Connect with us

Congress

How an Adam Schiff indictment could shake the Senate

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s retribution campaign against his political adversaries could soon hit the Senate — and lawmakers are already bracing for impact.

After securing the indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, Trump has his sights set on Sen. Adam Schiff, the California Democrat who as a member of the House managed the president’s first impeachment trial.

If Schiff ends up indicted on allegations of mortgage fraud — a charge he has vehemently denied — or for any other claim, it would mark an unprecedented escalation for Trump to target an outspoken political adversary who is also a federal elected official.

As Schiff solicits dollars for a legal defense fund and builds an expansive political operation prepared to do damage control around any potential charges, Schiff’s Democratic colleagues in Congress are increasingly anxious about their own vulnerability. They are also frustrated with the unwillingness of Republican senators to speak out on Schiff’s behalf.

“I’ve spoken to a number of Republicans, and they are certainly disquieted, if not dismayed, by the increasing weaponization of the Department of Justice,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “Because it tears down the norms and rule of law that protects them and all Americans, as well as Adam Schiff and Democrats who may be targeted by Trump.”

It has been just a few months since news broke that Schiff was being investigated for mortgage fraud relating to the financing of his Maryland residence — and weeks since Trump in a social media post called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to go after Schiff, Comey and James. Recent reports have suggested the case against Schiff has stalled as prosecutors are said to be struggling to find sufficient evidence to bring up charges.

“[Trump has] been more than willing to go after his political opponents — to go after universities, to go after law firms, to go after media organizations,” Schiff said last week. “It’s all part of the same effort to silence and intimidate critics and, I think, needs to be recognized for what it is.”

The investigation remains ongoing, however. And FBI Director Kash Patel, another longtime Schiff foe, continues to brandish accusations that Schiff, as chair of the House Intelligence Committee, sought to leak potentially damaging information about Trump. 

A report from the DOJ Office of Inspector General, in which names have been redacted, found that the witness levying the leaking charges against Schiff had “little support for their contentions.” Schiff, through a spokesperson, has denied the claims.

Lawmakers of both parties are now closely watching to see what will become of Schiff. Interviews with senators revealed concerns that their institution is at risk of becoming further polarized if the DOJ goes ahead with charges.

“You can’t go around threatening people everyday and have a collaborative environment,” said Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.).

Democrats are on edge, worrying a Schiff indictment would open the floodgates to more targeting of Democratic elected officials. Many Republicans are either visibly uncomfortable with the dynamics or unwilling to weigh in on a matter that could put them crosswise with the president.

Because Trump took the step of publicly calling on his attorney general to go after Schiff — a break with historical precedent in which the White House has kept its distance from the Justice Department — an indictment would play out differently on Capitol Hill than past episodes where lawmakers have found themselves under legal scrutiny.

The most recent senatorial indictment — of Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), accused of bribery in 2023 — presented an awkward situation for many of his longtime colleagues in both parties. Most Democrats repeated the “innocent until proven guilty” mantra while praising him for stepping aside from his leadership post atop the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as the case worked through the system.

Menendez was convicted at trial and is now serving an 11-year prison sentence. In recent months, he has sought to endear himself to Trump, who has pardon-granting power.

But Schiff’s indictment would challenge those old norms in almost every way. Democrats are expected to rush to his defense and blast the Trump administration for carrying out a personal vendetta. Many Republicans will have to decide how strongly to push back, if they do at all.

Senate Democrats concede they are nervous about the looming threat. Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, for instance, said in an interview her team has been in touch with Schiff’s office about how to prepare to be the subject of a Trump investigation.

“We’ve already created a break-glass plan for ourselves if the spotlight turns to others in the caucus,” said Slotkin. A former CIA analyst from a swing state, her decision to support impeaching Trump in 2019 helped catalyze the successful vote in the House.

“It’s based on the experience we’ve watched Adam go through,” she continued of her own preparations. “How do you have a lawyer ready to go? How do you make sure … you know the legal left and right limits of what you can and cannot do? How do you think about a legal defense fund? I mean, there’s a lot of details.”

Schiff’s national profile precedes his current predicament, which means he’s had a considerable infrastructure supporting him. In the years between his election to the House in 2000, his rising to prominence during the first Trump administration, and then winning a Senate seat last year, he has assembled a team of Democratic firms and advisers.

He is standing up a legal defense fund and has an $8.6 million campaign war chest, more than $2 million of which was raised in the year’s most recent fundraising quarter alone — notable because he is not up for reelection until 2030.

