Adam Schiff Crossed A Big Legal Line That Landed Him On the Hot Seat

Adam Schiff never expected to get caught.

But he did.

And Adam Schiff crossed a big legal line that landed him on the hot seat.

As Great American Daily reports:

When Schiff was chairman of the House Intelligence Committee his office pressured Twitter to censor Real Clear Investigations senior reporter Paul Sperry over Sperry’s reporting on how Schiff’s team coordinated the Ukraine impeachment hoax with alleged whistleblower and CIA employee Eric Ciaramella.

“Remove any and all content about Mr. Misko and other Committee staff from its service- to include quotes, retweets, and reactions to that content,” one of Schiff’s aides emailed Twitter with regards to banning Sperry. “Suspend the many accounts, including @GregRubini and @paulsperry, which have repeatedly promoted false QAnon conspiracies.” 

Twitter eventually suspended Sperry’s account.

But the American people only know the truth because of disclosures from Elon Musk’s Twitter Files.

Government officials cannot pressure private entities to carry out censorship that the First Amendment prevents the state from imposing.

Schiff demanding Twitter censor Sperry was a clear violation of established Supreme Court case law.

Sperry addressed the matter on Brian Kilmeade’s Fox News radio show telling Kilmeade that Schiff sought vengeance over the fact that Sperry outed the whistleblower that kicked off the sham impeachment over Ukraine as a partisan Democrat.

“So, Schiff didn’t like the fact I outed his anonymous whistleblower as a partisan Democrat — he’s a holdover from the Obama White House working in the Trump White House. And [Schiff] also didn’t like the fact that I exposed the whistleblower’s prior relationship with the key member of Schiff’s impeachment staff,” Sperry began.

“So, I was kind of a thorn in Schiff’s side, and he was angry,” Sperry continued.

Sperry blasted Schiff for violating his oath to protect and defend the Constitution by supporting government-mandated censorship.

“My stories went viral on Twitter, and he tried to silence me and remove content, which is outrageous censorship by a powerful government official. He was the head of the House Intelligence [Committee] at the time, and he was sworn to protect the First Amendment and free speech and the press,” Sperry added.

Sperry also told Kilmeade that his lawyers were evaluating their options and they were considering suing Schiff for defamation.

“We are exploring legal options, including defamation,” Sperry stated.

A defamation suit would force Schiff to finally come clear in public about the identity of the whistleblower.

Schiff, Big Tech, and the corporate media suppressed the identity of the individual who initially snitched on Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in 2019 where Trump asked Zelensky for help with an investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden’s corruption in Ukraine.

It later emerged that Hunter Biden’s business deals in Ukraine were the subject of a criminal probe.

But if this lawsuit goes forward Schiff will likely have to testify under oath about the identity of the whistleblower.

Great American Daily will keep you up to date on any new developments in this ongoing story and the rest of the breaking news in politics, please bookmark our site, consider making us your homepage and forward our content with your friends on social media and email.