Adam Schiff MALFUNCTIONS when Trump nominee refuses to play his silly games

Added: 2026-05-08

[00:00:00]Hey y'all and welcome to Polit. My name is Brian and Justin Smith, Trump's nominee here, absolutely roast Adam Schiff and then Eric Schmidt comes in as the ultimate icing on this cake. Let's dive in.

[00:00:14]>> You were part of the president's legal team uh defending the president, articulating the president's position in Trump v. United States. I want to ask you about that. In the court of appeals, uh, John Sauer, one of the council for the president, was asked by a court of appeals judge, uh, Penn in the DC circuit whether under your theory of the case, his theory of the case, a president could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political opponent and not be subject to prosecution for it. Sour's answer was effectively, that's right. uh unless he were impeached first, he would not be subject to prosecution. Is that your view as well?

[00:00:59]>> I think a similar question was also asked at the oral argument at the Supreme Court a few months later. I think the Supreme Court has now set forth a test in Trump versus United States that would address that hypothetical situation, which based on my relationship, I might add, I think is outlandish, and I see no reason to to think that the that hypothetical would ever be a possibility.

[00:01:18]>> Well, so so so is it your view as well as it was Mr. hours that yes, the president could assassinate a political opponent and not be prosecuted for it if his party won't impeach him in the Senate.

[00:01:31]>> I think Trump versus the United States that you mentioned, Senator, now has addressed to some extent the impeachment judgment clause and that is set forth in the opinion and would be something that I would be bound as president to apply if >> with my with my hypothetical. What's your answer?

[00:01:47]>> The president orders Seal Team Six to kill his political opponent. one of them, maybe several uses the military to do it, so it's within the scope of absolute immunity. Is it your view that he is not subject to prosecution for that if the members of his party will not impeach him?

[00:02:05]>> With that hypothetical or any hypothetical that you might try to pose, Senator, I would just refer to the test that the Supreme Court >> I'm asking you your view. So, just tell me yes or no.

[00:02:13]>> Yeah. And I want to tell you that as a judicial nominee, I don't want to prejudge any case. Well, I'm not asking you to prejudge. I'm asking you to talk about your view and also what you argued, what you counseledled the president in that case. Did you make the argument as a member of the president's legal team that yes, he could assassinate his opponent if he used the military to do it and if his party wouldn't impeach him that he would be protected?

[00:02:40]>> Yeah. So, I can't get into any privilege conversations as you know due to attorney client privilege, but I would refer to you to the remarks that uh John Sauer had at the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.

[00:02:51]>> Well, the the remarks that he made were yes, that's correct. He would be immune.

[00:02:56]Um, so I don't hear any disagreement with you. Um, do you disagree?

[00:03:00]>> I would disagree with your characterization of how he responded to that question. I think he said it was outlandish would would not happen and that there would be a process to to hold someone like that accountable. And I think that >> the process the question from the judge was if he were not impeached first is that your position and that was Sour's position. It sounds like that is your position as well. Let me ask you about a different part of the court's opinion.

[00:03:23]That is that the only area where he's truly liable is purely personal conduct.

[00:03:28]So let me ask you this. If a president uses their official position to enrich themselves, is he immune or is that purely personal?

[00:03:38]So, Chief Justice Roberts asked a similar question at oral argument. I think council referred him to >> I'm asking you.

[00:03:44]>> Yeah. I I want to refer you to the same place. The United States.

[00:03:47]>> Don't refer me. Don't refer me. Just answer the question. In your view, if the president enriches himself through his office, is he immune or is that purely personal conduct?

[00:03:57]>> Yeah. So, I think the United States versus Brewster decision >> you're not you're not answering my question. Let me ask you a different one. See if you'll answer that. If a president took bribes to change the country's policy in the Gulf, purely personal or subject to immunity.

[00:04:14]>> Brewster dealt with bribes and in that case the the court said that a legislature could be a legislator could be prosecuted for bribery.

[00:04:22]>> We're not talking about legislator.

[00:04:23]We're talking about the president of the United States who has immunity now thanks to your work in part. So let me ask you another question. If a president demanded money from a media organization in order to approve a merger immune or purely personal conduct subject to prosecution, >> every hypothetical situation will be addressed by the test in Trump versus United States on what type of immunity would apply.

[00:04:43]>> Yeah. So, you're you're not going to answer the question. I think it was a shocking view that John Sauer expressed in the court of appeals. I think it's a shocking view that you hold that the president's authority is so profound that he basically is above and beyond the law. that there's no remedy for a a president who would abuse his power the way we have already seen and I fear we'll see in the future. Uh I think the Roberts court will go down in history.

