If you have to say or do something controversial, aim so that people will hate that they love it and not love that they hate it.
- Criss Jami

posted: June 23, 2023, 8:10 p.m.

Schiff’s censure is a devastating attack on institutional comity masked as a political stunt. It is undisputed that Trump’s campaign (Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign chairman) gave internal campaign polling data to a Russian intelligence operative while Russian intelligence was helping his campaign. Marco Rubio’s Senate Intel Committee investigated these contacts and found that the Russian government wanted Trump to be president, Russian intelligence viewed Trump’s campaign as easily manipulated, and that Trum’s advisers were eager for help from Russia. While this may not have amounted to a “coordinated conspiracy” with the Russian government, Schiff was right to flag this, and to argue over the semantics of how he characterized Manafort’s behavior is a charade.

posted: June 23, 2023, 8:43 p.m.

Even if the censure was appropriate, the circus of people like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert made a completely mockery of the process. Plus, the censure lacks legitimacy without a bipartisan consensus.

posted: June 23, 2023, 8:43 p.m.

As someone that despises Trump and sees him as a threat to democracy, Schiff’s censure makes sense – but not entirely for the reasons the Republicans claim. Schiff misrepresented (lied?) about confidential evidence he claimed proved that Trump colluded with Russia. Once it was revealed that there was no such collusion, Trump solidified his base and forever has the shield of calling any attack on his behavior as a “witch hunt.” The false claim also undermined faith in the intelligence communities. This is just like how the NY/Brag case undermined the records/Smith case.