House Intel chair: There's 'pretty compelling evidence' of collusion


Rep. Adam Schiff says the GOP chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee is wrong to suggest there's no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff says there is "pretty compelling" evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign in Russia.

Schiff, who now heads the House Intelligence Committee's re-opened Russia investigation since Democrats took control of Congress, made the comment Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."

He was pushing back on an assertion from his Senate counterpart, Richard Burr (R-NC), who is running the Senate Intelligence Committee's Russia investigation, and who claimed last week he had seen no evidence of collusion in the probe.

"You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence," Schiff said.

Schiff pointed to a handful of public pieces of evidence that suggest collusion. They include:

  • The meeting top Trump campaign officials had with a Kremlin-connected lawyer to obtain "dirt" on Hillary Clinton;
  • Now-former national security adviser Mike Flynn's talks with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak;
  • And former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos' communications with Russian officials during the 2016 election.

Schiff isn't the only Democrat pushing back on Burr's comments.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has also pushed back on Burr's assertion.

Schiff was clear to point out that having evidence of collusion and being able to convict someone on that evidence are two separate things.

"Now, there's a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt," Schiff said.

But, no matter how much Trump screams "witch hunt," Schiff appears confident that there's clear evidence collusion occurred.

"All of this is evidence of collusion," Schiff said. "And you either have to look the other way to say it isn't, or you have to have a different word for it, because it is a corrupt dealing with a foreign adversary during a campaign."

Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.