Dem Whistleblower Says Schiff OK’ed Classified Leaks To Hurt Trump
An intelligence officer who spent over a decade working for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee repeatedly alerted the FBI, starting in 2017, that then-Rep. Adam Schiff had authorized the leaking of classified information to damage then-President Donald Trump during the now-discredited Russiagate investigation, according to explosive FBI memos recently provided to Congress by Director Kash Patel.
FBI 302 interview reports obtained by Just the News reveal that the staffer — a registered Democrat who described himself as a friend to both Schiff, now a California senator, and former Republican House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes — viewed the leaks as “unethical,” “illegal,” and “treasonous.”
The staffer claimed he was told not to worry because Schiff believed the Constitution’s speech and debate clause would shield him from prosecution, Just the News first reported.
There is no publicly available opinion from the Attorney General or Solicitor General supporting such a determination as a matter of law.
However, officials told Just the News that when the allegations were first presented years ago, the Justice Department showed little interest in pursuing Schiff, echoing the same rationale the lawmaker himself had offered.
In his most recent interview with the FBI in 2023, the whistleblower — whose name remains redacted — told agents from the bureau’s St. Louis office that he had personally attended a meeting where Schiff authorized the release of classified information, the outlet said.
“When working in this capacity, [redacted staffer’s name] was called to an all-staff meeting by SCHIFF,” the interview report said. “In this meeting, SCHIFF stated the group would leak classified information which was derogatory to President of the United States DONALD J. TRUMP. SCHIFF stated the information would be used to indict President TRUMP.”
The whistleblower told investigators that he “stated this would be illegal and, upon hearing his concerns, unnamed members of the meeting reassured that they would not be caught leaking classified information,” the 2023 interview report stated, according to Just the News.
The staffer first made similar allegations to agents at the FBI’s Washington field office in 2017, shortly after the start of Trump’s first term. While the alleged leaks are now beyond the statute of limitations for prosecution under most legal theories, the disclosures surface at a politically sensitive moment for Schiff, who was recently referred to the Justice Department for potential prosecution in a separate mortgage fraud case first reported by Just the News.
Officials also noted that several DOJ personnel who declined to pursue numerous classified leak cases during the Russiagate controversy still hold influential positions — a detail that may draw the attention of congressional lawmakers.
“For years, certain officials used their positions to selectively leak classified information to shape political narratives,” Patel told Just the News on Monday. “It was all done with one purpose: to weaponize intelligence and law enforcement for political gain.
“Those abuses eroded public trust in our institutions,” he added. “The FBI will now lead the charge, with our partners at DOJ, and Congress will have the chance to uncover how political power may have been weaponized and to restore accountability.”
Schiff, who served as both ranking member and later chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) before moving to the Senate, spent years promoting unfounded allegations of Trump-Russia collusion and championing former British spy Christopher Steele’s discredited dossier — even reading several baseless claims from it into the congressional record in March 2017.
That same year, the whistleblower began bringing concerns to the FBI, Just the News reported.
According to the memos, the Democratic HPSCI staffer told agents in one meeting that retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn — Trump’s first national security adviser — was being singled out as part of a broader committee effort to target Trump.
The whistleblower also identified Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) as a likely source of classified leaks, the outlet reported.
A NATIONALLY TELEVISED RECKONING: SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY READS AOC’S ENTIRE THREAD WORD FOR WORD ON AIR
When Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took to social media to label Senator John Kennedy “dangerous” and declare that dissenting voices “needed to be silenced,” she likely anticipated a standard partisan retort. Instead, the Louisiana Senator delivered a calculated, unedited counterstrike that captured national headlines.
Bypassing Spin: The Unvarnished Record
Rather than trading insults online or issuing a press release, Kennedy carried the confrontation straight to a nationally televised public forum. Armed with a printed stack of records, the Senator took the podium, paused, and began reading AOC’s entire thread aloud into the microphone.
