SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
"Sen. Schumer, why are you cutting a deal with Mitch McConnell to fast-track Trump judges? Why won't you whip the vote to stop Kavanaugh?" wrote Indivisible in response to reports of the senators' agreement. (Photo: Bill Pugliano/Getty Images)
Sparking More Calls for His Ouster, 'Utterly Useless' Chuck Schumer Cuts Deal With McConnell to Fast-Track 7 Trump Judges
"Is there a way to impeach Schumer?"
Aug 29, 2018
In addition to openly refusing to pressure his caucus to unite against President Donald Trump's Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is also helping his Republican counterpart ram through Trump's far-right lower court nominees at a torrid pace.
"Sen. Schumer, why are you cutting a deal with Mitch McConnell to fast-track Trump judges? Why won't you whip the vote to stop Kavanaugh? We're fighting to protect our courts and save our democracy. We expect you to do the same."
--IndivisibleSparking immediate outrage from progressives, Schumer cut a deal with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday that allowed the GOP to fast-track votes on seven of Trump's federal court nominees in exchange for... well, it's not exactly clear what he received in return, outside of getting to go home for a few days.
"Schumer is utterly useless," wrote journalist Chase Madar, a sentiment that was echoed across social media in response to the Democratic leader's dealmaking.
Just hours after the deal was reported, all seven judges were confirmed, with the help of some Democrats.
Because these judges--selected with the help of the right-wing Federalist Society--are relatively young, they are now in a position to shape American law for decades to come, threatening the planet, workers, and women's reproductive rights.
"Sen. Schumer, why are you cutting a deal with Mitch McConnell to fast-track Trump judges? Why won't you whip the vote to stop Kavanaugh?" wrote Indivisible in response to reports of the senators' agreement. "We're fighting to protect our courts and save our democracy. We expect you to do the same."
While Schumer received much of the backlash on social media following his agreement with McConnell, activist and writer Jonathan Cohn pointed out that rank-and-file Democrats deserve some blame as well, given that they actually outnumbered Republicans in the Senate chamber for some of Tuesday's votes.
\u201cFun fact: There were more Democrats than Republicans present in the Senate chamber for each one of these votes.\u201d— Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn (@Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn) 1535505792
\u201cThe Senate took six recorded votes on Trump's nominees today. \n\nOnly senators to vote NO six times: Booker, Brown, Durbin, Gillibrand, Markey, Menendez, Merkley, Sanders, Schatz, Udall, Warren \n\nSenators who voted YES six times: Donnolly, Hassan, McCaskill, Tester\u201d— Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn (@Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn) 1535506214
Adam Jentleson, public affairs director for Democracy Forward, argued in a lengthy Twitter thread late Tuesday that ultimately Democrats' refusal to use all the procedural tools at their disposal to block Trump's right-wing court picks is due to a complete lack of political will at the top of the party.
"This comes down to leadership. Senate Democratic leaders could take a stand and station one senator on the floor at all times to object, forcing McConnell to jump through interminable hurdles and produce 51 votes--twice--for each nominee, likely resulting in fewer lifetime Trump judges," Jentleson noted.
While pointing out that it is still unlikely that all of the seven nominees that breezed through on Tuesday would have been blocked if Democrats played hardball like Republicans so often do, Jentleson wrote that "at least one" of the judges could have been blocked.
\u201cI just want to emphasize the asymmetry here. Dems would only need to have *one* senator on the floor. McConnell would have to produce 51 votes.\n\nRather than organize this, the Senate Dem leader gave McConnell consent to instantly confirm 7 Trump judges to lifetime appointments.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
\u201cI want to be careful not to overclaim. \n\nWould all of the judges in question get confirmed if Dems had put in this effort? Maybe. Would at least one Trump judge be blocked from a lifetime appointment if McConnell was forced to produce 51 votes twice for all of them? Probably.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
\u201cThis outcome was predictable when McConnell said he was "cancelling recess." He whipped his troops and got them to accede to the "cancellation." Then he used the "cancellation" to extort this agreement, likely pocketing more Trump confirmations than he would have otherwise.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
With seven more of Trump's judicial picks confirmed with active help from the Senate Democratic leadership, progressive commentators concluded--once again--that Schumer is not fit to lead the party and has to go.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
brett kavanaughchuck schumerdemocratic partykirsten gillibrandmitch mcconnelltrumpismus supreme court
In addition to openly refusing to pressure his caucus to unite against President Donald Trump's Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is also helping his Republican counterpart ram through Trump's far-right lower court nominees at a torrid pace.
