Staff ReportsAdam Schiff has taken a break from his typical tirade against Trump to show his surprising support for one of the former president’s State Department nominees. This endorsement might raise eyebrows among those familiar with Schiff’s usual antics, highlighting yet again the comedy show that is American politics today. With no turkeys in sight for a Thanksgiving feast in Asia, the true spectacle lies in Schiff’s curious praise for Marco Rubio, a move reminiscent of a dog chasing its own tail.
Schiff’s apparent infatuation with Rubio raises a few eyebrows. He seemed downright glowing when discussing the senator, describing him as “enormously well-qualified.” It’s as if Schiff has suddenly put on glittery glasses and transformed into a cheerleader for Trump’s administration. Yet, in the grand political theatre, one can’t help but wonder what kind of underhanded game is at play here. Surely, when the arch-nemesis of Trump decides to praise a nominee before any rigorous vetting has even begun, something smells fishy, and it isn’t last week’s casserole left in the back of the fridge.
Michael Waltz for National Security Advisor
Marco Rubio for Secretary of State
These guys know what they are doing. One of the strongest possible teams when it comes to opposing the CCP. And they won’t sell out Ukraine
This is a tremendous, excellent sign pic.twitter.com/oOihmnCTcj
— Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 (@DrewPavlou) November 12, 2024
Pam Bondi and Tulsi Gabbard, both candidates for various roles, didn’t fare so well in Schiff’s eyes. Bondi is associated with what Schiff calls “The Big Lie” — and one can only presume he means Trump’s narrative while conveniently overlooking the giant echo chamber of #Russiagate. Meanwhile, Tulsi is labeled a “Putin tool,” showcasing how Schiff is ready to deploy his arsenal of slander without any substantive evidence. In Schiff’s world, criticism is often handed out based more on the team jersey one wears rather than any real qualifications.
Despite the ostensible bipartisanship shining brightly within Schiff’s new approval of Rubio, there are serious questions about his judgment. If an advocate of the swamp is thrilled about a nomination, it prompts legitimate concern about whether Trump’s team made the right choice. After all, the political establishment isn’t known for its stellar intuition when choosing allies. If the ultimate critic of Trump is rallying behind one of his nominees, it begs the question, has Trump truly reexamined his approach to selecting advisors? Or is this just another case of a political misfire reminiscent of one of those budget sitcoms that never quite hit the mark?
In sum, this scenario might even lead one to conclude that Trump, a self-proclaimed strategist, has just stepped right into a political landmine sprinkled with the glitter of Schiff’s compliments. Perhaps this is the elusive “4D Chess” everyone talks about, but let’s be real: The only thing being played here is a game of old maids. Naming Marco Rubio as a nominee isn’t a daring political maneuver; instead, it’s a misstep likely encouraged by the same insiders who continue to circle like vultures. It’s a reminder that in the modern political era, loyalty is often mistaken for competence, and it takes far more than an endorsement from a Schiff to ensure a secure future for America’s foreign policy.
