Did Schumer threaten Judges? (3 Viewers)

[tommyGunZ]

Words matter.  Trump's impeachment was largely based on a poor choice of words.  Schumer was using his position as leading Democratic Senator, who are Constitutionally empowered to remove Supreme Court justices through impeachment, to try and influence an upcoming decision through a veiled threat.   He deserves to be widely rebuked.  

Stuff like the bold is why I find you perhaps the toughest poster on these boards to read. You are extremely intelligent and make coherent arguments that I sometimes agree with, even though our worldviews are diametrically opposed

And then you post something like the bold above. And I wonder how someone of your intelligence can be so disingenuous to suggest that the impeachment was simply a slip of the tongue on a phone call.  Because you know that’s not the case at all. You know impeachment was about a well coordinated effort by several government and non-government officials to leverage and influence action in Ukraine over the course of months. To play if off as simply a “poor choice of words” is absolute nonsense, and I know you know better. Yet here we are.  Unreal. 

 

[jon_mx]

It shouldn't be, but some can't get out of the way of their own hypocrisy.  Sit back and watch the mental gymnastics ensue when they remain silent in some instances and throw tantrums in others  

As much as you think it is Republicans who are the big hypocrites here, the Democrats are being far bigger hypocrites if they let this slide.  Fortunately, most people are not taking your angle on this.  

 

[jon_mx]

Yeah, hadn't considered that angle. Good answer!

Thanks.

Stuff like the bold is why I find you perhaps the toughest poster on these boards to read. You are extremely intelligent and make coherent arguments that I sometimes agree with, even though our worldviews are diametrically opposed

And then you post something like the bold above. And I wonder how someone of your intelligence can be so disingenuous to suggest that the impeachment was simply a slip of the tongue on a phone call.  Because you know that’s not the case at all. You know impeachment was about a well coordinated effort by several government and non-government officials to leverage and influence action in Ukraine over the course of months. To play if off as simply a “poor choice of words” is absolute nonsense, and I know you know better. Yet here we are.  Unreal. 

See above comment.  Neither Trump's or Schumer's comments were a slip of the tongue, and I was not suggesting such.  They were well thought out and deserved to be rebuked.   Certainly Trump's was worse, but they are still in the same ballpark of abusing their position.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Policy reasons or just because he how he conveys his thoughts or something else?

A combination of all those things. He’s a smart guy and to my knowledge hasn’t ever been involved in corruption scandals.  But I think Democrats can do better, especially in NY.  

 

[The Commish]

It shouldn't be, but some can't get out of the way of their own hypocrisy.  Sit back and watch the mental gymnastics ensue when they remain silent in some instances and throw tantrums in others  

As much as you think it is Republicans who are the big hypocrites here, the Democrats are being far bigger hypocrites if they let this slide.  Fortunately, most people are not taking your angle on this.  

Yeah, I made no mention of "sides" here.  I can see it easily in both.  That's why I called it out in general and left the "sides" out.  That you're ignoring that and insisting on going into the "sides" shtick (on a post agreeing with a poster calling out Schumer by the way) is telling, but I"m not interested.

 

[jon_mx]

Yeah, I made no mention of "sides" here.  I can see it easily in both.  That's why I called it out in general and left the "sides" out.  That you're ignoring that and insisting on going into the "sides" shtick is telling, but I"m not interested.

True.  I was reading your last statement as talking about this specific case, when it actually wasn't.  So my bad.  

 

[timschochet]

I don’t think he meant it as a threat but it sounded like a threat and it was a really dumb thing to say, and deserved to be condemned.  Full stop 

What makes it worse is that at the moment, with Biden’s surge, the Democrats are attempting to present themselves as the grown ups in the room, the non-extremists. And then Schumer has to go and make an extreme comment like that. Stupid stupid stupid. 

Those of you conservatives who claim Nancy Pelosi is awful at her job (wrongly), you do realize that she would never be dumb enough to say something like this, right? Not in a million years. 

