Among President Trump’s long list of perceived political enemies, one lawmaker has drawn outsize scrutiny from the administration: Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).
Trump has routinely fixated on the California senator, who investigated Russia’s 2016 election interference and served as the lead manager on Trump’s first impeachment.
Schiff was also a member of the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, laying blame for the riot with Trump.
Since taking office for the second time, Trump has not just repeatedly bashed Schiff but tapped his powers to go after his adversary.
The administration has launched a probe into the lawmaker, suggesting he wrongly obtained more favorable lending conditions for his Washington-area home — a claim the lawmaker denies.
The Justice Department has also released to Congress other documents the administration says back Trump’s claims that Schiff is a leaker. Schiff has denied any improper release of classified information, while his team has said it’s an accusation from one disgruntled former employee.
Schiff appears to realize he may be in for a long-term battle.
Last month he created a legal defense fund as he prepares to fight the investigation into his Maryland home.
“It’s clear that Donald Trump and his MAGA allies will continue weaponizing the justice process to attack Senator Schiff for holding this corrupt administration accountable,” Marisol Samayoa, a spokesperson for Schiff, said in a statement.
“This fund will ensure he can fight back against these baseless smears while continuing to do his job.”
To Democrats, the reason for focusing on Schiff is obvious and alarming.
“There’s probably no one they hate more than Adam Schiff – and personally, just genuinely hate,” said Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), who was on the House Intelligence Committee as Schiff, then the top Democrat on the panel, was investigating Trump.
“I was part of those investigations – side by side. And I think the fact that [Schiff] was so good at it as a former prosecutor, and so articulate and, more importantly, effective, is what Trump could never let down,” he added.
Quigley also sees the investigation into Schiff as a warning sign to other lawmakers.
“I think they’re using it to intimidate, to chill, to scare away and to silence people before they even say anything at all,” Quigley said.
As evidence of the testy relationship, Trump has attacked Schiff in more personal ways than many of his other foes.
Even for a president not reticent about hurling insults, Schiff has been a routine punching bag for Trump, who has called him: “a sleazebag,” “a major low life,” “shifty,” “one of the least attractive human beings I’ve ever seen,” a “pencil neck,” “sick,” and one of the “enemies from within.”
One source close to the White House cited many events to describe why Schiff was among the most universally disliked figures among Trump and his top aides. The source said they view the California Democrat as a chief antagonist in key episodes that threatened the president’s political future.
“There’s no love lost there,” the source said.
There was a sense of frustration among some Trump allies that Schiff did not face any consequences, politically or otherwise, for being at the forefront of pushing allegations of potential wrongdoing by Trump and his campaign with Russia, the source said.
The White House, when asked about Trump’s relationship with Schiff, blamed the senator.
“Adam Schiff is a sleazy and corrupt politician who betrayed his oath to the Constitution by prioritizing his selfish and personal animosity toward the President over the interests of the American people,” the administration said in a statement.
Schiff has said the mortgage investigation, sparked by a criminal referral from the Federal Housing Finance Authority, is baseless.
“So the president today is accusing me of fraud. And the basis of his accusation is that I own a home in Maryland, and I own my home in California. Big surprise—members of Congress, almost all of them, own more than one home or rent more than one home because we’re required to be on both coasts. So he is using my ownership of two homes to make a false claim of mortgage fraud,” Schiff said in a July video when Trump first raised the charge.
Schiff’s office said his lender was aware he also owned a home in California, and that he considered both homes to be a principal residence. He has only claimed the homestead exemption once, in California.
Schiff has tapped Preet Bharara, a former U.S. attorney under Obama, to represent him in the matter.
The Justice Department has appointed a special attorney to oversee the probe, Ed Martin.
Martin was also named U.S. Pardon Attorney and head of the newly-formed Weaponization Working Group after the Senate failed to approve his nomination for a U.S. attorney post.
In addition to Schiff, Martin is also investigating a mortgage taken out by New York Attorney General Letitia James as well as Federal Reserve Board of Governors member Lisa Cook.
All of the targets have bashed the mortgage investigations, saying they did not do anything improper while casting the move as politically motivated. Cook, the third to be targeted in a mortgage probe, described them as “cut-and-paste” allegations.
Martin also has his own history with Schiff, who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee and placed a hold on Martin’s nomination, which later fell apart under broader Senate scrutiny.
“Mr. Martin is a January 6-defending lawyer who has repeatedly pursued baseless and politically-motivated investigations to fulfill demands to investigate and prosecute perceived enemies. Any supposed investigation led by him would be the very definition of weaponization of the justice process,” Bharara said when the probe was first confirmed.
Also swirling around Schiff are Trump’s claims he has leaked classified documents.
Documents obtained by The Hill show just one former House Intelligence Committee staffer made the allegation – but those suspicions were never backed by the FBI.
After its investigation, the Bureau determined there were at least 192 potential subjects that might have leaked classified information, something they said “certainly undercounts the actual number of persons who had access to the classified information given how widely the information had been disseminated to the FBI, the White House, and to Congress.”
“These baseless smears are based on allegations that were found to be not reliable, not credible, and unsubstantiated from a disgruntled former staffer who was fired by the House Intelligence Committee for cause in early 2017, including for harassment and potentially compromising activity on official travel for the Committee,” a spokesperson for Schiff said in a statement.
“Even Trump’s own Justice Department and an independent inspector general found this individual to not be credible, have ‘little support for their contentions’ and was of ‘unknown reliability,’ and concluded that his accusations against Members of Congress and congressional staff ‘were not ultimately substantiated.’”
Schiff does have some protections not afforded to others who have been targeted by Trump.
Former President Biden signed a preemptive pardon for Schiff and the other members of the Jan. 6 committee – something Schiff said at the time was “unwise.”
“I continue to believe that the grant of pardons to a committee that undertook such important work to uphold the law was unnecessary, and because of the precedent it establishes, unwise,” Schiff said on Inauguration Day as the move was signed.
“But I certainly understand why President Biden believed he needed to take this step in light of the persistent and baseless threats issued by Donald Trump and individuals who are now some of his law enforcement nominees.”
Lawmakers also have Speech and Debate Clause protections in connection with their work, which would limit the potential for some charges.
Quigley said that is top of mind for some of his colleagues.
“It’s a classic playbook, and honestly, I think it’s having an effect. I know members who are afraid of leaving Congress because they are afraid they’ll lose whatever protections they have,” he said of Speech and Debate Clause protections.
He added that many in the lawmaker’s circles ask him if he’s scared to speak out against the president.
“Friends and family are afraid that, you know, you’ll be next.”
Brett Samuels contributed.
