D-Senator Schumer Declares House Impeachment Was A 'Cover-Up' of 'Dem Witch Hunt

[easyt65]

McConnell calls for ‘fairness,’ Schumer blasts ‘cover-up’ as Trump trial starts

During his theatrical performance before the Senate, Chucky unintentionally claimed the House Democrats had engaged in a 'cover-up'...


According to D-Senator Chuck Schumer, refusing to allow witnesses to be called to testify during the Impeachment process, refusing to allow cross-examinations of witnesses, refusing to allow fair representation, reusing to allow additional information / evidence, reusing to allow ALL information to be presented, etc... is the definitive, unquestionable signs of a 'cover-up'.

I wonder if the Senator is even aware what he just declared in the on-going debate over the Rules for the Impeachment Process in the US Senate is that the House Democrats perpetrated a 'COVER-UP' during their fastest rush to Impeachment in US history based on the weakest case for Impeachment in US history ... because the Democrats are guilty of doing everything he mentioned during their Impeachment of the President....

Schumer, ironically, is one of the Democrats who, in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, declared he did not support Impeachment of a US President so close to election because it equates to stripping US citizens of their Constitutional right to choose their own leaders.
-- Gotta love that Democrat Double-Standard and their beloved surrogate fake news pushing media refusing to hammer them on it...

Evidently / obviously, the same Impeachment rules that applied to Clinton are not warped / stacked enough in the Democrats' favor because the Democrats continue to reject them.


Trump Senate impeachment live blog: Lawmakers debate ground rules

.

 

[Nostra]

Schumer is a clown.

 

[Pogo]

Schumer, ironically, is one of the Democrats who, in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, declared he did not support Impeachment of a US President so close to election because it equates to stripping US citizens of their Constitutional right to choose their own leaders.

Umm.... really.

Clinton was impeached December 1998, halfway through his second term. What election was he going to be in?

 

[easyt65]

Schumer, ironically, is one of the Democrats who, in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, declared he did not support Impeachment of a US President so close to election because it equates to stripping US citizens of their Constitutional right to choose their own leaders.

Umm.... really.

Clinton was impeached December 1998, halfway through his second term. What election was he going to be in?

I stated what Schumer stated during his defense of Clinton. I did not say that specific comment directly related to Bill Clinton...and I am sure Schumer and Pelosi - who said the same thing - did not mean it that way. Of course, they are stupid...

 

[BlindBoo]

When you can't defend what the old Trumpybear did, whine about the process and cry that the Democrats are the guilty ones!

 

[Pogo]

Schumer, ironically, is one of the Democrats who, in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, declared he did not support Impeachment of a US President so close to election because it equates to stripping US citizens of their Constitutional right to choose their own leaders.

Umm.... really.

Clinton was impeached December 1998, halfway through his second term. What election was he going to be in?

I stated what Schumer stated during his defense of Clinton. I did not say that specific comment directly related to Bill Clinton...and I am sure Schumer and Pelosi - who said the same thing - did not mean it that way. Of course, they are stupid...

Really.

Maybe I missed something. Let's see. Roll it again.

Schumer, ironically, is one of the Democrats who, in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, declared he did not support Impeachment of a US President so close to election because it equates to stripping US citizens of their Constitutional right to choose their own leaders.

Huh, thought it was there, now I can't find it.

Weird how things disappear innit? Coulda sworn I saw in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, and now I can't find in defense of then-President Bill Clinton anywhere. Maybe I need my eyes checked.

 

[LaDairis]

When you can't defend what the old Trumpybear did,

I'll defend it. I want an investigation into Hunter Biden. I want to know why Hunter Biden was paid $16 million for never showing up to work, not having any relevant expertise, and not speaking the language. You do not. You know Hunter received a kickback from the last US foreign aid package, and you cheered it, because Democrats STEAL, and when Democrats STEAL, you CHEER....

 

[easyt65]

When you can't defend what the old Trumpybear did,

I'll defend it. I want an investigation into Hunter Biden.

One of D-House Intel Committee Chairman Schiff's State Department 'witnesses' even declared under oath he could not see any crime committed by the President and that, as long as all of this tax payer money was getting spent, HE wanted to see Hunter Biden...and Joe...investigated, brought in to answer questions under oath....

I thought, just for a second, that THIS testimony might be the thing that caused Schiff's already-bulging eyes to pop completely out of his head.