"Sen. Schumer, why are you cutting a deal with Mitch McConnell to fast-track Trump judges? Why won't you whip the vote to stop Kavanaugh? We're fighting to protect our courts and save our democracy. We expect you to do the same."
--IndivisibleSparking immediate outrage from progressives, Schumer cut a deal with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday that allowed the GOP to fast-track votes on seven of Trump's federal court nominees in exchange for... well, it's not exactly clear what he received in return, outside of getting to go home for a few days.
"Schumer is utterly useless," wrote journalist Chase Madar, a sentiment that was echoed across social media in response to the Democratic leader's dealmaking.
Just hours after the deal was reported, all seven judges were confirmed, with the help of some Democrats.
Because these judges--selected with the help of the right-wing Federalist Society--are relatively young, they are now in a position to shape American law for decades to come, threatening the planet, workers, and women's reproductive rights.
"Sen. Schumer, why are you cutting a deal with Mitch McConnell to fast-track Trump judges? Why won't you whip the vote to stop Kavanaugh?" wrote Indivisible in response to reports of the senators' agreement. "We're fighting to protect our courts and save our democracy. We expect you to do the same."
While Schumer received much of the backlash on social media following his agreement with McConnell, activist and writer Jonathan Cohn pointed out that rank-and-file Democrats deserve some blame as well, given that they actually outnumbered Republicans in the Senate chamber for some of Tuesday's votes.
\u201cFun fact: There were more Democrats than Republicans present in the Senate chamber for each one of these votes.\u201d— Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn (@Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn) 1535505792
\u201cThe Senate took six recorded votes on Trump's nominees today. \n\nOnly senators to vote NO six times: Booker, Brown, Durbin, Gillibrand, Markey, Menendez, Merkley, Sanders, Schatz, Udall, Warren \n\nSenators who voted YES six times: Donnolly, Hassan, McCaskill, Tester\u201d— Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn (@Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn) 1535506214
Adam Jentleson, public affairs director for Democracy Forward, argued in a lengthy Twitter thread late Tuesday that ultimately Democrats' refusal to use all the procedural tools at their disposal to block Trump's right-wing court picks is due to a complete lack of political will at the top of the party.
"This comes down to leadership. Senate Democratic leaders could take a stand and station one senator on the floor at all times to object, forcing McConnell to jump through interminable hurdles and produce 51 votes--twice--for each nominee, likely resulting in fewer lifetime Trump judges," Jentleson noted.
While pointing out that it is still unlikely that all of the seven nominees that breezed through on Tuesday would have been blocked if Democrats played hardball like Republicans so often do, Jentleson wrote that "at least one" of the judges could have been blocked.
\u201cI just want to emphasize the asymmetry here. Dems would only need to have *one* senator on the floor. McConnell would have to produce 51 votes.\n\nRather than organize this, the Senate Dem leader gave McConnell consent to instantly confirm 7 Trump judges to lifetime appointments.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
\u201cI want to be careful not to overclaim. \n\nWould all of the judges in question get confirmed if Dems had put in this effort? Maybe. Would at least one Trump judge be blocked from a lifetime appointment if McConnell was forced to produce 51 votes twice for all of them? Probably.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
\u201cThis outcome was predictable when McConnell said he was "cancelling recess." He whipped his troops and got them to accede to the "cancellation." Then he used the "cancellation" to extort this agreement, likely pocketing more Trump confirmations than he would have otherwise.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
With seven more of Trump's judicial picks confirmed with active help from the Senate Democratic leadership, progressive commentators concluded--once again--that Schumer is not fit to lead the party and has to go.
