schiff, is there anybody on this listing who, at this very second, you suppose you can vote sure on, you can assist?Adam Schiff:
For instance, I believe Marco Rubio is enormously nicely certified for the job for which he’s been nominated. I nonetheless wish to ask questions. I’m not going to fully prejudge even him, however he’s unquestionably certified, and there are others as nicely. Some actually stand out for the danger they’d current to the American folks.Kristen Welker:
So proper now, Senator Rubio would have your vote as a sure?Adam Schiff:
Properly, I’m strongly inclined that approach. I don’t wish to prejudge fully since you by no means can inform what comes out within the vetting course of, however he’s unquestionably certified.
WATCH:
