FLASHBACK: Schumer On Impeachment In 1999 Was Very Different Than Schumer In 2019

Written by Wes Walker on December 27, 2019

Schumer likes to bring up Republican statements during the Clinton Impeachment. His OWN flip-flop completely shoots down his favorite complaint about Senator McConnell.

Whoops.

Even CNN is calling him out on his inconsistency.

Chuck Schumer is livid that McConnell has already made up his mind about the case the Democrats tried to push against Trump. There’s no ‘there there’.

That disqualifies McConnell from doing this job as an ‘impartial juror’ over the question of impeachment. So says Chuck Schumer.

Or should we say, so says Chuck Schumer, 2019.

Because the 1999 version of Schumer has something much different to say about it. Back in the day, NOT going into the Senate hearings with a pre-determined decision was actually cited as a ‘disqualifier’ against his Republican opponent.

Speaking on CNN’s “Larry King Live” in January 1999, Schumer said the trial in the Senate was not like a jury box.
“We have a pre-opinion,” Schumer said, citing himself and two newly-elected Republican senators who had voted on impeachment in 1998 as members of the House of Representatives who said they would vote in the Senate. “This is not a criminal trial, but this is something that the Founding Fathers decided to put in a body that was susceptible to the whims of politics.”
“So therefore, anybody taking an oath tomorrow can have a pre-opinion; it’s not a jury box,” King asked Schumer.
“Many do,” Schumer responded. “And then they change. In fact, it’s also not like a jury box in the sense that people will call us and lobby us. You don’t have jurors called and lobbied and things like that. I mean, it’s quite different than a jury. And we’re also the judge.”
Source: CNN

What was the difference between the Democrats refusing to remove Clinton and the 2020 Senate Republicans who are likely to shoot down the current round of impeachment? For one thing, Clinton had actually committed criminal offenses, including perjury, for which he lost his law license.

Trump? Not so much.

And yet, Clinton’s criminal offenses were written off as a ‘misdeed that did not rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors’.

Somehow, this same Schumer is claiming that Trump’s NON-misdeeds somehow DO rise to that level.

Why?

For the most obvious of reasons: he’s a partisan hack.

You Might Like