Hypocritical Schumer Fought AGAINST More Evidence And Trial For Clinton Impeachment

One of the unfortunate things about living in New York State is the burden of having Chuck Schumer as our US Senator. The man doesn't give a rat's arse about NY State, or the United States. All he cares about is advancing the needs of his party. The latest example of his party-first attitude is the Democrats' sham impeachment of Donald Trump. Sen. Schumer impeachment

Chuck Schumer sent Majority Leader McConnell a letter demanding a full drawn-out trial (and got the Constitution wrong):

“In response to the House’s action, as you have noted, our rules require the Senate to conduct a trial to consider and vote on the Articles of Impeachment. This is an enormously weighty and solemn responsibility that was assigned to the Senate by the Framers of the Constitution. Senate Democrats believe strongly, and I trust Senate Republicans agree, that this trial must be one that is fair, that considers all of the relevant facts, and that exercises the Senate’s ‘sole Power of Impeachment’ under the Constitution with integrity and dignity. The trial must be one that not only hears all of the evidence and adjudicates the case fairly; it must also pass the fairness test with the American people. That is the great challenge for the Senate in the coming weeks.” (Sen. Schumer, Letter To Sen. McConnell, 12/15/2019)

But as you can see in the short video below. In  December 1998, between Bill Clinton being impeached and a Senate trial, he told a reporter, "Well, I hope a trial doesn’t go forward. And I am starting from this moment on to explore every possible way to avoid a trial."

And the hypocritical Senator from NY followed through trying to stop a long trial a month later, with votes to dismiss the case. When that failed he fought against calling witnesses:

• In January 1999, Sen. Schumer Voted Against A Motion To Subpoena Witnesses During The Clinton Impeachment Trial. (Roll Call Vote #5: Motion Agreed To 56-44: D 1-44, R 55-0, 1/27/1999, Schumer Voted Nay)
• In January 1999, Sen. Schumer Voted Against A Resolution To Subpoena And Depose Witnesses During The Clinton Impeachment Trial. (S. Res. 30, Roll Call Vote #8: Resolution Agreed To 54-44: D 0-44, R 54-0, 1/28/1999, Schumer Voted Nay)
• “Democrat Chuck Schumer cast his first substantive votes as New York’s newest senator on Wednesday, voting first to dismiss the impeachment trial of President Clinton and then against hearing testimony from witnesses.” (“In First Votes As New Senator, Schumer Supports Ending Impeachment,” The Associated Press, 1/27/1999)
• “Sen. Charles Schumer said Saturday that House impeachment managers, in three days of impeachment presentations, did not mention ‘a single new fact’ that would warrant calling witnesses. ‘I have not heard in all the days of testimony a single new fact,’ said Schumer, D-N.Y. ‘That is the reason to have witnesses. That is basically the only reason to have witnesses.’” (“Sen. Schumer Argues Witnesses Not Warranted,” The [Albany] Times-Union, 1/17/1999)
• “So far, there is no sign of a bipartisan groundswell in favor of calling witnesses to examine the charges. ‘I think most Democrats remain opposed to the idea,’ said Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a Democrat from New York.” The Baltimore Sun, 1/16/1999)

Back to Present Day:

Conducting the trial according to this plan will also allow the public to have confidence in the process and will demonstrate that the Senate can put aside partisan concerns and fulfill its constitutional duty.  I look forward to discussing this plan with you and to working with you to ensure that the Senate can rise to this critically important occasion.” (Sen. Schumer, Letter To Sen. McConnell, 12/15/2019)

But he didn't put aside partisanship for the Clinton trial:

•  NPR’s “All Things Considered,” 12/18/1998--> LINDA WERTHEIMER: “Mr. Schumer, you had critical things to say about the president in your own campaign for the Senate in New York. Did you ever at any time consider voting for any of the articles of impeachment?”

  REP. SCHUMER: “Never. I had to research this thoroughly, Linda, because I was, as you say, campaigning and had to vote as a member of the Judiciary Committee. I came to two conclusions. I came to the conclusion that the president did lie under oath and should be punished for it. But I came to an equally strong conclusion that the obstruction of justice and abuse of charges, the more serious charges, not that the others aren’t, were flimsy and were politically motivated by Ken Starr. And that any--even if you assumed everything Ken Starr said as fact, it did not rise to the level of impeachment. So I never thought of voting for the articles of impeachment and I do think this is sort of a partisan hijacking. I worry about the future of the country when this can happen. I worry that Democrats will next try to impeach a Republican president. I worry that we are using the criminal process and scandal-mongering, if you will, both parties are, to achieve political goals; things that can’t be achieved at the ballot box are almost sort of criminalized.”

• CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 1/6/1999 --->  LARRY KING: “How can you judge a trial in which you have already stated an opinion or have an opinion? You wouldn’t be --- you’d be thrown off a jury in any court in America, right?”

  SEN. SCHUMER: “Right.”

  KING: “You have a pre-opinion.”

  SEN. SCHUMER: “The three of us in the House, two Republicans -- Crapo and Bunning -- and myself have all decided we would continue to sit here and that’s precisely for the reasons I think that Joe Biden mentioned. This is not a criminal trial, but this is something the founding fathers decided to put in a body that was susceptible to the whims of politics. I felt that to have my state -- have half the representation of every other state wouldn’t make sense.”

  KING: “So therefore anybody taking an oath tomorrow can have a pre-opinion; it’s not a jury box.”

  SEN. SCHUMER: “Many do.”

  KING: “Many do.”

  SEN. SCHUMER: “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. We’re also the judge.”

That's our Chuck. Everything he said about impeachment when Bubba Clinton was about to be put on trial, gets thrown into the toilet when his party pushes through a farcical impeachment of President Trump. That's because Schumer's attitude is party before country. And America is worse off for it.

Note: All of the bullet points below the video are from the Senate Republican Communications Center

Sen. Schumer impeachment 

Sen. Schumer impeachment 

Sen. Schumer impeachment 

Sen. Schumer impeachment 

Https://lidblog1.wpenginepowered.com