Schumer: Trump lawyers’ argument that he can’t obstruct justice would be valid in a dictatorship

[Hayabusa Rider]

Chuck's Tweet:

This would be a valid legal argument — if our government were a dictatorship. Fortunately, we are a government of laws, not men. And in America, no one is above the law, including the president.

Golf clap for Chucky.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Guilliani's next statement: "who said we're not in a dictatorship?"

 

[alien42]

Guilliani's next statement: "who said we're not in a dictatorship?"

I'm going with "just because trump isn't a dictator doesn't mean he doesn't have the awesome powers of a dictator."

 

[Jaskalas]

Chuck's Tweet:

This would be a valid legal argument — if our government were a dictatorship. Fortunately, we are a government of laws, not men. And in America, no one is above the law, including the president.

Golf clap for Chucky.

He gets credit for being on the correct side, but that's worth a bit less when speaking of one's opponent.
Real honor belongs to those who use those words on their own party members. When we hold everyone accountable.

Looking at you, Republican Party.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I'm going with "just because trump isn't a dictator doesn't mean he doesn't have the awesome powers of a dictator."

Yea, that sounds more likely

 

[FIVR]

Schumer is wrong. The US government has already decided that we are in fact a dictatorship and that our dictators cannot be prosecuted. This started with Nixon and became concrete with Bush. Donald will never see the inside of a jail cell and we will be lucky if we can get rid of him in 2020.


If US presidents are not dictators, why is Bush still painting instead of in prison? Bush killed hundreds of thousands and lost billions of dollars for the profit of his Texas cronies. The day Bush is charged is the day that Schumer can make such comments with a straight face.

Schumer is much too busy making excuses for Israeli abuses in Gaza and criminalizing BDS to actually pay attention to how his government operates, unfortunately.