Schumer threatens justices

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: Jon Estes

Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Thu Mar 05, 2020 6:01 pm

[Chuck] Schumer, D-N.Y., suggested that President Donald Trump's court appointees, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, "won't know what hit" them if they vote to uphold abortion restrictions. He spoke during a rally on the sidewalk in front of the court building.

"I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price," Schumer said.

In rare rebuke, Chief Justice Roberts slams Schumer for 'threatening' comments

Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe, a supporter of abortion and friend of Chuck Schumer, sided with Chief Justice Roberts over Schumer. Tribe tweeted:
These remarks by @SenSchumer were inexcusable. Chief Justice Roberts was right to call him on his comments. I hope the Senator, whom I’ve long admired and consider a friend, apologizes and takes back his implicit threat. It’s beneath him and his office.

Laurence Tribe on Twitter
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Dave Roberts » Thu Mar 05, 2020 7:34 pm

First it was Trump saying that Sotomyor and Ginsberg should recuse themselves since they were biased. Now Shumer entered the fray. Seems Roberts' response should have censured both. Interference with the courts should be forbidden on both sides.
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7700
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Sandy » Fri Mar 06, 2020 12:35 am

Dave Roberts wrote:First it was Trump saying that Sotomyor and Ginsberg should recuse themselves since they were biased. Now Shumer entered the fray. Seems Roberts' response should have censured both. Interference with the courts should be forbidden on both sides.


You mean the same Roberts who sat through the Senate trial of Trump and watched the constitution crumpled up and thrown in the trash? You're expecting him to conduct himself fairly and in the non-partisan way that the constitution instructs? He ignored the constitution and behaved like the Republican Senators who sheepishly admitted that Trump broke the law but not enough to warrant his removal rom office. I don't expect Roberts to behave, or rule, fairly.
Sandy
 

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby KeithE » Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:49 am

In context Schumer was threatening political consequences in the 2020 elections if Roe vs Wade were to be overthrown by the SCOTUS. He wrongly (in my view) named just Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and has apologized for that and clarified what he meant.

See his original statement at pro-choice rally, his clarification, and his apology here. Listen and watch the whole video (after a brief commercial)

Of course the RW (always ready to pounce) played this as a physical threat against the two most recently added Justices. There is no way Schumer meant to physically threaten either Justice. Nor did he mean it as a political threat aimed at specifically Gorsuch and Kavanaugh who face no re-election. In all likelihood he awkwardly evoked their names as a reminder of the rightward drift in the court's makeup.

OTOH, peruse the over 40 Trump's threatening statements (written March 2018). They are largely of a political nature (not physical threats). I do not recall any apology from Trump for any of these (unless someone can show me otherwise).

Trump also winks at or ignores when his supporters threaten violence sometimes in direct response to Trump’s speech and/or rallies: 52 incidents outlined here .

And many of Trump’s supporters have followed though with violent acts: Here Is a List of Far-Right Attackers Trump Inspired

More important than Schumer’s verbal mistake in naming 2 Justices, is his support for abortion.

Matthew 7:3 comes to mind.
Last edited by KeithE on Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:10 am, edited 2 times in total.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9362
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby William Thornton » Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:52 am

Schumer screwed up, walked it back, apologized.
My stray thoughts on SBC stuff may be found at my blog, SBC Plodder
User avatar
William Thornton
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12597
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Tim Bonney » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:37 am

William Thornton wrote:Schumer screwed up, walked it back, apologized.


I have to agree Williams. I see some of the Dems trying to emulate Trump's bombastic approach. It's a huge mistake. Don't claim to be the party of reason and then pull a boneheaded move like this.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6558
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Sun Mar 08, 2020 5:14 pm

Yes, of course, it was a political threat, but should we be threatening justices with “political consequences” if they don't rule our way? In theory at least, they should rule according to what the law says and not what might be the consequences of their ruling. Yes, Schumer was preaching to the choir and trying to stir up abortionists, but even he later admitted I shouldn’t have used the words I did.” Here are some things he said in his somewhat equivocal (to me) apology (as in, I meant what I said, I just should not have said it that way). The first time he mentioned Kavanaugh and Gorusch he gives thumbs down signs to incite the crowd to boo. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/03/04/schumer_to_kavanaugh_gorsuch_you_will_pay_the_price.html
“My point was that there would be political consequences for President Trump and Senate Republicans if the Supreme Court, with the newly confirmed justices, stripped away a woman’s right to choose. I’m from Brooklyn. We speak in strong language. I shouldn’t have used the words I did, but in no way was I making a threat.