 

[easyt65]

Schumer, ironically, is one of the Democrats who, in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, declared he did not support Impeachment of a US President so close to election because it equates to stripping US citizens of their Constitutional right to choose their own leaders.

Umm.... really.

Clinton was impeached December 1998, halfway through his second term. What election was he going to be in?

I stated what Schumer stated during his defense of Clinton. I did not say that specific comment directly related to Bill Clinton...and I am sure Schumer and Pelosi - who said the same thing - did not mean it that way. Of course, they are stupid...

Really.

Maybe I missed something. Let's see. Roll it again.

Schumer, ironically, is one of the Democrats who, in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, declared he did not support Impeachment of a US President so close to election because it equates to stripping US citizens of their Constitutional right to choose their own leaders.

Huh, thought it was there, now I can't find it.

Weird how things disappear innit? Coulda sworn I saw in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, and now I can't find in defense of then-President Bill Clinton anywhere. Maybe I need my eyes checked.

Not as much as your inability to understand words in context. As I stated, I stated what Schumer stated during his defense of Clinton. I did not say that specific comment directly related to Bill Clinton... as Schiff proved numerous times over, if things don't say exactly what you want them to say...write your own 'parody'. It's sorta like how the Democrats' entire 'Trump NON-Extortion Extortion' Impeachment is based on the Bill Clinton argument of 'Semantics'.....definition of the word 'IS'.....definition of the word 'US'...

 

[BlindBoo]

You know Hunter received a kickback from the last US foreign aid package

Any real investigation into such <sarcasm> serious allegations </sarcasm> would never begin by a public announcement. You should just admit that you support the corrupt Shakedown scheme Donnie cooked up using Congressional approved and appropriated funds to aid in his re-election campaign.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

When you can't defend what the old Trumpybear did,

I'll defend it. I want an investigation into Hunter Biden. I want to know why Hunter Biden was paid $16 million for never showing up to work, not having any relevant expertise, and not speaking the language. You do not. You know Hunter received a kickback from the last US foreign aid package, and you cheered it, because Democrats STEAL, and when Democrats STEAL, you CHEER....

That's not going to happen unless the spineless Rs get off their ass and quit letting the dems slap them around.

 

[LaDairis]

would never begin by a public announcement.

Why not???

The transfer of money happened in the past. The records still exist.


Why are you SO SCARED of an INVESTIGATION into Democrats stealing???


Because you are a Democrat and you LOVE IT when Democrats STEAL..... which is what they do, and almost all of what they do....

 

[jknowgood]

When you can't defend what the old Trumpybear did, whine about the process and cry that the Democrats are the guilty ones!

 

[easyt65]

Any real investigation into such <sarcasm> serious allegations </sarcasm> would never begin by a public announcement. You should just admit that you support the corrupt Shakedown scheme Donnie cooked up using Congressional approved and appropriated funds to aid in his re-election campaign.

1. During Schiff's Impeachment Coup Hearings his own State Department witness declared Trump broke no law, which Schiff, Nadler, and Pelosi concurred with because none of the articles of Impeachment included any prosecutable crime...and then declared Hunter Biden and Papa Joe should be investigated. OF COURSE the Democrats ignored this and refused to allow new evidence / calls for investigations of crimes uncovered by the House Impeachment, crimes associated with the principal core of the Impeachment hearing - asking the Ukraine PM to investigate crimes committed by Hunter Biden and the videotaped confession of extortion of the previous Ukraine PM by the then-Vice President of the United States, part of the administration that withheld lethal military aid Ukraine needed to defend itself from Russia's invasion.

2. You are still confused, demonstrate you do not understand what 'extortion' / a 'shake-down' is.

NOT withholding aid is NOT 'extortion' / a 'shake-down'.
- Ukraine received its aid under President Trump
- Barry and Joe withheld lethal aid from Ukraine, allowing Russia to invade and annex Crimea without fear of a serious Ukraine military defense


THIS is extortion / a shakedown:



Now YOUR turn to post President Trump's videotaped confession.....oh wait, that's right. There isn't one.

 

[BlindBoo]

When you can't defend what the old Trumpybear did, whine about the process and cry that the Democrats are the guilty ones!

View attachment 301783

Campaigning by meanie memes still?

 

[jillian]

McConnell calls for ‘fairness,’ Schumer blasts ‘cover-up’ as Trump trial starts

During his theatrical performance before the Senate, Chucky unintentionally claimed the House Democrats had engaged in a 'cover-up'...


