A deep dive into the career of California's Senator and former Representative, focusing on his most significant and controversial moments in American politics.
Adam Bennett Schiff is an American lawyer, author, and politician currently serving as the junior United States senator from California. Prior to his Senate victory in 2024, Schiff represented California's 28th congressional district in the House of Representatives from 2013 to 2024, previously representing the 29th and 27th districts.
Schiff rose to national prominence as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, where he played a central role in the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and led the first impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump in 2019.
Throughout his career, Schiff has been both praised as a defender of democratic institutions and criticized for his handling of sensitive investigations. His actions, particularly during the Trump administration, have made him a polarizing figure in American politics.
Schiff faced criticism for his strong claims about evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, which some argue were not fully supported by the Mueller investigation's findings. Critics accused him of making misleading public statements based on classified information.
As lead impeachment manager during Trump's first impeachment trial, Schiff was accused of mischaracterizing Trump's call with Ukrainian President Zelensky and misleading the public about his staff's contact with the whistleblower whose complaint sparked the impeachment inquiry.
In June 2023, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives censured Schiff for his role in investigations of former President Trump. The censure resolution accused him of "misleading the American public" and "abusing his position of power."
Schiff was criticized for statements suggesting the Hunter Biden laptop story was part of a Russian disinformation campaign. Days before the letter from 51 former intelligence officials was released, Schiff claimed on CNN that the "smear" came from the Kremlin.
Early in his congressional career, Schiff directed earmarks to for-profit defense companies that were also campaign donors, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest. While legal at the time, these actions have been scrutinized for ethical concerns.
Schiff released a memo defending the FISA warrant application on Carter Page. Later, Inspector General Horowitz found 17 major errors or omissions in the applications, leading to criticism that Schiff had misled the public about their accuracy.
As the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee during the Trump administration, Schiff was at the center of investigations into alleged ties between Trump's campaign and Russia. He repeatedly claimed to have seen "more than circumstantial evidence" of collusion.
After Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, Schiff faced criticism for overstating the case. The Mueller report, while documenting Russian interference in the 2016 election, did not establish that the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia.
Republicans, including every Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee in March 2019, called for Schiff's resignation as chairman, arguing he had abused his position and damaged American families with false claims.
Later reports by Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz and Special Counsel John Durham were cited by critics as further evidence that Schiff's claims were unfounded. The Durham report concluded that the FBI had rushed into its investigation and relied too heavily on unconfirmed intelligence.
"The evidence is pretty clear that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians."
- Adam Schiff, CNN interview, 2018
"We found no evidence that any Americans coordinated with the Russian government's interference activities."
- Mueller Report, 2019
"This is the essence of what the president communicates: 'We've been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don't see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though.'"
- Adam Schiff's characterization of Trump's call, September 26, 2019
Schiff served as the lead impeachment manager during President Trump's first impeachment trial, which centered on Trump's dealings with Ukraine. He faced criticism for his handling of the proceedings on several fronts:
Characterization of Trump-Zelensky Call: During a House Intelligence Committee hearing on September 26, 2019, Schiff presented what he called the "essence" of Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, using language that did not directly appear in the transcript. Critics accused him of fabricating quotes and misleading the public.
Whistleblower Contact: Schiff initially denied that his staff had communicated with the whistleblower whose complaint triggered the impeachment inquiry. He later acknowledged that the whistleblower had reached out to an Intelligence Committee aide before filing the complaint, leading to accusations that he had misled the public.
Selective Presentation of Evidence: During the Senate trial, Republicans accused Schiff of selectively presenting evidence and mischaracterizing testimony to strengthen the case against Trump. They argued that he omitted contextual information that might have weakened the impeachment case.
On June 21, 2023, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted to censure Adam Schiff in a largely party-line vote of 213-209. The censure is a formal statement of disapproval that carries no practical consequences beyond public rebuke.
Schiff denounced the censure as a partisan attack motivated by his role in Trump's impeachments. Standing in the well of the House as the censure was read, he defended his actions:
"I am honored to be accounted as a small part of that history. If I am censured for standing up to a president who abused his power and lied about it, who incited a violent insurrection, who still poses a clear and present danger to our democracy, then so be it. I wear this partisan censure as a badge of honor."
In October 2020, the New York Post published a story about a laptop allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden that contained emails about his foreign business dealings. The story emerged just weeks before the 2020 presidential election.
On October 16, 2020, Schiff stated on CNN: "Well we know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin... Clearly, the origins of this whole smear are from the Kremlin, and the president is only too happy to have Kremlin help and try to amplify it."
Three days after Schiff's comments, a letter signed by 51 former intelligence officials was released, stating that the laptop story had "all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation," though they acknowledged they did not have evidence of Russian involvement.