In addition to openly refusing to pressure his caucus to unite against President Donald Trump's Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is also helping his Republican counterpart ram through Trump's far-right lower court nominees at a torrid pace.
"Sen. Schumer, why are you cutting a deal with Mitch McConnell to fast-track Trump judges? Why won't you whip the vote to stop Kavanaugh? We're fighting to protect our courts and save our democracy. We expect you to do the same."
--IndivisibleSparking immediate outrage from progressives, Schumer cut a deal with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday that allowed the GOP to fast-track votes on seven of Trump's federal court nominees in exchange for... well, it's not exactly clear what he received in return, outside of getting to go home for a few days.
"Schumer is utterly useless," wrote journalist Chase Madar, a sentiment that was echoed across social media in response to the Democratic leader's dealmaking.
Just hours after the deal was reported, all seven judges were confirmed, with the help of some Democrats.
Because these judges--selected with the help of the right-wing Federalist Society--are relatively young, they are now in a position to shape American law for decades to come, threatening the planet, workers, and women's reproductive rights.
"Sen. Schumer, why are you cutting a deal with Mitch McConnell to fast-track Trump judges? Why won't you whip the vote to stop Kavanaugh?" wrote Indivisible in response to reports of the senators' agreement. "We're fighting to protect our courts and save our democracy. We expect you to do the same."
While Schumer received much of the backlash on social media following his agreement with McConnell, activist and writer Jonathan Cohn pointed out that rank-and-file Democrats deserve some blame as well, given that they actually outnumbered Republicans in the Senate chamber for some of Tuesday's votes.
\u201cFun fact: There were more Democrats than Republicans present in the Senate chamber for each one of these votes.\u201d— Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn (@Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn) 1535505792
\u201cThe Senate took six recorded votes on Trump's nominees today. \n\nOnly senators to vote NO six times: Booker, Brown, Durbin, Gillibrand, Markey, Menendez, Merkley, Sanders, Schatz, Udall, Warren \n\nSenators who voted YES six times: Donnolly, Hassan, McCaskill, Tester\u201d— Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn (@Jonathan 'Boo and Vote' Cohn) 1535506214
Adam Jentleson, public affairs director for Democracy Forward, argued in a lengthy Twitter thread late Tuesday that ultimately Democrats' refusal to use all the procedural tools at their disposal to block Trump's right-wing court picks is due to a complete lack of political will at the top of the party.
"This comes down to leadership. Senate Democratic leaders could take a stand and station one senator on the floor at all times to object, forcing McConnell to jump through interminable hurdles and produce 51 votes--twice--for each nominee, likely resulting in fewer lifetime Trump judges," Jentleson noted.
While pointing out that it is still unlikely that all of the seven nominees that breezed through on Tuesday would have been blocked if Democrats played hardball like Republicans so often do, Jentleson wrote that "at least one" of the judges could have been blocked.
\u201cI just want to emphasize the asymmetry here. Dems would only need to have *one* senator on the floor. McConnell would have to produce 51 votes.\n\nRather than organize this, the Senate Dem leader gave McConnell consent to instantly confirm 7 Trump judges to lifetime appointments.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
\u201cI want to be careful not to overclaim. \n\nWould all of the judges in question get confirmed if Dems had put in this effort? Maybe. Would at least one Trump judge be blocked from a lifetime appointment if McConnell was forced to produce 51 votes twice for all of them? Probably.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
\u201cThis outcome was predictable when McConnell said he was "cancelling recess." He whipped his troops and got them to accede to the "cancellation." Then he used the "cancellation" to extort this agreement, likely pocketing more Trump confirmations than he would have otherwise.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1535505052
With seven more of Trump's judicial picks confirmed with active help from the Senate Democratic leadership, progressive commentators concluded--once again--that Schumer is not fit to lead the party and has to go.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.