Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer is signaling he could plunge the country into a partial government shutdown if Republicans move forward with rescinding just a fraction of a percent of government spending.
The Senate is expected to vote on a request from the White House to claw back $1.1 billion in public broadcasting funding and $8.3 billion in foreign aid next week. Schumer has threatened that Democrats will reject a government funding deal for the upcoming fiscal year if Republicans pass President Donald Trump’s $9.4 billion rescission package, which could trigger a partial government shutdown at the end of September.
“Ask the Republicans why they are heading on this path,” Schumer said at a Senate Democratic leadership press conference Wednesday in response to a question citing his previous warnings about the alleged harmful effects of letting government funding lapse. “We are doing everything we can to keep the bipartisan appropriations process going. And they’re undermining it with rescissions, with pocket rescissions, with impoundment and every other way.”
Schumer’s implicit shutdown threat is a noticeable departure from his decision to avert a lapse in government funding in March by supplying the votes to pass a Trump-backed stopgap spending bill. The Democratic leader’s decision to avoid a government shutdown earlier in the year infuriated the party’s base, leading Schumer to postpone a scheduled book tour. Elected Democrats across the country criticized his leadership.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune criticized Schumer’s recent remarks appearing to use the rescissions package as leverage in the anticipated government funding showdown later this year. Schumer wrote a “Dear Colleague” letter Tuesday warning of “consequences that will be felt far beyond the halls of power” if Republicans claw back funding for public broadcasting and foreign aid.
“I was disappointed to see the Democrat leader … implicitly threaten to shut down the government,” Thune said on the Senate floor Wednesday. “But I’m hopeful that that is not the position of the Democrat Party, the Democrat conference here in the Senate, and that we can work together in the coming weeks to pass bipartisan appropriations bills.”
“Funding the government is our chief priority before October, but that won’t stop us from considering additional measures,” Thune said, in an implicit reference to the rescissions package.
Thune is up against a July 18 deadline to pass the rescissions package, which is subject to a simple majority vote. Failure to approve the clawback request by that timeline would force the president to spend the money as originally directed by lawmakers.
The House cleared the clawback measure 214 to 212 in June with four GOP lawmakers joining Democrats in opposing the rescissions package.
Though several moderate Senate Republicans have voiced concerns about rescinding some of the proposed DOGE cuts, some in the conference are warning that failure is not an option and that Senate Republicans must meet the July 18 deadline. The $9.4 billion rescissions request would be the first DOGE cuts codified by Congress out of the roughly $175 billion identified by the president’s cost-cutting commission.
“I think if the Republicans in the United States Senate do not pass the rescission package, after all the rhetoric about reducing spending, then they should hide their head in the bag,” Republican Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy told reporters Tuesday. “And I think the White House will provide the bag.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2025-07-10 12:05:192025-07-10 12:10:44Chuck Schumer Lays Groundwork For Government Shutdown
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer sidestepped a question about whether he supported states giving illegal migrants taxpayer-funded health insurance at a press conference Wednesday.
The House-passed One Big Beautiful Bill Act included a provision to penalize 14 states and the District of Columbia who enroll illegal immigrants in state health insurance programs by reducing their federal Medicaid funding for the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion population. The Daily Caller News Foundation asked Schumer about the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) preliminary projections that 1.4 million illegal immigrants would lose health coverage as a result of this provision in the House-drafted bill.
WATCH: Daily Caller News Foundation reporter @AndiNapier PRESSES Schumer on states providing health coverage to illegal immigrants 🚨
NAPIER: “Is reducing federal Medicaid payments to states that provide coverage to undocumented immigrants a reform that you would support?”… pic.twitter.com/Tz7hlTWQfD
Schumer immediately reacted by slamming the president’s tax and spending bill before offering a word salad on his opposition to congressional Republicans’ proposed crack down on states who give illegal migrants free healthcare.
“The bottom line is the overall bill is so awful,” Schumer said. “If they want to aim — if they got some specific issues aim it, don’t just do just do a ‘meat axe,’ chainsaw, across the board and cut everything, everything, everything.”
“This goes way beyond what they’re talking about and hurts everybody,” Schumer added.
The DCNF’s Andi Shae Napier attempted to ask a follow-up regarding Schumer’s opposition to the Medicaid reform provision before he declared “next question.”
The Democratic leader also incorrectly said the CBO projections were “GOP numbers” and questioned the accuracy of the congressional scorekeeper’s estimates.
The Medicaid provision specifically lowers the Federal Medicaid Assistance Percentage (FMAP) — the Medicaid match rate the federal government pays to states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act — from 90% to 80%. The proposal would force certain blue states to cover 20% of the cost themselves, putting billions of dollars in Medicaid funding they depend on at risk.
GOP lawmakers and Trump administration officials have defended their Medicaid reforms as preserving the entitlement program’s benefits for those who need it most while eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. Savings generated from reforming Medicaid contributed in part to more than $1.5 trillion in spending cuts over a decade in the president’s landmark bill.