 

[timschochet]

Or for that matter, neither would Harry Reid, who was pretty damn effective himself, 

As I examine Chuck Schumer’s time as minority leader of the Senate, I find it wanting. It’s always harder not to be in power of course but I’m trying to think of something really positive that he’s accomplished and I’m coming up empty. 

 

[knowledge dropper]

It came across as a threat.  However, Schumer is so pompous and has zero self awareness like a Ron Burgandy.  I don’t think he should resign. We all know NY would replace him with another Democrat even further left, and that person might be able to do some real damage.   

 

[Zow]

So just to be clear, are you saying that it's okay that schumer did that because Trump did it?

So Trump's fault?

No. Not even close. I’m saying both are wrong. 
 

I joked that Schumer can now be elected president b/c apparently we, as an electorate, will vote in somebody willing to say such stupid and awful things. 

 

[Zow]

Trump is critical of judges and probably goes too far often and should shut his mouth.  Schumer went further than being critical and appeared threatening.  Trump is a large hurdle to clear, but Schumer clearly did and pointing at Trump doesn't even work. That is bad. 

Trump has suggested that Obama contract Ebola, that 2nd amendment people take action [against his opponents], and, as you note, have suggested that judges cannot be objective in very crude fashion. 
 

Schumer was very very wrong and shouldn’t be defended here. But you’re wrong if you’re suggesting that his comments shouldn’t be viewed through a Trump lens and that ardent Trump supporters’ criticisms of Schumer doesn’t lose credibility when they don’t criticize trump for his similar conduct. 

 

[Phil Elliott]

I don't even get it. It's not like those comments can even be construed as saying there are political consequences. These are lifetime appointments. And why single out Kavanaugh and Gorsuch only? Ugh. Dangerous discourse is infecting our nation and the "good people" need to stop this instead of shrugging it off.  This was so why I wanted Buttigieg to win the D nomination because I think he was serious about unity. 

Agree. Why only these two are honored by Schumer?

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

And I think he should apologize and this should then be over.

I agree. He needs to make a sincere apology. 

 

[sho nuff]

This to me makes it hard to take any discussion seriously.

This is a pretty big deal.  And rather than acknowledging the big deal that it is “Well, Trump bad.”

So really in your eyes nothing a Democrat will ever do is bad because Trump exists. 

I applaud the anti-Trump posters who haven’t tried to turn this into a Trump thread.  Schumer did something deplorable.  Trump had no part in it. 

No...its still bad that Schumer said it and when Democrats do it...but the outrage by people that defend Trump and his statements and things similar and worse is laughable.

 

[Summer Wheat]

I’m squarely progressive, left of most people on this board.

Senator Schumer was over the line. I agree with CJ Roberts.

I think any rational person would agree. Chuck was way over the line here. Pelosi needs to come down on him publicly.

 

[sho nuff]

Stuff like the bold is why I find you perhaps the toughest poster on these boards to read. You are extremely intelligent and make coherent arguments that I sometimes agree with, even though our worldviews are diametrically opposed

And then you post something like the bold above. And I wonder how someone of your intelligence can be so disingenuous to suggest that the impeachment was simply a slip of the tongue on a phone call.  Because you know that’s not the case at all. You know impeachment was about a well coordinated effort by several government and non-government officials to leverage and influence action in Ukraine over the course of months. To play if off as simply a “poor choice of words” is absolute nonsense, and I know you know better. Yet here we are.  Unreal. 

Also anyone making it just about the phone call and not everything else that went on isn’t arguing in very good faith IMO

 

[Godsbrother]

What Schumer said was way over the line and he should apologize.  

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Attacks? Not even on the same planet as what Chuck said. Is it possible you have an opinion without obsessing about Trump?

Narrator: It is not

 

[squistion]

Attacks? Not even on the same planet as what Chuck said. Is it possible you have an opinion without obsessing about Trump?