“I feel so deeply the anger of women all across America about Senate Republicans and the courts working hand in glove to take down Roe v. Wade. Republican state legislatures are restricting a woman’s right to choose so severely as to make it nonexistent, and the courts are now likely to go along because Senate Republicans have confirmed nominees they believe will strip away women’s rights and fundamentally change this country.

“I didn’t intend to suggest anything other than political and public opinion consequences for the Supreme Court, and it is a gross distortion to imply otherwise.”

A transcript of his speech is here:
https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/chuck-schumer-pro-abortion-rally-speech-transcript-says-kavanaugh-gorsuch-will-pay-the-price
As Tim says, and I will put slightly different: Don’t oppose Trump’s bombastic speech, and then defend it in someone else and/or to deflect to “what about Trump.” I expected some of you would, and you did not disappoint on the latter. Fortunately, no one defended Schumer’s extreme comments, or at least I did not take what you wrote that way.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Sandy » Sun Mar 08, 2020 6:26 pm

Rvaughn wrote: Don’t oppose Trump’s bombastic speech, and then defend it in someone else and/or to deflect to “what about Trump.” I expected some of you would, and you did not disappoint on the latter. Fortunately, no one defended Schumer’s extreme comments, or at least I did not take what you wrote that way.


Where?

I have a problem with Roberts stepping out and wagging his finger at Schumer after making multiple claims that the court is above partisanship in order to defend obviously partisan rulings. He's the Chief Justice. If he doesn't want the court, under his leadership, to look partisan, he needs to step back into his own hallway and mind his own business. That's been his posture in the past when, on rare occasions, a justice has stepped into a political perspective aside from simply commenting on a ruling. He chided Justice Ginsberg for responding to Trump tweets degrading her, even though her response was measured and mature by comparison. It's not his job to police the senate.

To Schumer's credit, he cooled off, and issued an apology. You're way, way off base even putting it in the same category with Trump, who has issued such an insensate stream of criticism and comments, including attacks on Supreme Court justices and with clear disrespect in tone and intent. He doesn't walk anything back or apologize. His behavior invalidates your comparison.
Sandy
 

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby KeithE » Mon Mar 09, 2020 5:46 am

On balance Trump has exhibited many, many more instances of “bombastic” or threatening speech. I gave 10's of examples above and there are many more. No one has even referred to any of those,

And Trump is President. And Trump seldom if ever apologizes.

I agreed with you that Schumer made a mistake.

Where is your balance rvaughn? william? Admit that.

Sandy said:
To Schumer's credit, he cooled off, and issued an apology. You're way, way off base even putting it in the same category with Trump, who has issued such an insensate stream of criticism and comments, including attacks on Supreme Court justices and with clear disrespect in tone and intent. He doesn't walk anything back or apologize. His behavior invalidates your comparison.


Amen to that!
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9362
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Mar 09, 2020 5:58 am

Sandy wrote:Where?
Well, your first post, for example, where you vented about Trump and Roberts. Even though the thread is about Schumer you did not mention him.

Yesterday my daughter posted on Facebook wondering why Tulsi Gabbard has not been able to gain more traction in the presidential primary than she has. First response out of the box? "I don't see how anyone anywhere for any reason could support DJ Trump." Really? Maybe there is such a thing as Trump Derangement Syndrome.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Mar 09, 2020 6:02 am

KeithE wrote:I agreed with you that Schumer made a mistake.
And I acknowledged that you agreed.
KeithE wrote:Where is your balance rvaughn? william? Admit that.
Balance of what? What does that even mean? That because Trump has diarrhea of the mouth we should never mention or discuss anyone else's?
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby KeithE » Mon Mar 09, 2020 8:17 am

Rvaughn wrote:
KeithE wrote:I agreed with you that Schumer made a mistake.
And I acknowledged that you agreed.
KeithE wrote:Where is your balance rvaughn? william? Admit that.
Balance of what? What does that even mean? That because Trump has diarrhea of the mouth we should never mention or discuss anyone else's?