“We’re not cutting Medicaid,” Speaker Mike Johnson told “Meet the Press” host Kristen Welker on Sunday. “What we are doing is reducing the program wrought with fraud, waste and abuse to make sure that that program is essential to so many people and ensure that it is available for the most vulnerable, and it’s intended for young, single pregnant women, the disabled and elderly.”
Johnson added that 7.6 million people “will supposedly be affected by this,” referring to preliminary CBO projections. “When you look at the numbers and break them down, this is high on public opinion. You are talking about [removing] 1.4 million illegal immigrants.”
A spokesperson for Schumer did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment seeking clarification on the Democratic leader’s position.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2025-06-06 05:52:012025-06-06 06:22:35‘Next’: Schumer Dodges Simple Question About Medicaid For Illegal Immigrants
Roger Aronoff is the executive director and Editor of the Citizens Commission on National Security. Aronoff founded the Citizens Commission on Benghazi. He has produced and directed six documentaries, and produced a weekly series on PBS called Think Tank with Ben Wattenberg.
TOPIC: The Schumer Dilemma and a Lesson for the Left
REV. BEN JOHNSON
Rev. Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.. . His writings have also appeared in The (UK) Guardian, Human Events, The Stream, Real Clear Policy, Conservative Review, The Daily Caller, and have been cited by National Review, CBS News, and Fox News. He was managing editor of FrontPage Magazine and U.S. Bureau Chief at LifeSiteNews. He is the author of two books on tax-exempt foundations, as well as Party of Defeat (2008, Spence, with David Horowitz). Before turning to online journalism and editing, he spent more than a decade in all facets of radio broadcasting, including news and talk.
TOPIC: Unconstitutional, Ineffective, Incompetent, Unnecessary: Trump Moves to Abolish Dept. of Education
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Conservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TVhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngConservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TV2025-06-03 05:43:502025-06-03 05:45:19The Schumer Dilemma and Taking Down the Dept. of Education
Republican Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno reportedly called Democratic New York Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer a “drooling moron” in a remark to The New York Times during an in-depth piece on Democratic Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman. Fetterman’s absenteeism and mental health have sparked concern and criticism on Capitol Hill.
“Chuck Schumer is a drooling moron compared to John Fetterman,” Moreno said, according to the New York Times. Moreno also called Fetterman a “really, really cool dude.”
Fetterman has lately aligned himself more with Republicans on issues, including his support for Israel after the October 7 Hamas attack. He has also voiced skepticism toward for Democrats’ calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, criticized aspects of cancel culture, and embraced stricter immigration enforcement.
Fetterman was hospitalized for depression shortly after taking office. “It shook me that people are willing to weaponize that I got help,” he told The New York Times.
“This became the Belichick girlfriend story of politics,” Fetterman added, referencing the viral media fixation on NFL coach Bill Belichick’s much-younger girlfriend.
The New York Times’ profile revealed how Fetterman, once floated as a potential 2028 presidential contender, has grown isolated in Washington, distancing himself from both his staff and fellow Democrats. He’s quit the party’s caucus group chat, skipped weekly lunches, and missed dozens of floor votes.
Though Fetterman has denied any intention of switching parties, he told the outlet he appreciates his Republican colleagues and shares views with them on several hot-button issues, even while remaining pro-union and pro-choice.
The party of censorship suddenly cares about free speech.
The reverse is true of Republicans who want to censor or else deport left-wingers who are anti-American but who are nevertheless protected by the First Amendment to voice those noxious opinions. But let’s focus on Democrats for now.
Democrats have long pushed to censor conservatives, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, when, in the highest reaches of the Biden administration, government officials worked to nuke conservatives off social media platforms for their dissenting views on, among other things, the virus’s origin. House and Senate Democrats, of course, cheered on the White House’s gross overreach while long using the guise of “misinformation” and “disinformation” to quash politically inconvenient facts or narratives.
But now, in the wake of pro-Palestine activist Mahmoud Khalil’s arrest at the hands of the Trump administration, numerous high-profile Democrats have become staunch defenders of free speech, despite their long history of advocating for censorship. It’s politics, after all.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer emphasized that he despises Khalil’s views on Palestine and Israel while also invoking the First Amendment.
I abhor many of the opinions and policies that Mahmoud Khalil holds and supports, and have made my criticism of the antisemitic actions at Columbia loudly known. Mr. Khalil is also legal permanent resident here, and his wife, who is 8-months pregnant, is an American citizen.…
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries issued a similar statement, saying that absent a crime committed by Khalil, the Trump administration’s actions are “wildly inconsistent with the United States Constitution.”
Meanwhile, several ‘squad’ members and left-wing lawmakers didn’t dance around the issue of Khalil’s innocence as much as Schumer and Jeffries, but also came out strongly — suddenly — as fierce First Amendment advocates.
