Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) patiently explained to Meghan McCain the differences between Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial and President Donald Trump’s.
The New York Democrat appeared Tuesday on ABC’s “The View,” where McCain challenged him to reconcile comments he made in 1999 about Clinton’s impeachment trial and his call to hear witness testimony in Trump’s trial.
“Nice to see you again, even via satellite, even though Democrats and Republicans aren’t supposed to be friends, but, you know, we go back a little,” McCain began. “You have criticized the majority leader, Mitch McConnell, after he described himself as not an impartial juror, but during the impeachment trial of Clinton, you made statements on CNN. You said, quote, ‘This is not a criminal trial, it’s not like a jury box. It’s susceptible to the whims of politics, and quite different from a jury.'”
“Do you find that hypocritical?” she added.
Schumer quickly said no, and then laid out the differences between the two trials.
“There are two differences, Meghan,” he began. “The first, personally, to me, I’m a historical footnote, because I was in the House in 1998, and so I was on the prosecution, on the voting for impeachment, and then I went over to the Senate. So I’m in sort of a unique position.”
“The witnesses that were being called on in trial in ’98, as you may remember, had already testified,” Schumer continued. “They had given grand jury testimony, everyone had looked at it. The American people knew what they said, so people wanted to bring them back again. The witnesses we are seeking have not been heard from, and they are the people with the greatest knowledge as to whether the president did what is alleged to, what he is alleged to have done, which is influence a foreign power, cut off their aid to get them to affect our election.”
Then he explained the seriousness of the articles of impeachment approved against Trump.
“You know, it’s funny,” Schumer said. “When I was in high school, and maybe this happened to you, Meghan, we read that the founding fathers were most afraid of a foreign country interfering in our elections. I shrugged my shoulders and said, what’s that all about? Well, once again the founding fathers were a lot smarter than all of us.”
Eric Trump bragged about the stock market as the US crossed 100,000 dead — and it didn’t go well
On Wednesday, the number of reported coronavirus deaths in the United States officially hit the 100,000 mark — a milestone experts have been anticipating for days.
But at the same time, President Donald Trump's second son chose to take the moment to brag about how the stock market was doing.
GREAT DAY for the DOW!! https://t.co/t0cK3wOKUu
— Eric Trump (@EricTrump) May 27, 2020
Navajo Nation got masks from a former Trump official — that ‘are not approved by the FDA’: report
The Indian Health Service acknowledged on Wednesday that 1 million respirator masks it purchased from a former Trump White House official do not meet Food and Drug Administration standards for “use in healthcare settings by health care providers.”
The IHS statement calls into question why the agency purchased expensive medical gear that it now cannot use as intended. The masks were purchased as part of a frantic agency push to supply Navajo hospitals with desperately needed protective equipment in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic.
ProPublica revealed last week that Zach Fuentes, President Donald Trump’s former deputy chief of staff, formed a company in early April and 11 days later won a $3 million contract with IHS to provide specialized respirator masks to the agency for use in Navajo hospitals. The contract was granted with limited competitive bidding.
‘There needs to be a prosecution’ of cop who killed George Floyd: CNN guest says ‘call it what it is’
On CNN Wednesday, criminal defense attorney Joey Jackson walked through why the Minneapolis police officer responsible for George Floyd's suffocation death must be prosecuted.
"Bottom line, question here from looking at this, should the officer face charges?" asked host Erin Burnett.
"Erin, I don't think there is any question about that, and I think if you look at it, under any reasonable measure there needs to be a prosecution," said Jackson. "You know, when you look at issues of excessive force — and I know this comes with a lot of emotion, and it should because of the blatant nature of what occurred. But if you even look at it legally and forget about the emotion, you look and you see, was there an imminent fear that the officer was facing when he had his knee in the neck of Mr. Floyd? And the answer is resoundingly no. You look at the force he used, that is the officer, and you say is it proportionate to whatever threat was posed? The answer is no, you don't see any threat. You see a person detained and really not resisting at all."