A Democrat whistleblower’s claims, supported by newly declassified FBI interview documents, now pose a significant threat to the political future of Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA).
Should the whistleblower’s narrative prove to be true and prosecutors decide to take action, Schiff may encounter not only the potential end of his political career but also substantial financial repercussions and lengthy prison sentences. As Tolman pointed out, the legal risks could escalate rapidly: “It depends on the counts in the indictment… The fine is up to $250,000 for every leak that’s charged.”
These allegations trace back to Schiff’s tenure in the U.S. House, where he held the position of ranking member — and subsequently chairman — of the House Intelligence Committee during the Trump–Russia investigation.
According to Just The News, the whistleblower, who had been employed by Democrats on the committee for over a decade, consistently informed the FBI starting in 2017 that Schiff had sanctioned the leaking of classified intelligence to the media to undermine then-President Donald Trump.
The whistleblower recounted that during an all-staff meeting, Schiff stated that “the group would leak classified information which was derogatory to President of the United States Donald J. Trump” and that these leaks “would be used to indict President Trump.”
The whistleblower asserted that he immediately raised objections, informing Schiff that the strategy was “unethical and possibly treasonous,” but was reassured by others that “we would not be caught leaking classified information.”
The source also informed federal agents that Schiff believed he had been promised the role of CIA Director if Hillary Clinton emerged victorious in the 2016 election. The whistleblower named Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) as a probable channel for the leaks and stated he was abruptly dismissed after bringing the matter to the attention of the FBI.
In spite of the gravity of the allegations, the whistleblower claims that FBI leadership, including Director Christopher Wray, took no action. He asserts that he reiterated the same account to agents from the bureau’s St. Louis office in 2023, once again with
Currently, former U.S. Attorney Brett Tolman is cautioning about the possible repercussions Schiff may encounter if prosecutors decide to file charges. In a discussion with political commentator Benny Johnson, Tolman clarified that disclosing classified information entails significant financial and criminal consequences.
ð¨Former US Attorney Brett Tolman says Adam Schiff could be facing 20 years in federal prison plus a $250,000 fine for every piece of Russian information he leaked to the media:
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) August 12, 2025
“The fine is up to $250,000 for every, every leak that's charged. So it depends on the counts in the… pic.twitter.com/1lPIKVZFFc
“Indeed. The penalty can reach up to $250,000 for each leak that is charged, so it varies based on the counts in the indictment,” Tolman informed Johnson. “Additionally, it is important to consider that some of the penalties depend on the intent behind the classified leak or the unlawful possession of classified documents. The intent is crucial.”
Tolman indicated that the circumstances surrounding the leak could be pivotal in assessing the punishment.
“I believe this was fundamentally the initiation of a conspiracy aimed at undermining a president, affecting his capacity to govern,” he stated. “There are additional laws — conspiracy laws, obstruction of official proceedings, and so forth. Many individuals question treason — ‘Is it treason?’ You likely do not meet the criteria for treason, but there are related offenses that could be relevant.”
Tolman further noted that if prosecutors discovered an intention “to subvert the United States,” the penalties could extend “up to 20 years in federal prison.”
The FBI’s lack of action regarding the allegations aligns with what critics describe as a trend under Director Wray of protecting politically influential individuals. Kash Patel, a former official in the Trump administration, has accused the bureau of overlooking serious misconduct while actively pursuing political adversaries.
Patel has highlighted the FBI’s employment of confidential informants prior to the Jan. 6 protests as evidence that the agency had prior knowledge of the events but failed to respond appropriately.
Schiff has not yet provided a public response to the recently emerged allegations. Previously, he has denied leaking classified information and has characterized such accusations as partisan attacks aimed at undermining his oversight efforts.