Balance of negative comments in relation to instances of potty mouth vs your political persuasions.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9362
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Sandy » Mon Mar 09, 2020 9:04 am

Rvaughn wrote:
Sandy wrote:Where?
Well, your first post, for example, where you vented about Trump and Roberts. Even though the thread is about Schumer you did not mention him.

Yesterday my daughter posted on Facebook wondering why Tulsi Gabbard has not been able to gain more traction in the presidential primary than she has. First response out of the box? "I don't see how anyone anywhere for any reason could support DJ Trump." Really? Maybe there is such a thing as Trump Derangement Syndrome.


My first post was about Roberts and his response which, by his own claim of attempting to keep the court above partisanship, was inappropriate and unbecoming of the Chief Justice, especially when he hasn't retorted in similar fashion to Trump's caustic criticisms of justices. That doesn't justify Schumer's remarks, but it certainly lessens the legitimacy of his and undermines his claim to being above the partisan fray.

Glad to see your daughter's response. People are waking up and realizing they've got to go to the ballot box to make a change and that's encouraging. The more people who believe that the better.
Sandy
 

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Mar 09, 2020 11:57 am

KeithE wrote:Balance of negative comments in relation to instances of potty mouth vs your political persuasions.
As I have said before, I did not vote for Donald Trump in 2016, and will not vote for him in 2020. Yes, he is loud, rude, and obnoxious. You will not find my support for that in any of my posts, unless not railing on him in every post is considered support!

You all may get goosebumps when you read Schumer's apology, but color me skeptical, yes skeptical not only of his, but of the apologies of politicians in general. I may get it wrong on occasion, but I think the percentages are in my favor for most of them being calculated and politically motivated. This doubtless also colors what some of you may perceive as my seeming lack of concern for apologies from President Trump. If it is not sincere, it is merely political posturing.
Last edited by Rvaughn on Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:05 pm

BTW, concerning Chief Justice Roberts, I am not a huge fan, though likely for different reasons than most of you. However, I don't feel a need to trot out "anti" credentials in every post I make.

Not to try to make you feel better about him (cause I know you won't), but you may have forgotten that he chided President Trump when Trump made the comment about "Obama judges." Roberts told him there were no Obama judges, no Bush judges, no Clinton judges -- just judges.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Sandy » Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:11 pm

Rvaughn wrote:BTW, concerning Chief Justice Roberts, I am not a huge fan, though likely for different reasons than most of you. However, I don't feel a need to trot out "anti" credentials in every post I make.

Not to try to make you feel better about him (cause I know you won't), but you may have forgotten that he chided President Trump when Trump made the comment about "Obama judges." Roberts told him there were no Obama judges, no Bush judges, no Clinton judges -- just judges.


Ah, if only that were true.

Using the term "chided" gives some nuance of difference between what he said to Trump and what he said to Schumer. I didn't hear or see a Roberts response to Trump's suggestion that Sotomayor and Ginsberg recuse themselves, or his rude remarks about Ginsberg's age.
Sandy
 

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:44 pm

But, of course, it is true. He did say that, whether or not you think he should have done something different/more.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Sandy » Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:31 pm

Rvaughn wrote:But, of course, it is true. He did say that, whether or not you think he should have done something different/more.


If only it were true that there were no clinton justices, no bush justices, no obama justices, no trump justices. It's clear that there is an ideological divide. Both sides think so.
Sandy
 

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby KeithE » Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:34 pm

Rvaughn wrote:
KeithE wrote:Balance of negative comments in relation to instances of potty mouth vs your political persuasions.
As I have said before, I did not vote for Donald Trump in 2016, and will not vote for him in 2020. Yes, he is loud, rude, and obnoxious. You will not find my support for that in any of my posts, unless not railing on him in every post is considered support!

You all may get goosebumps when you read Schumer's apology, but color me skeptical, yes skeptical not only of his, but of the apologies of politicians in general. I may get it wrong on occasion, but I think the percentages are in my favor for most of them being calculated and politically motivated. This doubtless also colors what some of you may perceive as my seeming lack of concern for apologies from President Trump. If it is not sincere, it is merely political posturing.


