Adam Schiff Admits That There is ‘No Indication’ That Trump is Under Investigation By the DOJ For Jan. 6

U.S. House Rep Adam Schiff (D-CA) admitted today on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that there is “no indication” that the 45th President Donald Trump is under investigation by the DOJ for Jan. 6.

Schiff added that he believes there is “sufficient evidence” that the former president “violated multiple federal laws.”

However, Schiff didn’t name specific laws that he believes Trump violated, just that since he is no longer in office, he should be able to be prosecuted.

Host Chuck Todd:

“A couple things, this week, boy, the Department of Justice has certainly let the public know it was doing a lot more on January 6th than we’d seen in the past.”

“I think there were subpoenas served on at least nine people in four states. A search warrant was executed on the home of Jeffrey Clark.”

“You’ve been critical in the past of the Justice Department. You felt as if there was maybe, maybe they were being a little passive.”

“Do you still have that criticism or do you look at their actions this week and does that reassure you a little bit?”


“It certainly seems that there’s a greater sense of urgency than I’ve seen before. At the same time, I have yet to see any indication that the former president himself is under investigation.”

“And I concur with what Judge Carter out in California said, that there’s sufficient evidence to believe the former president violated multiple federal laws. And you can’t hold anyone immune.”

“You can’t say there’s a different standard, different rule of law for former presidents. Particularly when you took the position while they were in office that they couldn’t be indicted.”


“This country’s, I’d characterize it as dangerously divided right now. And an indictment of a former president, that could throw gasoline on this fire.”

“Choosing not to hold him accountable could also throw gasoline on this fire. What is – there are no good outcomes here.”

“What’s the worst outcome on that front, and do you understand why the attorney general may be really struggling with this decision?”


“Well, I think it’s a very difficult decision, but I don’t think it’s a difficult – that is, to prosecute. It’s not a difficult decision to investigate when there’s evidence before you.”

“And I think the worst-case scenario is not that Donald Trump runs and wins, but that he runs and loses and they overturn the election.”

“Because there’s no deterrent because there’s no effort to push back and to hold people accountable.”


“What if you prosecute him and he gets off?”


“Well, that’s always a risk. But the fact is, if you follow the evidence where it leads, if you believe that you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, then you have a duty to prosecute.”

“And the decision not to investigate or not to prosecute becomes a political decision that, well, this person is immune from the rule of law.”

Leave a Reply

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