TODD: But you admit, all you have right now is a circumstantial case?SCHIFF: Actually, no, Chuck. I can tell you that the case is more than that. And I can't go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. So, again, I think -TODD: You have seen direct evidence of collusion?SCHIFF: I don't to want go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial, and it very much worthy of investigation. So, that is what we ought to do.
March 23, 201721:22
When we contacted the congressman's office, asking if Schiff may have misspoken, and giving him a chance to walk this back, his office said Schiff meant what he said.In other words, the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee was circumspect on Sunday and Monday, pointing to circumstantial evidence, but as of yesterday, Schiff appears to have learned more.Remember, there's more than one angle to the Russia scandal. The idea that a foreign adversary attacked our democracy, stole materials, and launched an illegal espionage operation to help put Trump in the White House is, by any fair measure, one of the most important political scandals in modern American history. What's more, no one seriously denies that this is precisely what happened.But the collusion question is something even more serious. If Trump's campaign and its associates cooperated with a foreign government's effort to attack an American election, it's an order of magnitude more serious. Russia's intervention raises credible questions about the legitimacy of the Trump presidency, but allegations about cooperation between Team Trump and Moscow create an existential threat to the Trump presidency.