Yet during an appearance on MSNBC Sunday, the California Democrat took his obsession with Trump to a new level: jumping on the bandwagon of those who believe the former president is disqualified from running again.
Host Jen Psaki asked Schiff about the argument that the portion of the 14th Amendment, which states office holders who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” cannot run again, applies to Trump.
She noted, “This hasn’t been tested in our system before,” and asked if he thought it was a valid argument.
“I think it is a valid argument. The 14th Amendment, Section 3 is pretty clear. If you engage in acts of insurrection or rebellion against the government, or you give aid and comfort to those who do, you are disqualified from running,” Schiff responded.
He added, “It doesn’t require that you be convicted of insurrection. It just requires that you have engaged in these acts. It’s a disqualification from holding office again. And it fits Donald Trump to a T.”
Watch the video below:
Adam Schiff claims the 14th Amendment "fits Donald Trump to a T" and "he should be disqualified from holding office." pic.twitter.com/A2qWdbyU3I
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) September 3, 2023
Schiff also predicted the argument for Trump’s disqualification will be tested and raised the possibility a secretary of state may try to prevent him from being on the ballot in their state.
Notably, neither Trump nor any of the defendants from Jan. 6 have been charged with insurrection. Even if you believe he is responsible for the violence, it is hard to say Trump engaged in or supported an insurrection or rebellion if the government is not even charging those crimes.
Now setting aside whether or not Jan. 6 is considered an insurrection and this provision applies here, you may recall the 14th Amendment was ratified 155 years ago, and the riot took place over two and a half years ago.
This provision is not new nor is the violence and attempt to overturn the election results. So why is this argument for disqualifying Trump creeping up right now while he has announced his candidacy for the presidency and is crushing the competition in the polls?
If legal scholars really believe that Trump is disqualified from running because of the 14th Amendment, why did they not bring it up and push it before he declared his candidacy for office?
To argue that secretaries of state should keep him off the ballot without even a conviction, while his nomination looks almost inevitable, would stink of a gross and corrupt use of state power to interfere in the democratic process and deny the voters their choice.
It would lend immense credibility to the idea there is some secret cabal of the Deep State or the “establishment” so scared of and offended by Trump that they are willing to use any means possible to stop him, including even stealing elections through fraud — though there has been no evidence of that in the 2020 election.
And even if Trump was blocked from being on the ballot, do these people really think he would just go away quietly? If you thought he was bad after he lost a free and fair election, just wait to see his claims and calls for protests after being blocked from being on the ballot.
Taking such action now would further undermine the already shaky faith in our institutions, election integrity, and the democratic process.
If these legal scholars thought the 14th Amendment was the trick to stopping Trump, they should have brought it up before he was running again. To do so now just looks desperate and political.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.