According to D-Senator Chuck Schumer, refusing to allow witnesses to be called to testify during the Impeachment process, refusing to allow cross-examinations of witnesses, refusing to allow fair representation, reusing to allow additional information / evidence, reusing to allow ALL information to be presented, etc... is the definitive, unquestionable signs of a 'cover-up'.

I wonder if the Senator is even aware what he just declared in the on-going debate over the Rules for the Impeachment Process in the US Senate is that the House Democrats perpetrated a 'COVER-UP' during their fastest rush to Impeachment in US history based on the weakest case for Impeachment in US history ... because the Democrats are guilty of doing everything he mentioned during their Impeachment of the President....

Schumer, ironically, is one of the Democrats who, in defense of then-President Bill Clinton, declared he did not support Impeachment of a US President so close to election because it equates to stripping US citizens of their Constitutional right to choose their own leaders.
-- Gotta love that Democrat Double-Standard and their beloved surrogate fake news pushing media refusing to hammer them on it...

Evidently / obviously, the same Impeachment rules that applied to Clinton are not warped / stacked enough in the Democrats' favor because the Democrats continue to reject them.


Trump Senate impeachment live blog: Lawmakers debate ground rules

.

No Sergei. That is not what he said.

did vlad tell you to post that?

 

[Rye Catcher]

When you can't defend what the old Trumpybear did,

I'll defend it. I want an investigation into Hunter Biden. I want to know why Hunter Biden was paid $16 million for never showing up to work, not having any relevant expertise, and not speaking the language. You do not. You know Hunter received a kickback from the last US foreign aid package, and you cheered it, because Democrats STEAL, and when Democrats STEAL, you CHEER....

Post the evidence that, "Hunter Biden was paid $16 million for never showing up to work, not having any relevant expertise, and not speaking the language".

 

[BlindBoo]

Any real investigation into such <sarcasm> serious allegations </sarcasm> would never begin by a public announcement. You should just admit that you support the corrupt Shakedown scheme Donnie cooked up using Congressional approved and appropriated funds to aid in his re-election campaign.

1. During Schiff's Impeachment Coup Hearings his own State Department witness declared Trump broke no law, which Schiff, Nadler, and Pelosi concurred with because none of the articles of Impeachment included any prosecutable crime...and then declared Hunter Biden and Papa Joe should be investigated. OF COURSE the Democrats ignored this and refused to allow new evidence / calls for investigations of crimes uncovered by the House Impeachment, crimes associated with the principal core of the Impeachment hearing - asking the Ukraine PM to investigate crimes committed by Hunter Biden and the videotaped confession of extortion of the previous Ukraine PM by the then-Vice President of the United States, part of the administration that withheld lethal military aid Ukraine needed to defend itself from Russia's invasion.

2. You are still confused, demonstrate you do not understand what 'extortion' / a 'shake-down' is.

NOT withholding aid is NOT 'extortion' / a 'shake-down'.
- Ukraine received its aid under President Trump
- Barry and Joe withheld lethal aid from Ukraine, allowing Russia to invade and annex Crimea without fear of a serious Ukraine military defense


THIS is extortion / a shakedown:



Now YOUR turn to post President Trump's videotaped confession.....oh wait, that's right. There isn't one.

Give me the announcement that Ukraine is investigating the Bidens or you'll get no aid from the USA.

Everybody in the world knows what "The Dirty" Don did.

 

[WillowTree]

Why didn’t the House subpoena the documents they say today are so vital?

 

[easyt65]

Give me the announcement that Ukraine is investigating the Bidens or you'll get no aid from the USA.

I'll do better than that, lil' snowflake. I will give you Joe Biden's videotaped CONFESSION one more time:

Everybody in the world knows what "The Dirty" Don did.

'Democrats and snowflakes aren't 'EVERYBODY', lil' snowflake....and they have KNOWN it - like 'EVERYONE' knew Hillary was going to win in a 'landslide', too - for nearly 4 years...they just haven't been able to present any crime, evidence, or witnesses.

At some point you have to reach 1 of 2 conclusions:
1. The President did NOT commit any crime.

OR

2. The Democrats are just stupid, like several points above plant life, too incompetent to find 'existing' evidence


Schiff's attempted manufacturing of and presenting false 'evidence' during his Committee's Impeachment hearing could be used to argue either / both. .