Politics makes strange bedfellows, but politicians also discover that someone who was cuddling them yesterday could kick them onto the floor today.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jefferies was given two chances on Friday to back Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer: He balked on both.
With Democrats in the House and Senate raging at Schumer because he insisted senators bend a knee to President Donald Trump and approve a federal government spending plan that guts critical programs — rather than shut down the government — Jeffries was asked whether he believed Schumer had “acquiesced.”
“That is a question best addressed by the senate,“ Jeffries said. ”The vote hasn’t taken place yet, and the House Democrats’ position is very clear. We strongly oppose any efforts to cut the health care of the American people, veterans’ benefits, and nutritional assistance, all of which are in the partisan Republican bill.”
Jeffries added that House Democrats would continue to fight for Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, veterans’ benefits and public schools — while Trump and Elon Musk “take a chainsaw to these important priorities.”
Jeffries held together the House Democratic caucus, which rejected the spending plan — and they now feel like they’re being sold out by Schumer.
Jeffries was asked if Schumer should be replaced.
“Next question,” he said.
Again, he didn’t say no.
“WOW,” longtime Congressional reporter Jake Sherman tweeted. “Jeffries is giving Schumer ZERO back up. … This is absolutely stunning.”
Rep. Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, taking the microphone next, piled on Schumer.
“Most American people … they don’t know who Chuck Schumer is, but they do know what this administration and Elon Musk and the GOP are planning for them, and it’s why you’re seeing this uproar in town halls,” she said. “It’s why you are seeing in very, very Republican parts of this country, veterans expressing their frustration and their outrage that they’ve cut 7,000 of them from jobs … and [Trump has] a spokesperson for the White House that says, ‘Well, those veterans weren’t fit to work.‘”
Despite polls that show the Republicans and Trump would be blamed for shutting down the federal government, Schumer has instructed Democratic senators to vote for the House GOP’s funding bill — a continuing resolution or “CR” — which will allow Elon Musk and DOGE to keep gutting the federal government and crucial support programs.
That has sparked a revolt from all corners of the party — and criticism from the anti-Trump wing of former Republicans.
Among those lining up to rip Schumer is one of his longtime supporters, Sen. Patty Murray of Washington:
“I will NOT vote to let Elon and Trump pick winners and losers with your taxpayer dollars,” she teeted. “Senators were not elected to beg Trump for federal resources.”
Jaime Harrison, former head of the Democratic National Committee, piled on: “Dammit VOTE NO!” he tweeted. “These are not normal times! Senator Schumer, it is time to lead! Senate Democrats must fight for the American people and cannot rubber stamp the chaos of Trump and Musk!”
Activist Shannon Watts, who founded Mom Demand Action, the nation’s largest gun-control group, called for Schumer to be pushed aside ASAP.
“Regardless of whether you think Sen Schumer should allow cloture to be invoked on a CR, you can’t argue that he’s performed abysmally: there’s been no fight, no strategy and no interest in or ability to persuade his colleagues or the public,” she tweeted. “We cannot win this way.”
Still others pointed to the lack of a strategy to fight Trump from the aging, low-energy Schumer, 74.
Meanwhile, Trump applauded Schumer for “doing the right thing,” which brought even more attacks: “I don’t think we should be moving in any way to elicit praise from Donald Trump, who has no respect for Congress and the power of the purse, who is by the hour rolling out executive actions that are lawless,” Democratic Rep. Ayanna Pressley said on CNN. “… This is a hostile government takeover. He is a dictator.”
Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart has had Schumer in his crosshairs for months:
“What is the decision-making process here? ‘Hey, who should we get out there to effectively battle one of the most savvy presidential media manipulators in history? Oh, I don’t know, how about Schumer? He’s uninteresting, but at least he’s monotone. Oh wait, and Chuck, before you go out there, you look too young! Put on these readers and lower them on your nose. Perfect!’”
