George Washington University law professor and FOX News contributor Jonathan Turley analyzes the whistleblower complaint against Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) for leaking classified information in the Trump-Russia investigation.

WILL CAIN, FOX NEWS HOST: Newly released FBI memos, by the way, obtained by FOX show a Democrat whistleblower who’s accusing Adam Schiff of greenlighting a leak of classified information in order to damage Trump during the Russiagate investigation. The source recalled the following. “In the meeting, Schiff stated the group would leak classified information which was derogatory to President of the United States Donald J. Trump. Schiff stated the information would be used to indict President Trump. Someone stated this would be illegal, and upon hearing his concerns, an unnamed member of the meeting reassured that certain someone they would not be caught leaking classified information.” No way they’re ever going to get caught. Whoops. FBI director Kash Patel posted, “We found it. We declassified it. Now Congress can see how classified info was leaked to shape political narratives and decide if our institutions were weaponized against the American people.” Schiff is saying, no, no, no, no, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. I’m not guilty of leaking classified information. “Those baseless smears are based on allegations that were found to be not reliable, not credible, and unsubstantiated from a disgruntled former staffer who was fired by the House Intel Committee for cause in 2017, including for harassment and potentially compromising activity on official travel for the committee.” You want me to think about official travel for the committee when I’m sitting here concerned about you leaking classified information? Joining me now, George Washington University law professor and FOX News contributor Jonathan Turley. Professor, it’s great to see you here today. Leaking classified information, that’s a potentially very serious charge, is it not? JONATHAN TURLEY: It doesn’t get much more serious than that. The chairman of the House Intel Committee doesn’t have declassification authority over these types of documents. They are made available to Congress under very tightly controlled rules. This has been a source of tension for years. And members of both parties have gone out of their way to assure that this material would be closely held and not weaponized. Schiff was viewed as one of the most political chairs of that committee in its history. And this is a truly chilling account, if true. Now, when I first read it, frankly, I was taken aback because it’s perfectly moronic to commit such a felony through with a planning conference meeting with staff. That’s not usually how things are leaked in in Washington, D.C. What makes this different, Will, is that this was a statement made to FBI agents. The person who made this statement was no doubt aware that lying to FBI agents is not just a crime, but a crime that was repeatedly prosecuted during prior administrations, including the Obama and Biden administrations. Right. So making this statement puts you at risk. That’s why someone’s lying here and someone’s a felon. WILL CAIN: Okay, well, let’s just for a moment, hypothetically take this whistleblower at their word. Let’s assume for a moment that it’s true. Professor, what kind of punishment follows for leaking classified information? JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, this is a very significant punishment. You can have in addition to having multiple counts, you can easily go 10 years in terms of sentence, if not more, depending on the circumstances and the number of violations. Each of these leaks is an individual violation. Each of these documents would likely be charged as a violation. That type of count stacking is precisely what Mueller and others did. Remember, these are very similar to the types of claims made against Donald Trump and Mar-a-Lago, that he removed material and properly stored them. There were also allegations that he might have revealed them to third parties. But this is much more serious in one sense. Trump was accused of negligence in most of these counts. This would be a premeditated criminal act to release classified information to damage one’s political opponents. WILL CAIN: And it’s not the only, by the way, it’s not the only legal jeopardy currently facing Adam Schiff. There is the whole thing about what he was doing with his mortgages and whether or not there was any fraud involved. You brought up he’s the most political member of that committee. And I think we can get the motivation pretty easily. Beyond TDS, beyond derangement syndrome, just the news is reporting that a Democratic staffer told the FBI during an August 2017 interview that if former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won the election in 2016, Schiff would be offered the position of CIA director. So he was, he had a lot of skin in this game. And I’m sure a lot of disappointment when I guess he didn’t get to become the chief of lies at the CIA. JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, that’s a truly chilling prospect. The idea of Adam Schiff having that particular position. He was widely accused of misusing this information. Of course, he was the one after the special report found no actionable evidence of Russian collusion who said, I have the evidence. I have classified material that establishes Russian collusion. He just never produced it. And people generally, I think widely today agree that it doesn’t exist. You can only imagine what would have happened if he had gotten that position under Hillary Clinton. WILL CAIN: I think that now is the point where I’m supposed to, if I’ve learned my news casting correctly, I think now’s when you say the walls are closing in. I heard that for a long time. I heard that for more than half a decade. The walls are closing in this time, though, on Adam Schiff. Professor Jonathan Turley, great to see you. Thank you.

RealClearPolitics Videos