I didn’t say you voted for Trump; but it is apparent you are a card carrying member of the ilooktehotherwayclub when it comes to Trump.

Schumer’s response had a good measure of clarification in it - not a pure I-was-wholely-wrong apology. As I said before I am more upset about Schumer’s support for abortion than his misstatement.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9362
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Sandy » Mon Mar 09, 2020 3:57 pm

Rvaughn wrote:You all may get goosebumps when you read Schumer's apology, but color me skeptical, yes skeptical not only of his, but of the apologies of politicians in general. I may get it wrong on occasion, but I think the percentages are in my favor for most of them being calculated and politically motivated. This doubtless also colors what some of you may perceive as my seeming lack of concern for apologies from President Trump. If it is not sincere, it is merely political posturing.


No goosebumps. Just a reasonable acknowledgement that he did apologize, regardless of apologies of politicians in general. It's something you see very little of in politics, and while I would agree that many apologies are politically motivated and perhaps even calculated, you have to look at it at face value. Schumer really has nothing to lose. Would his comments make any difference to me if he were my senator and up for re-election? No. Nor would it really cost him any votes. We're starting to see a real contrast among the Washington politicians between those who still have respect for the constitutional republic and the give and take of needing bi-partisan support to get things done and the swamp creatures who take the "my way or the highway" approach and get nothing done. Schumer is of the former group and that needs to be acknowledged and taken into consideration when judging his motives.
Sandy
 

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Mar 09, 2020 4:33 pm

Sandy wrote:If only it were true that there were no clinton justices, no bush justices, no obama justices, no trump justices. It's clear that there is an ideological divide. Both sides think so.
Thanks for clarifying what you meant you thought was not true. I mistook your meaning.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Mar 09, 2020 4:38 pm

KeithE wrote:I didn’t say you voted for Trump; but it is apparent you are a card carrying member of the ilooktehotherwayclub when it comes to Trump.
Keith, I have no idea what you perceive would get someone in the ilooktheotherway Trump club. I'm certainly not going to pile on the already high heap here at BaptIstLife.com just to see who hates Trump the most. Y'all are doing a fine job.

Otherwise, I believe what I believe, vote how I vote, contact my representatives, and generally save my complaining about and opposition to Trump for Christian friends who think he walks on water. I am not looking for anyone's approval.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby KeithE » Mon Mar 09, 2020 6:36 pm

Rvaughn wrote:
KeithE wrote:I didn’t say you voted for Trump; but it is apparent you are a card carrying member of the ilooktehotherwayclub when it comes to Trump.
Keith, I have no idea what you perceive would get someone in the ilooktheotherway Trump club.


Quite obviously when you “look” at (and choose to post on) a very isolated (one time) “threatening” speech from a known Trump opponent. That's "looking the other way” instead of at the serial, multiple offender himself. That got you into that club.

I am a card carrying ihatetrump club member. Although I would choose to call it the iamappalledattrump club. Try not to hate anyone.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9362
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Mar 09, 2020 8:37 pm

KeithE wrote:Quite obviously when you “look” at (and choose to post on) a very isolated (one time) “threatening” speech from a known Trump opponent. That's "looking the other way” instead of at the serial, multiple offender himself. That got you into that club.

I am a card carrying ihatetrump club member. Although I would choose to call it the iamappalledattrump club. Try not to hate anyone.
Oh, I see. The ihatetrump & iamappalledattrump clubs don't want any variety or competition at Baptist Life Politics and Public Policy Issues! Loud and clear.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Schumer threatens justices

Postby KeithE » Mon Mar 09, 2020 9:58 pm

Rvaughn wrote:
KeithE wrote:Quite obviously when you “look” at (and choose to post on) a very isolated (one time) “threatening” speech from a known Trump opponent. That's "looking the other way” instead of at the serial, multiple offender himself. That got you into that club.

I am a card carrying ihatetrump club member. Although I would choose to call it the iamappalledattrump club. Try not to hate anyone.
Oh, I see. The ihatetrump & iamappalledattrump clubs don't want any variety or competition at Baptist Life Politics and Public Policy Issues! Loud and clear.


Huh?
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9362
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Next

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron