Revised: Censuring Schiff Resolution Returns to House with Key Change, Posing Potential Trouble
The House Motion to Censure Rep. Adam Schiff Gets a Second Chance
A week ago, the California Democrat narrowly avoided a public rebuke from his colleagues when Republicans voted with Democrats to table the resolution. But now, Schiff is facing judgment once again.
And this time, the numbers are not in his favor.
Schiff, the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, spent years abusing his position to deceive the American people about evidence in the “Russia collusion” hoax against President Trump. His reputation for dishonesty was so well-known that when Republicans took control of the House, Schiff was stripped of his committee membership.
Last week, a resolution to censure Schiff was tabled, but now it’s making a comeback. The resolution’s sponsor, Florida Republican Ana Paulina Luna, plans to reintroduce it without the controversial fine included.
“Censure Schiff Round 2 next week.” – Anna Paulina Luna
Massie, a Kentucky Republican, argued that the fine in the original resolution violated the Constitution’s 27th Amendment and the Eighth Amendment. He believes it was unnecessary overreach and self-defeating.
While Schiff played a role in the hype against the Trump presidency, he was not solely responsible. The FBI, the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the media all played a part in shaping the narrative. Schiff is a symptom of the larger problem of corruption in Washington.
Censuring Schiff would send a signal that Republicans are serious about addressing the corruption he represents. It would also serve as a repudiation of the first Trump impeachment, in which Schiff played a leading role.
If this resolution passes, it would brand Schiff as a liar for all time and could potentially change the minds of millions of Americans who continue to vote for Democrats.
Source: The Western Journal
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
Now loading...