[00:05:09]That will be their legacy as having enabled the worst form of corruption we've ever seen in the Oval Office. Uh and you'll be a part of the team that made that possible. I yield back. Thank you. I would point out the implication that Mr. Smith can't be a good judge because he did his job as a lawyer is ridiculous. um and did what every advocate would do for their client. And in fact, the Supreme Court agreed with those arguments. And so I don't view it as a strike of uh against the nominee, but rather a mark of distinction.

[00:05:36]>> Y'all, Eric Schmid just smacked down Adam Schiff with that one. That's political speak for you are a And I am just disgusted with your own stupidity. I mean, we should all be disgusted with Adam Schiff. the the dude has quite literally done one of the dumbest things you can do and that is basically take cart blanch terrible advice from your own party and take terrible information like you know the steel dossier and this dude I think has uh been rewarded for it. He did that while he was in the house. He's now in the senate. California for some reason thought to elevate him because either A these people are just have lost their minds or B they think that Trump is the worst possible thing in the world even though he seems to be completely reshifting power balances all over the world in favor of the United States.

[00:06:38]I I I don't get it. I I truly do not understand Trump derangement syndrome until you realize Americans really don't like guys that brag a lot and they don't like bullies.

[00:06:51]We we've never liked them.

[00:06:54]Now we like our winners. Okay, we like the New York Yankees of the 1920s. Uh we for some reason we seem to like the Dodgers right now.

[00:07:05]We like winners. We always have. but we want you to win with grace and dignity.

[00:07:10]And Trump's the kind of guy that says, "Nope, I'm going to brag about everything." So, he breaks a fundamental mold in in the American mindset. But that's also the very thing that makes him attractive, sets him apart, and made me realize, oh, that's why he does this.

[00:07:27]It It's so antithetical to the American uh experience. And that American experience unfortunately is changing maybe for the better. But uh I've been sitting here thinking about the uh 250th anniversary and the number strikes me so much because that's the average lifespan of a great empire. That's the average lifespan of a great u civilization.

[00:07:56]But that's not what this video is about.

[00:07:58]Very fortunately. This video is about Adam Schiff trying to get a judicial nominee to uh be be caught between a rock and a hard place. Adam Schiff is not dumb here. He's done dumb things, but he is not dumb to do this. These are important questions that I actually want uh my nominees to answer. And the thing is Justin Smith is answering them correctly. You answer with precedent. If you are going uh to be appointed to a legal position, I want to know precedent. Okay. When you are being asked about certain things because what what's really going on here is uh the Democrats are trying want a platform to impeach Trump based on corruption charges. I believe that's going to be their goal because they know that Trump has made money as president.

[00:08:51]He's made money. uh his uh cryptocurrency is quite literally a way for him to make money. It's what I jokingly call MAGA corruption. This is stuff where other people invest in something that you have uh offered as a service or a product while still so while being president.

[00:09:09]This is ultimately nothing. It's not really it's not even in the remote areas of corruption. Then there's the second line of corruption. This is Republican corruption. This is when one of your buddies in the Chamber of Commerce wants to open a new business because he's got some land that he owns and it's going to create about 10 25 extra jobs, but he's wanting a special rate. So, his political buddies say, "Okay, I'll make you a deal. You cut me in on this and uh I'll I'll change a law down the state house or I'll change a law here locally so we can make construction easier. You save money, I make money, and then we we make new jobs." That's Republican corruption that actually benefits me.

[00:09:50]Yes. Is it it is unethical, but there's a much worse kind that must never be allowed. The Democrat corruption.

[00:09:57]Democrat corruption is okay. So, we're in a heavily urban area and uh we need to have a pipeline of people who are going to continue to support our policies. let's set up um some I don't know a daycare center and then remind them knock on their door and say hey we're the ones that provided this environment for you could you please donate to our campaign so they set up special tax havens give them money and then basically some of that money funnels its way back into their pocket it's literally taking money out of our pockets and slowly trickling it down into theirs I guess trickle down economics does work for Democrats That is terrible corruption. And yet they're try Democrats are trying to make the case that Trump's corruption is the worst kind out there when it is the most benign form of it because I can't even qualify it as corrupt.

[00:10:53]They're trying to build a legal case here and that's why these questions are so important and it's why Adam Ship is asking them because this is the dude that gets the playbook and he's the one that has to run point on this particular uh issue.

[00:11:07]So yeah, that's the game here, or at least in my opinion. Let me know what you think down in the comments below. My name is Brian. Hope you enjoyed that segment here on Poliberal. Don't forget to like and subscribe. Catch you on the next one. Check out our merch at poliberal.shop if you so feel so inclined. Until next time, y'all have a