A spokesperson for Schiff would not say how much cash is currently in the legal defense fund, but donations from any unrelated individual into that fund cannot exceed $10,000 per fiscal year and lawmakers cannot transfer campaign money into the account. Per Senate rules, members may set up a legal expense trust fund to pay for their defense, but they have to regularly disclose contributions and spending to the Senate Ethics Committee.

Schiff is being represented by the legal giant WilmerHale; one of his lawyers is Preet Bharara, a former U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York who was fired by Trump in 2017 for refusing to follow orders to resign as a Barack Obama-era appointee.

On Capitol Hill, Democrats want Republicans to step up and offer support, too.

“We’re in the middle of a totalitarian takeover, in part, because even threatening major political figures like Adam Schiff … with arrest undoubtedly has a chilling impact on political speech,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said in an interview. “It’s been heartbreaking to see relative silence from Republicans in the face of these threats.”

Schiff said he has not yet heard directly from GOP colleagues about his case. However, Murphy is among some Senate Democrats, including Blumenthal, who say they are privately back-channeling with Republicans about the DOJ’s actions against Trump’s political enemies, including Schiff.

For many of the Republican Senators who work alongside Schiff daily, the situation is complicated. Notoriously chatty Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John Kennedy (R-La.) — Trump loyalists who serve with Schiff on the Senate Judiciary Committee — declined to discuss the matter.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) would only point to the probe’s reportedly dimming prospects when asked for his reaction to the case.

“I just go by what I saw on television, that the people in the Justice Department thought … it was a difficult case to win,” he said.

A spokesperson for the Department of Justice declined to comment and pointed to a recent social media post from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche denying news reports about the obstacles in charging Schiff for mortgage fraud.

Some Senate Republicans are avoiding comment on Schiff’s predicament by maligning former President Joe Biden for weaponizing the Justice Department — exactly what Democrats say is happening now under Trump.

“I don’t know the underlying facts, but I believe the Department of Justice should enforce the law and not be weaponized the way it was for four years under Joe Biden,” said Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) in an interview.

Further underscoring the treacherous terrain in which Schiff now finds himself is that some Republicans are outwardly eager to have him targeted.

“Adam Schiff was probably the most corrupt member of Congress when it came to pushing the totally false collusion hoax. … He used his position as chair of Intel to push that thing,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.). He was referring to the accusations during the first Trump impeachment trial that centered around claims that Trump pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to dig up information about Biden.

Johnson, the chair of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, is now leading an inquiry into revelations that Biden special counsel Jack Smith obtained the phone records of Republican lawmakers as part of his probe into Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.

“It’s unfortunate the Democrats in California would elect someone like that who’s been censured by the House, that is so thoroughly proven a liar,” said Johnson, referring to a Republican-led 2023 House effort to condemn Schiff for his role in investigating Trump.

“He needs to be investigated,” he added.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

GOP senators urge Trump to find Iran exit plan as energy prices rise: ‘The clock is ticking’

Published

on

President Donald Trump promised a quick end to the war in Iran, but the ongoing conflict has kept energy costs high — and some Senate Republicans are starting to go public with their concerns.

GOP lawmakers who already feared November would be an increasingly tough battle are trying to nudge the president toward clearly defining his endgame after a surge in oil, gas and fertilizer prices. Trump warned the sticker shock might not completely recede by the time the November elections roll around, though news Friday that the Strait of Hormuz would reopen could begin to bring some relief if the agreement sticks.

Several GOP senators are warning the president could face growing pushback, including them not supporting military action against Iran after the conflict hits the 60-day mark at the end of the month, if he doesn’t articulate his plan. The White House could try to invoke a 30-day extension for national security reasons.

“I hope that we are arriving at an exit strategy here to bring this to a close to preserve our security interests and bring down the cost of gasoline,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told reporters this week, adding that the “clock is ticking” on the war.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said in an interview that she and a group of other senators are in the process of drafting an authorization for the use of military force against Iran, which would lay out when and how Trump could use force. She pointed to the 60-day threshold as a possible deadline for hammering out text, saying it would be “helpful” for it to be done by then.

Even senior Republicans are warning that if the administration wants Congress to greenlight tens of billions in additional war funding, Republicans are going to need to know more about the president’s ultimate Iran strategy beforehand.

“I think our members are going to be very interested in what next steps are,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, predicting that the administration’s forthcoming Iran war spending ask “will be an important inflection point if and when the administration submits their request.”

Thune, like most congressional Republicans, has been supportive of the administration’s Iran campaign but said the impact on gas and fertilizer prices is “a big deal” back in his home state of South Dakota.

“We’re in planting season so if you didn’t buy fertilizer ahead of time, you’re really feeling it, and obviously fuel is a critically important part of production, agriculture,” Thune said this week, prior to the Strait’s reopening.

Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) predicted his party would ultimately keep the Senate majority, but said the Iran war and the related spike in pricing could be a drag when they are already facing “headwinds.”

“The president has to help us get the vote out,” Tillis said. “But the base alone is not going to be able to do it. The way we’re going to get the other ones is addressing the energy challenges, particularly the price at the pump and some of the other affordability issues.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), in an interview before Friday’s announcement, predicted that prices would come down after the strait’s reopening and that it would matter the most in September, when swing voters start tuning in for the midterms.

“If we’re going into September and, even more, October … with super high — you know gas prices over $4 — I mean it’s going to be a problem,” Cramer said.

There were early signs of celebration from Senate Republicans Friday over the announcement that the strait had reopened, even if it’s potentially only temporarily.

“Very glad to hear the Strait of Hormuz is open, at least for the remainder of the ceasefire,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wrote on X.

Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), also took a victory lap: “Will Dems be making comments about the massive drop in oil prices?” he asked.

Trump has suggested that he is eager to negotiate a deal to end the conflict. And GOP lawmakers have largely deferred to Trump so far — including defeating attempts in both chambers this week to limit the president’s ability to carry out additional military action without Congress.

But even with oil shipments through the strait set to resume now, some Republicans say generally, they want to see the president focusing more on affordability issues.

“I would like to see the president spend 70 percent of his time talking about all the things that we and he have done to reduce the cost of living and 30 percent of his time on other important stuff,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said in an interview.

Continue Reading

Congress

GOP hard-liners threaten to tank FISA vote

Published

on

House GOP hardliners are threatening to tank the FISA rule shortly on the House floor as Speaker Mike Johnson tries to force through a five year extension, according to four people granted anonymity to speak about plans not yet public.

They’re livid over the “inexplicable 5 year extension, the fake warrant requirement, and the walk back of the promise from this afternoon to include CBDC,” according to one of the people, referring negotiations to prohibit a central bank digital currency.

Continue Reading

Congress

‘The original sin:’ Hill Republicans blame White House for slow-walking FISA sales pitch

Published

on

A messy GOP battle over a key government spy authority boiled over in the House this week — but the crisis was months in the making.

White House officials and Republican Hill leaders have tried to pressure GOP hard-liners into approving a clean, 18-month extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that President Donald Trump demanded. But amid a GOP rebellion on Capitol Hill, Speaker Mike Johnson Thursday afternoon punted a vote on the measure for the second day in a row.

The program expires Monday night. Senators went home for the weekend as Johnson continued to pursue a compromise with the holdouts for an extension as long as three years with reforms, and raced to hold a vote.

Now, the finger-pointing among Republicans is rampant and temperatures are running high.

A band of House ultraconservatives — who have long been concerned that warrantless government surveillance of foreign individuals could sweep up data on Americans — shot down Trump and GOP leaders’ long-held plans for the 18-month extension with no reforms earlier this week.

“A clean extension ain’t going to move on the floor,” Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, one of the head House GOP holdouts, warned earlier this week.

In interviews with more than two dozen Republican lawmakers and aides on Capitol Hill involved in the talks, many of whom were granted anonymity to speak freely about the contentious policy debate, the consensus is that the White House is largely responsible for the current breakdown as GOP factions snipe and assign blame.

“This is why we shouldn’t wait until the last minute on these things,” one House Republican fumed Thursday. A congressional GOP aide added, “The White House was too late to come to a decision. That was the original sin.”

A senior White House official disputed the characterization from some Hill Republicans that the administration had taken too long to plead their case. They pointed to a briefing in the Situation Room months ago with Republican lawmakers, during which “the president heard arguments on both sides of the issue.”

The official added, “We’ve had multiple briefings from senior officials, both on the House and Senate side, about the desirability of this program. Again, going back months ago.”

Trump told House Intelligence Chair Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) and House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) that he wanted a clean extension, without reforms, in February. The president arrived at this position, a second White House official said, after “the administration completed a policy process through the interagency and advised POTUS that a clean extension was the best course and solicited views on length from Blue Light News.”

There was also coordination between the White House and Capitol Hill, according to three people familiar and the senior White House official: Johnson requested the reauthorization run for 18 months, and Trump agreed.

The administration succeeded in convincing Jordan, who had previously pushed for changes to Section 702, to publicly support a clean extension following a White House meeting on the subject.

But ultraconservatives on Capitol Hill were harder to convince, with some House Republicans correctly predicting two months ago they were going to have issues as the vote drew nearer. Trump has forced those hard-liners to cave in recent months on other fights, but the spy powers legislation was one area where members have not been as willing to relent.