No more than you apparently.  

 

[Phil Elliott]

Because they are Trump appointees of course. 

Again, incredibly stupid comment. 

So its about Trump again and not about the conservative leaning justices or pro-life democrats and republicans.

 

[jm192]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconnell-to-call-out-schumer-for-controversial-remarks-directed-towards-supreme-court-justices

Mitch calling Schumer out on the Senate floor

 

[jonessed]

Schumer threatened them and needs to apologize.  Trump Is an ###, but he has nothing to do with this.    

 

[Phil Elliott]

Schumer speaking now on Senate floor, justifying because of his strong passion justifies his remarks, but acknowledges he used words he shouldn't have. That passion thing gets blamed quite a bit. 

 

[tonydead]

No more than you apparently.  

I think what he said was horrible, it goes without saying.  Your turn.

 

[Summer Wheat]

Schumer speaking now on Senate floor, justifying because of his strong passion justifies his remarks, but acknowledges he used words he shouldn't have. That passion thing gets blamed quite a bit. 

I use the same terms when I get into a argument with my wife.  When she asks are you going to apologize I say "I am sorry I let you provoke me"

 

[squistion]

I think what he said was horrible, it goes without saying.  Your turn.

Yes, he shouldn't have said it.

However, if he apologizes then so should Trump for demanding that Sotomayor and Ginsburg recuse themselves from 'Trump-related' cases that are before the court in which he has a lot at stake. 

 

[Summer Wheat]

No more than you apparently.  

I mean we all have to condemn Chucks comments.  As Joe Biden would say.  "come on man"

 

[jm192]

If he should apologize then so should Trump for demanding that Sotomayor and Ginsburg recuse themselves from 'Trump-related' cases that are before the court in which he has a lot at stake. 

Here it comes.

No Dem can do bad because Trump bad.

 

[jonessed]

If he should apologize then so should Trump for demanding that Sotomayor and Ginsburg recuse themselves from 'Trump-related' cases that are before the court in which he has a lot at stake. 

That’s not even in the same ballpark.  Trump has quite a few comparable remarks.  That’s not one of them.

 

[squistion]

Here it comes.

No Dem can do bad because Trump bad.

Strawman. Just asking for consistency. 

 

[jm192]

Strawman. Just asking for consistency. 

Because you’re not capable of discussing or considering any issue through a lens that doesn’t involve Trump. When people discuss trump derangement syndrome, this is it.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I’m squarely progressive, left of most people on this board.

Senator Schumer was over the line. I agree with CJ Roberts.

I don’t think Schumer intended a physical threat. But he massacred the idiom so egregiously that it’s very hard to figure out what he meant to say. 
 

Apropos of nothing, I felt a little stabby this morning when reporters kept saying he was trying to lift the phrase from Kavanaugh  it’s a freakin’ Bible passage famously quoted by Sir Arthur Harris when discussing the Dresden bombing campaign  

 

[jon_mx]

Strawman. Just asking for consistency. 

They are completely different.  Raising the issue that a judge should recuse themselves is not comparable to threats based on an upcoming opinion.  It is not only irrelevant, but it is not even remotely comparable.   

 

[Summer Wheat]

Strawman. Just asking for consistency. 

Is ripping up the SOTU speech ok as well?  I am disgusted as it seems we have lost our minds. These are our  leaders from the left acting this way.

 

[squistion]

They are completely different.  Raising the issue that a judge should recuse themselves is not comparable to threats based on an upcoming opinion.  It is not only irrelevant, but it is not even remotely comparable.   

That is your opinion and I have mine. 

 

[jm192]

Strawman. Just asking for consistency. 

Also, it’s hilarious that you bring up strawman arguments, but you’re intentionally deflecting the entire point of the thread by bringing up misdeeds of the president.