Later investigations by multiple news organizations confirmed the authenticity of the laptop and many of the emails it contained. The FBI had taken possession of the laptop in December 2019, and investigators quickly concluded it was genuinely Hunter Biden's and did not appear to have been tampered with.
Critics argue that Schiff's statements, along with the intelligence officials' letter, contributed to the suppression of a legitimate news story by social media platforms and mainstream news outlets during a critical period before the election.
"Well we know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin... Clearly, the origins of this whole smear are from the Kremlin, and the president is only too happy to have Kremlin help and try to amplify it."
- Adam Schiff, CNN interview, October 16, 2020
"No evidence has publicly surfaced to support suspicions that the laptop was part of a Russian disinformation scheme."
- Wikipedia, reflecting consensus by 2023
Early in his congressional career, Schiff directed earmarks (funds designated for specific projects) to for-profit defense companies that were also campaign donors, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest.
| Company | Earmark Amount | Project | Related Donations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Smiths Detection | $6 million | Military warfare sensors | Connected to PMA Group lobbying firm |
| Phasebridge | $3 million | Radar frequency distribution system | Connected to PMA Group lobbying firm |
| Various companies | Multiple earmarks | Defense projects | $8,500 from PMA Group PAC and related individuals |
| Eureka Aerospace | Not specified | Not specified | Run by campaign donors |
| Tanner Research Inc. | Not specified | Not specified | Run by campaign donors |
Schiff's campaign defended these actions by stating that the contributions represented a small percentage of his total fundraising and that the earmarks were driven by what was best for his constituents and the military. They also noted that these practices occurred before reforms in 2010 that restricted earmarks to non-profit organizations.
Watchdog groups like Taxpayers for Common Sense raised concerns about the appearance of impropriety, even if the practices were legal at the time. While this controversy has received less attention than his role in the Trump investigations, it represents questions about potential conflicts of interest earlier in his career.
The controversy centers around the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant applications used to surveil Carter Page, a former Trump campaign advisor. In February 2018, Schiff released a memo defending the FBI's handling of the FISA application process in response to a memo by Republican Devin Nunes alleging abuses.
Schiff's memo argued that the FBI and Department of Justice officials did not abuse the FISA process and that proper procedures were followed. He defended the FBI's use of information from the Steele dossier in the FISA application, arguing it was appropriately disclosed and vetted.
However, in December 2019, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a report identifying 17 significant errors or omissions in the Carter Page FISA applications. The report found that the FBI had withheld information that might have undermined its case and overstated the reliability of the Steele dossier.
In January 2020, the FISA court issued a rare public statement declaring that the FBI had misled the court. This contradicted key assertions in Schiff's memo and led to accusations that he had misled the public about the integrity of the FISA process.
Critics argue that Schiff's defense of the FISA process, despite these later revelations, demonstrates a pattern of misleading the public on matters related to the Trump-Russia investigation.
Schiff states there is "more than circumstantial evidence" of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Schiff releases memo defending FBI's FISA application on Carter Page, contradicting allegations in the Nunes memo.
Mueller Report finds no evidence of criminal conspiracy between Trump campaign and Russia. Republican Intelligence Committee members call for Schiff's resignation.
Schiff presents controversial characterization of Trump's call with Ukrainian President Zelensky during a congressional hearing.
DOJ Inspector General Horowitz identifies 17 significant errors in the Carter Page FISA applications, contradicting key assertions in Schiff's memo.
Schiff serves as lead impeachment manager in Trump's first Senate trial, which ends in acquittal.
Schiff suggests on CNN that the Hunter Biden laptop story is Russian disinformation, days before 51 former intelligence officials release a letter with similar claims.
House of Representatives votes to censure Schiff for his role in the Trump-Russia investigation.
Schiff wins California Senate race, defeating Republican Steve Garvey.
In November 2024, Adam Schiff won election to the U.S. Senate seat previously held by Dianne Feinstein, defeating Republican Steve Garvey. The campaign itself was not without controversy, as Schiff strategically spent campaign funds to elevate Garvey in the primary, with the goal of facing him rather than fellow Democrats in the general election.
This election marked a new chapter in Schiff's political career, elevating him to the upper chamber after more than two decades in the House of Representatives. As he transitions to the Senate, Schiff carries with him both the support of his admirers, who see him as a principled defender of democratic institutions, and the criticism of his detractors, who question his handling of sensitive investigations.
How Schiff's controversial past will shape his Senate career and whether he will continue to be a polarizing figure in American politics remains to be seen. His election to the Senate ensures that his voice will remain prominent in national debates for years to come.