Wolf, it is still unclear if it
would have enough votes to
pass.
>> Manu, thank you very much.
Manu Raju, up on capitol hill.
Let's stay on capitol hill.
Joining us now, congressman
Adam Schiff.
He's the Democrat of
California.
Thank you so much for joining
us.
We have a lot to discuss, but
first, what does it say to you
that Republicans are now
gearing up for another attempt
to censor you, after this
latest effort today fail?
>> Well look.
I'm flattered that they view me
as such a threat to them.
That they view me as effective
at holding Donald Trump
accountable, and this is the
way they want to lash out.
But it's not going to deter me.
They can introduce all the
resolutions they want, it could
be 16 million or 160 million.
I'm not going to stop defending
our democracy.
But, for the speaker Mccarthy
to bring this stuff to the
floor is an embarrassment.
And it's also an abuse of the
house resources.
It would be laughable if you
had George Santos today saying
we have to pass this to restore
integrity to the house.
This stuff would be laughable
if it wasn't the house of
representatives.
But it's clear the lunatics
have taken over the asylum, and
I want to try to distract from
trump's legal woes, they want
to gratify his Maga base by
going after some of debt they
considerate his chief
antagonist.
>> I know you have defended
your previous comments
defending collusion between
trump and Russia --
have you learned any lessons,
congressman, on how to talk
about his legal peril?
>> Well, wolf, let's face it.
Trump's campaign chairman Paul
manafort, as you know, was
giving internal campaign
polling data and their
battleground strategy for key
states to an agent of Russian
intelligence.
Something that most Americans
call collusion.
So, my statements are accurate.
I stand by them as I think the
American people do, but look.
They are going to go after me
no matter what.
And I am just going to keep on
defending the truth, and I'm
going to keep on defending our
democracy.
The only lesson I take away
from this recent attack is if
you do your job and you stand
up to the Maga world, you have
to be prepared to take all of
the income.
I am prepared to do.
So >> What concerns do you have
about these calls by some house
Republicans to subpoena the
special counsel jack Smith, and
to try to defund his entire
office?
>> I think this is another
reason why they're going after
me.
I serve now as a senior member
of the judiciary committee.
Kevin Mccarthy may rue the day
that he took me off until now,
because I am in a position to
push back against Jim Jordan
and the Republicans on the
committee effort to interfere
in the prosecution of Donald
Trump.
As I said last week, Donald
Trump has --
criminal defense lawyers.
That's not the job of members
of congress to be on his
defense team.
But this is what they are
trying to do and I'm going to
resist those efforts in every
way I can.
It's absurd to me that you have
so many Republicans attacking
the justice department.
They were doing it before they
even read the indictment, now
presidential candidates are
saying that they would pardon
him.
Clearly, in their view, it
doesn't matter how many times
he violates the law, doesn't
matter how serious his
transgressions, they will stand
by him, because they think
that's what the Republican base
is at this moment.
And they are willing to
essentially ignore their oath
of office and they're too deep
to the constitution to devote
themselves completely to this
flawed human being.
>> You are a former federal
prosecutor out in Florida.
Should the U.S. Department
asked judge Aileen cannon to
recuse herself from this case?
>> I don't think there's a
basis for the justice
department to ask her to recuse
herself based on her
appointment by trump or even
the fact that her ruling, which
was a very beneficial to him,
was overturned by a
conservative circuit.
I am concerned with her
impartiality, not because she
was overturned and not because
of who she was appointed by,
but the ruling that she made
earlier.
The appointment of a special
master is so unprecedented in a
criminal proceeding like this
that to me, it does potentially
betray a real bias here and
what caused her judgment to
call into question.
So I do have serious concerns
about her but I don't think
there's a basis for the justice