You mention consistency, but you don’t do it yourself. You literally post the president’s tweets and dissect them. If the president had done this, you would be all over it. But when the Democratic senator does it, we need to stop and analyze how someone else has done something in the past.

 

[jon_mx]

I don’t think Schumer intended a physical threat. But he massacred the idiom so egregiously that it’s very hard to figure out what he meant to say. 
 

Apropos of nothing, I felt a little stab by this morning when reporters kept saying he was trying to lift the phrase from Kavanaugh  it’s a freakin’ Bible passage famously quoted by Sir Arthur Harris when discussing the Dresden bombing campaign  

What ever the threat was (physical/political/impeachment) it is completely inappropriate for a Senator to do to try to sway a pending decision.  Schumer should admit his error and apologize.  

 

[jm192]

That is your opinion and I have mine. 

Your opinion is that saying that judges should recuse themselves is the same as threatening them? Seems very illogical, but so have several of your other posts today.

 

[jm192]

Is ripping up the SOTU speech ok as well?  I am disgusted as it seems we have lost our minds. These are our  leaders from the left acting this way.

Apparently it’s all OK because Trump.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Strawman. Just asking for consistency. 

Totally agree with you. 

 

[squistion]

Your opinion is that saying that judges should recuse themselves is the same as threatening them? Seems very illogical, but so have several of your other posts today.

It is interfering with the judiciary or the judicial process, specifically with upcoming decisions by SCOTUS. In this case it is a matter of degree but neither should be done. 

 

[jon_mx]

That is your opinion and I have mine. 

Of course you do.  And sometimes opinions are nothing but an indefensible hack to deflect against the obvious.  When CNN condemns a top Democrat, you might want to rethink your stance.  

 

[jm192]

It is interfering with the judiciary or the judicial process, specifically with upcoming decisions by SCOTUS. In this case it is a matter of degree but neither should be done. 

Trump trump Trump

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

What ever the threat was (physical/political/impeachment) it is completely inappropriate for a Senator to do to try to sway a pending decision.  Schumer should admit his error and apologize.  

Give me a break. It is not inappropriate, in any way, for any person to express a preference about a matter before the Court. I mean, what has Trump done for months on the Stone case?

You really think that if Schumer has simply said that decision will have political consequences that he’d owe anyone an apology?

 

[jm192]

Of course you do.  And sometimes opinions are nothing but an indefensible hack to deflect against the obvious.  When CNN condemns a top Democrat, you might want to rethink your stance.  

During Impeachment, John Roberts was the greatest.  We should let him decide on how to proceed on issues and respect his honorable decisions.

Now?  Well, we’ll just pretend him speaking put against a top Democrat doesn’t matter.

 

[The Commish]

Strawman. Just asking for consistency. 

why would you ask something of others you aren't willing to do yourself?

 

[squistion]

Of course you do.  And sometimes opinions are nothing but an indefensible hack to deflect against the obvious.  When CNN condemns a top Democrat, you might want to rethink your stance.  

Not a Jeffery Toobin fan and he was expressing his opinion (just like yours) and not speaking for the CNN Network. 

 

[jon_mx]

Give me a break. It is not inappropriate, in any way, for any person to express a preference about a matter before the Court. I mean, what has Trump done for months on the Stone case?

You really think that if Schumer has simply said that decision will have political consequences that he’d owe anyone an apology?

He crossed the line at making it a threat.  His opinion is fine if he thinks it would be a horrible ruling.   Even as you state it in a nicer better way, it still comes across as a bit of a threat.  

 

[beef]

Do I have to pick a side here, or can I just say both R's and D's are acting like jerks and saying stupid things?  I also don't care about the "who started" or "who said more" of it.  I get enough of that from my children.  

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

It was not a threat.

It was dumb and offensive and disappointing and bad.

He was paraphrasing Kavanaugh (who was paraphrasing Hosea 8:7).

That doesn’t make it okay.

Trump has said much worse about judges.

That also doesn’t make it okay.