Loading record
Public disputes concerning political parties, public officials, institutions, political conduct, and governance in the United States.
Counts show individual statements. They do not assign an overall position.
5 statements on this page. Dates: September 17, 2025 to October 5, 2026
5 matching statements. Dates: September 17, 2025 to October 5, 2026
5 published statements. Dates: September 17, 2025 to October 5, 2026
5 published statements. Dates: September 17, 2025 to October 5, 2026
5 statements on this page. Dates: September 17, 2025 to October 5, 2026
Role at the time: U.S. senator from California
Response to this claim
Trump accepts attacks on Los Angeles and San Diego as a cost of the Iran war: "if it means attacks on two major American cities in the process, he is not troubled by the cost."
“And if it means attacks on two major American cities in the process, he is not troubled by the cost.”
Sen. Adam Schiff's post on his Senate X account, quoting a clip of the rally remark.
The reference point is whether Trump's remark meant Iranian attacks on Los Angeles and San Diego would be an acceptable price for the war, as critics read it, rather than that the war prevents a nuclear Iran from being able to attack them, as the White House says. Schiff reads the remark as Trump accepting attacks on two American cities as a cost of the war and criticizes him for it, which asserts the critics' reading. The closest competing label is Mixed or conditional, because the sentence begins with "if"; but the condition restates what Schiff takes Trump to have said, and the post's conclusion about Trump is not conditional. Evidence: Schiff's own post on X.
Role at the time: U.S. Senator, California
Statement summary
Adam Schiff voted yea on H.Con.Res. 89, a vote to direct the removal of U.S. forces from unauthorized hostilities with Iran.
“On the Concurrent Resolution H.Con.Res. 89: A concurrent resolution directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
Official Senate roll call on H.Con.Res. 89, a concurrent resolution directing the President under section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran. Rejected 49-50 on September 24, 2026. Fetterman was the only Democratic nay; Republicans Collins, Murkowski, Paul and Tillis voted yea; Alsobrooks did not vote.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Voted to direct the removal of U.S. forces from unauthorized hostilities with Iran, a vote to end U.S. involvement absent congressional authorization.
Role at the time: U.S. Senator from California, in a quote-post on his official X account (@SenAdamSchiff)
Statement summary
In a quote-post of a journalist's photograph of Trump looking at a placard about the Kennedy Center, Schiff says that if the President cannot put his name on the Kennedy Center 'he is willing to close it or destroy it,' and that Trump cares more about branding institutions than preserving them. He adds that Congress allocated $257 million to repair the building and should insist the work be done properly.
“If the President can't put his name on it, he is willing to close it or destroy it. He cares more about branding our institutions than preserving them. Congress allocated $257 million to repair the Kennedy Center. It should insist that work be done properly.”
Schiff's own post on the X account his Senate site lists, a quote-post of Aaron Rupar's post of an AFP/Getty photograph by Brendan Smialowski; it is not a reply. The post shows no edits. We did not save an archive copy of the post.
Schiff's own words say that if the President cannot put his name on the building he is 'willing to close it or destroy it' and that he 'cares more about branding our institutions than preserving them', which criticizes making the building's fate depend on his name. The closest competing label is “Mixed or conditional”, because the post ends by urging Congress to insist that the $257 million repair work be done properly. That loses because the urging is a remedy aimed at the conduct Schiff criticizes, not a materially different position on the recognition condition.
Role at the time: U.S. Senator, California
Statement summary
Adam Schiff voted Yea on H.Con.Res. 86, the Senate resolution directing the President to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.
“On the Concurrent Resolution H.Con.Res. 86: Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
Official Senate roll call on H.Con.Res. 86, directing the President under section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran. Agreed to 50-48 on June 23, 2026 — the first Iran war powers resolution to pass both chambers. Republicans Cassidy, Collins, Murkowski and Paul voted yea; Fetterman was the only Democratic nay.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)A yea vote supported directing the President to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran, opposing continued U.S. involvement in the war without congressional authorization.
Role at the time: U.S. senator from California
Statement summary
Schiff argues that Citizens United allowed corporate dark money to weaken election transparency and democracy.
“The Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United opened the door for corporations to pour billions of dollars of dark money into elections. This anonymous and unrestricted spending cripples transparency in the political process and weakens our democracy.”
September 17, 2025 Senate release containing separately attributed statements from Schiff, McGovern and Lee about overturning Citizens United. The same quotations appeared in a later Neguse release.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Schiff criticizes Citizens United and the corporate influence he says it enabled. His support for reversing the ruling is opposition to it.
