Why Is Adam Schiff Wildly Trying to Stop Blanche and Pulte Appointments? - Joe Hoft
Why is Adam Schiff Wildly Trying to Stop Blanche and Pulte Appointments?From Pulte to Blanche: What Are They Afraid the Schiff Records Will Show?
Guest post by Christine Bish
First, Bill Pulte became politically radioactive.
ADVERTISEMENTNow Adam Schiff wants the Senate to block Todd Blanche as Attorney General.
And in the middle of both fights is the same question Washington refuses to answer:
What do Adam and Eve Schiff’s records show?
Pulte, the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, became a national flashpoint after President Trump tapped him for a major intelligence role. We were told the controversy was about qualifications, surveillance authority, and fear of political weaponization.
ADVERTISEMENTFine. Ask those questions.
But do not ignore the obvious.
Pulte had also been involved in mortgage-related referrals and inquiries involving powerful Trump opponents, including Adam Schiff.
If the Schiff mortgage issue is supposedly baseless, why did Pulte’s connection to it become so explosive?
Now the same pattern is appearing with Todd Blanche.
President Trump has nominated Blanche to serve as Attorney General. Schiff, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, immediately called for the Senate to oppose him.
ADVERTISEMENTAgain, Schiff says this is about politicizing DOJ.
But Schiff is not a neutral observer.
Schiff is also the subject of unresolved mortgage and residency questions involving records, sworn representations, public filings, and federal investigative decisions.
That matters.
The Attorney General controls DOJ. If confirmed, Blanche would have authority over the agency that decides whether the Schiff records are investigated, buried, redirected, or finally placed before the right witnesses and a grand jury.
So the Senate should ask Blanche the questions Washington keeps avoiding:
Did DOJ subpoena Adam and Eve Schiff’s mortgage applications?
Did DOJ obtain the 1003 forms?
Did DOJ obtain the 1008 underwriting forms?
Did DOJ obtain the occupancy certifications?
Did DOJ obtain the underwriting and verification files?
Did DOJ compare those records to tax, voting, residency, and public-office claims?
Did DOJ contact the mortgage-company whistleblower or source with direct knowledge?
Did DOJ investigate the facts?
Or did DOJ investigate the people who found them?
I ask because I am not watching this case from the sidelines.
I am the investigator who uncovered and submitted the Schiff mortgage and residency records. I provided my research to congressional ethics officials years ago. After Pulte publicly requested mortgage-fraud tips, I resubmitted my research to FHFA and the FBI.
Then I was subpoenaed.
I traveled to Greenbelt, Maryland, prepared to testify before the federal grand jury about the underlying Schiff records. I was ready to walk through the mortgage documents, residency representations, occupancy questions, address history, and public-interest concerns at the center of this case.
But that is not what happened.
I was questioned. I cooperated. But the focus was not the heart of the Schiff evidence. The focus shifted toward Bill Pulte, Ed Martin, and whether I had communications with people connected to the investigation.
So my question is simple:
Why was I subpoenaed and questioned, but not allowed to fully testify about the Schiff records?
Why did DOJ focus on the people investigating Schiff instead of the documents that could prove or disprove the claims?
And why, to my knowledge, did DOJ never contact the mortgage-company whistleblower or source with direct knowledge?
That source mattered.
I had identified a person connected to one of the mortgage companies who could speak to the records that matter: mortgage applications, underwriting files, occupancy representations, verification documents, and lending procedures.
That is exactly the kind of person investigators should want to interview if they are trying to find the truth.
But to my knowledge, DOJ did not contact that person.
So what exactly was DOJ investigating?
The Schiff records?
Or the people who found them?
This is not about whether Adam Schiff can own two homes. Of course he can. Millions of Americans own property in more than one state.
The issue is whether a powerful senator is held to the same legal standard as everyone else.
An ordinary American does not get to tell one story to a lender, another story to election officials, another story to tax authorities, and another story to the public — then dismiss every question as political persecution.
If there is no contradiction, the records will clear Schiff.
So subpoena them.
Subpoena the 1003s.
Subpoena the 1008s.
Subpoena the occupancy certifications.
Subpoena the underwriting files.
Interview the mortgage-company source.
Let the grand jury hear the full story.
Washington loves the word “weaponization” because it allows powerful people to avoid documents.
But the cure for alleged weaponization is not secrecy.
The cure is transparency.
If Pulte abused authority, investigate him.
If Blanche is unqualified, question him.
If DOJ mishandled the Schiff matter, expose it.
But none of that answers the central question:
What do the records say?
Adam Schiff wants the Senate to oppose Todd Blanche.
Fine.
Then Schiff should also support full transparency on the records that created this controversy in the first place.
Ask Blanche under oath.
Ask DOJ under oath.
Ask FHFA under oath.
Ask Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under oath.
Ask the mortgage companies under subpoena.
Were Adam and Eve Schiff’s mortgage records obtained?
Were they reviewed?
Were they presented to the grand jury?
Was the mortgage-company source contacted?
Was I allowed to testify fully about the underlying evidence?
And if not, why not?
From Pulte to Blanche, the pattern is becoming impossible to ignore.
Whenever the Schiff records get close to federal power, Washington suddenly screams “weaponization.”
Maybe they fear political abuse.
Or maybe they fear what the records will show.
There is only one way to find out.
Subpoena the records.
Call the witnesses.
Let the grand jury hear the full story.
And let the truth land wherever it lands.
Next: Why Adam and Eve Schiff’s California voter-registration records may be the missing link — and why any serious California voter-file audit should start where the evidence already points.