Every single post. Word for word. No commentary, no edits, and no interruptions.
The impact was immediate. By simply reading the text exactly as written, Kennedy turned the words themselves into the centerpiece of the discussion, forcing viewers to confront the rhetoric on its face without the buffer of online talking heads or social media spin.
The Constitutional Contrast
Once the last tweet was read into the record, Kennedy methodically dismantled the core premise of the argument. Drawing directly on the First Amendment, the Senator offered a biting, forensic critique of modern cancel culture and political double standards:
Free Speech vs. Political Censorship: Kennedy underscored the bedrock constitutional principle that no elected official has the authority to dictate who is permitted to speak or whose views are deemed acceptable.
The Receipts on Display: By contrasting the calls for silencing opponents against past defenses of radical speech, Kennedy highlighted what critics called a glaring standard of selective outrage.
Composure Over Outrage: Refusing to raise his voice, Kennedy let his trademark folksy calm underline the gravity of the constitutional stakes, turning the moment from a political spat into an indictment of authoritarian impulses.
A Turning Point in the Political Debate
The stark visual of a veteran senator calmly holding up public statements and letting them speak for themselves resonated widely, sparking an immediate frenzy across political broadcasts and digital platforms. The exchange shifted the spotlight from party lines to fundamental questions about accountability, public discourse, and the right to dissent.
By trading digital outrage for a live, unedited reading of the public record, Kennedy didn’t just answer a challenge—he forced Washington into a broader reckoning over the language of modern politics.
Will moments like this reshape how political battles are fought going forward? Share your thoughts below!
SENATE SHOWDOWN: ADAM SCHIFF’S GAMBIT CRUMBLES AS SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY DELIVERS A DEVASTATING TAKEDOWN
What began as a standard Senate hearing on intelligence reform erupted into one of the most explosive political confrontations in recent Capitol Hill history. Congressman Adam Schiff’s attempt to outmaneuver Senator John Kennedy reversed course dramatically, culminating in an extraordinary defeat that left the hearing room—and viewers across the country—stunned.
An Ambush Derailed
Schiff opened the session with an aggressive gambit, looking to steer the proceedings and dictate the narrative. Framing the discussion around intelligence protocols, Schiff quickly pivoted to launch familiar rhetorical salvos, attempting to put committee members on the defensive with sweeping assertions.
Kennedy, however, refused to yield an inch of ground. Known for pairing a drawling, down-home demeanor with razor-sharp legal acumen, the Louisiana Senator sat back, waited for Schiff to overreach, and sprang a meticulously constructed trap.
The Masterclass in Cross-Examination
Rather than trading partisan talking points, Kennedy methodically built his counterattack on raw documentation. Point by point, the Senator systematically challenged Schiff's record:
Dissecting past statements and intelligence memos line by line against verified committee findings.
Pressing hard on questions of procedural transparency, selective disclosures, and ethical boundaries.
Turning Schiff’s own past arguments back on him with unflinching, forensic precision.
As Kennedy tightened the focus on specific ethical violations and questionable oversight decisions, Schiff’s confident posture began to erode under the relentless questioning.
The Live-Broadcast Climax
The confrontation reached a boiling point when Kennedy introduced a critical piece of official correspondence into the record. The document struck at the core of Schiff’s defense, leaving no procedural exit.
In a shocking scene broadcast live to the public, the tension at the witness table snapped. Confronted with the unassailable evidence, Schiff’s own legal counsel hesitated, gathered their materials, and stepped away from the table—leaving Schiff isolated before the microphone without an answer.
The hearing room went dead silent. Schiff, deprived of both rebuttal and support, could only sit in stunned silence as the final seconds ticked away.
The dramatic clash has triggered shockwaves throughout Washington, with analysts hailing the exchange as a benchmark demonstration of rigorous congressional oversight and accountability.
What are your thoughts on this dramatic Senate face-off? Share your perspective below!
