Adam Schiff Gets Vocabulary Lesson from Trey Gowdy After Bringing Up 'Collusion' Again
Despite a long, drawn-out investigation that hasn’t uncovered any evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff continues to push the narrative, insisting there’s is “evidence in plain sight.”
So, in true “Bulldog Gowdy” form, Republican Trey Gowdy, the former South Carolina representative and federal prosecutor, decided to give the California politician a little English lesson.
During “The Story with Martha MacCallum” Tuesday night, MacCallum played Gowdy a clip of Schiff claiming there’s clear evidence that President Donald Trump colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 presidential election.
“You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said Monday on CNN. “Now, there is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Rep. Adam Schiff: “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion.” https://t.co/NaVAhdkdq1 pic.twitter.com/NS6TPLTnFT
— The Hill (@thehill) February 18, 2019
Schiff apparently couldn’t see the obvious contradiction in his comments, so Gowdy gave him a lesson on the word “collusion.”
“Well, collusion is a synonym for conspiracy,” Gowdy said. “So, I hope the questioner followed up and said, ‘OK, Chairman Schiff, you have just said that you have evidence of a criminal conspiracy between the president of the United States and the Russian state. What is that evidence? What is the crime?'”
“I’ve heard Adam on a number of occasions say that he is the third eye raven, has evidence and seen things that nobody else has ever seen before,” Gowdy continued.
“But I’ve never heard him asked, ‘What is it? What’s the evidence of crime that you have, Chairman Schiff?’ I’ve never heard it followed up on.”
Clearly, Schiff doesn’t have any proof of what he’s saying. He just hopes if he shouts “collusion” and “evidence” enough times, people might believe him.
Besides, even Schiff’s own statement about the alleged collusion is self-defeating — he admitted he can’t prove collusion happened “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
And without having evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt,” it’s impossible to convict someone.
But that doesn’t stop Democrats from pretending they have all the facts they need to condemn Trump and his administration.
CNN won’t hold Schiff accountable for his nonsensical claims, but thankfully Trey Gowdy did.
CORRECTION, Feb. 22, 2019: This article was originally published under the headline, “Gowdy Gives Schiff Grammar Lesson After Bringing Up ‘Collusion’ Again.” The construction of the headline implied that former U.S. Rep. Gowdy brought up collusion “again,” but in reality, it was Rep. Schiff who did so.
Because the change, while important for accuracy, did not materially affect the sense of the headline, The Western Journal will not re-post this article on social media as we often do with headline changes.
We have corrected the headline and apologize to Trey Gowdy and our readers for any confusion we may have caused.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