While Trump officials made outreach to members at least two months ago, Hill engagement ramped up in the days leading up to the scheduled vote. That has included appeals to lawmakers from CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Deputy CIA Director Michael Ellis and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine, according to five people. Ellis has made personal phone calls to members, according to two people familiar with the pressure campaign.

White House deputy chief of staff James Blair, White House Legislative Affairs chief James Braid and other legislative affairs officials have also been calling individual House Republicans and working through negotiation details, according to six other people with direct knowledge of the conversations.

Noticeably absent from this outreach is Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Her office plays a statutory role in overseeing Section 702 and has historically been a key proponent of the powerful spy powers.

Gabbard in early February expressed concerns to Trump about reauthorizing the statute without additional privacy guardrails, as Blue Light News reported earlier Thursday, though her appeal appears to have been unsuccessful.

And while the administration’s position on Section 702 came into focus in February, there were signs earlier in the month that its position had not fully crystallized. Officials meeting with the Senate Intelligence Committee at that time refused to divulge the White House’s stance on extending the surveillance power and adding reforms, according to five people with knowledge of the meeting. The exchange frustrated Republicans and Democrats on the panel, who are generally supportive of the surveillance program.

Due to a quirk in the law, the administration will still be able to operate the program for nearly a year even if it is not renewed, and privacy advocates have argued that Monday is a false deadline. But without the law on the books, communications providers like Google and AT&T, which the government tasks to surveil foreign messages, could stop complying with those orders.

But White House officials want an extension codified now, all the same. They have been arguing in conversations with lawmakers that the country is at war and national security is paramount amid threats from Iran. Therefore, they say, hardliners should fall in line to back the clean extension without delay, according to five people involved in the conversations.

“The program is critical for the United States military to listen to the conversations of foreign terrorists abroad while we are engaged in a military operation in Iran. That’s what we’ve been telling individuals, as well as the elevated threat levels around the world, as well as the threat from Mexican drug cartels,” the senior White House official said.

Two groups of House GOP hard-liners, after being summoned by Trump Tuesday night, met with officials at the White House. But some of the Republicans declined the invitation.“I’ve heard everything that the executive has to say on FISA,” Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said in an interview that evening. That meeting, however, marked a shift: Those House Republicans who went to the White House alongside GOP leaders — among them Roy and Reps. Keith Self of Texas, Byron Donalds of Florida, Clay Higgins of Louisiana, Morgan Griffith of Virginia and Warren Davidson of Ohio — took the opportunity to begin negotiations about a framework for a possible agreement around the use of warrants to access certain information.

The discussions included how the White House and GOP leadership needed to make good on a months-old promise to advance legislation that would ban a central bank digital currency. Enough House GOP holdouts late Thursday evening were threatening to still tank the procedural vote to advance the extension if the White House didn’t address the digital currency matter, according to four people with direct knowledge of the matter. “Unless it’s included, there’s enough votes to kill the rule,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said in an interview Thursday afternoon. But other Republicans, White House officials and Senate GOP leadership are warning that attaching the measure directly would tank the FISA bill.

In exchange for making these concessions, GOP leaders and the White House have been pushing for a Section 702 extension that’s longer than 18 months and closer to three years.

The senior White House official also said Thursday the administration has “focused in on potentially having conversations about reforms to the program that we think would strengthen protections for American civil liberties … those conversations are ongoing.”

Jordan, meanwhile, has been helping build support for a clean extension by privately telling some Republicans that, if they can pass this 18-month clean extension now, they could potentially work on warrant reforms later, according to three people with direct knowledge of the discussions. That’s raised some eyebrows internally among House Republicans.

The House delays are leaving barely any time for the Senate to act. Majority Leader John Thune said in an interview Thursday that he’s already started having conversations with his own members about what they would need to clear a FISA extension Monday.

Ultimately, even if GOP leaders strike a deal on changes to the current proposed extension, it could risk support for reauthorization among key Democrats, who Republicans will need to pass the final legislation in a narrowly-divided House. While some House Democrats are expected to help Republicans get the final bill across the finish line — including top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut — Democratic leaders have so far declined to shore up the votes for any fast-tracked process.

“I am deeply skeptical of a straightforward extension,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Thursday, adding he told Johnson a few days ago there was “great Democratic skepticism” on a clean extension.

One Democratic Hill aide said Johnson and Trump did far too little to coordinate their pitch with Democrats, who carried a razor-thin vote to re-up the law in 2024.

“They never came to us,” the aide said.

Continue Reading

Trending