“We must be extremely clear: this is an attempt to criminalize political protest and is a direct assault on the freedom of speech of everyone in this country,” 14 House Democrats said in a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
There is also an irony in all the left-wingers who claim speech is equivalent to violence, then those same activists go on to vandalize property on college campuses across the country and claim their violence is actually free speech.
It’s all a bit maddening, but par for the course in national politics, where every elected representative is a reflexive cheerleader, adopting principles or else abandoning them when it’s convenient to score points against the other side.
Schumer advised that “universities political problems are really only among Republicans”
The House Committee on Education and the Workforce report on antisemitism is filled with damning materials, but some of the most damning bits of it deal not just with the reality of campus antisemitism and how university leaders covered it up, but the complicity of the Democrats in those cover-ups.
The description of contacts between Sen. Schumer and Columbia University leaders has already gone viral.
On January 4, then-President Shafik explained to Shipman and her fellow Co-Chair David Greenwald that she had met with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who advised Shafik that “universities political problems are really only among Republicans.” The Senator’s staff recommended the “best strategy is to keep heads down,” and when asked, Schumer and his staff indicated they did not believe it was necessary for the University’s leaders to meet with Republicans. Greenwald echoed this, writing in response, “If we are keeping our head down, maybe we shouldn’t meet with Republicans.”
Sen. Schumer had once claimed to be a ‘shomer’ or ‘protector’ for the Jewish community.
The report reveals that he was actually a ‘shomer’ for campus antisemites.
Columbia University leaders were hoping that Democrats would take the House to protect them from further congressional oversight.
Days later, Greenwald exchanged text messages with his immediate predecessor Jonathan Lavine, about the Committee’s investigation and how they hoped Democrats would retake the House. On January 7, Greenwald sent Chair Emeritus Lavine a recent New York Times article about the expansion of the Committee’s investigation into campus antisemitism. Lavine responded, “Let’s hope the Dems win the house back. Greenwald replied, “Absolutely.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2024-11-03 04:23:042024-11-03 04:30:42College Presidents Turned to Sen. Schumer and Dems to Protect Them From Congressional Oversight on Antisemitism
On Tuesday, House Democrat leadership urged their colleagues in the party to vote against a GOP bill that pressures the Biden administration not to withhold arms from Israel as it fights Hamas following a deadly terrorist attack in October of last year.
Republican appropriators introduced the legislation after President Joe Biden halted the delivery of some weapons to Israel in protest of a full-scale ground operation in the southern Gaza city of Rafah.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2024-05-15 16:11:412024-05-15 16:15:42Democrat Leadership Urges Members To Oppose House GOP’s Israel Aid Bill
Schumer, a Jewish Democrat from New York, sent tremors through both countries this week when he said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has “lost his way” and warned that “Israel cannot survive if it becomes a pariah” as the Palestinian death toll continues to grow.
Biden is backing Schumer, signifying a new low in American-Israeli relations during this administration.
“He made a good speech,” Biden said in the Oval Office during a meeting with Ireland’s prime minister. “I think he expressed serious concerns shared not only by him but by many Americans.”
The full text of Schumer’s speech is published by the Times of Israel.
The speech and the subsequent support of it from Biden as he and Schumer hope to see the current Israeli government fall during a war for its very survival was recently reported on here. The speech and Biden’s approval represent a strategy to make Netanyahu the fall guy and install a government more to the left’s liking. As I recently wrote on Jihad Watch: Biden reportedly attempting to collapse Netanyahu government mid-war:
Here is one key reason why Biden is now reportedly attempting to force the collapse of Netanyahu’s government in the middle of a war:
Netanyahu has been a frequent obstacle to Democrats’ policies in the Middle East, starting with his opposition to President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, and continuing into his opposition to Biden’s Palestinian state ideas.
Another reason is the dilemma Biden faces in light of the upcoming elections, given his dependence on the Muslim vote and the pressure he has been receiving from Muslim communities. By shifting attention to Israel and the Netanyahu government, Biden diverts scrutiny away from himself, and creates an excuse for evading his responsibility to ally with Israel against jihad terror. He also gets to shift blame away from his administration for pouring money into the coffers of Iran. Under Obama, Iran — a main funder of Hamas — received $33.3 billion dollars in backroom deals. Under Biden, billions more have flowed into Iran.
Creating a crisis to avert attention and responsibility has become a signature ploy of Democrats.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2024-03-17 07:33:382024-03-17 07:40:34Joe Biden Backs Schumer After Senator Calls For New Elections In Israel — And now the crisis begins!
“Israelis are notoriously outspoken and have a vibrant democracy. In the middle of a war the very last thing they need is for a Democratic Party politician to elevate his own party’s electoral needs over Israeli national security and over Israeli democracy. This speech, coming after the Vice President’s, appears to signal a continuing campaign against Netanyahu. It’s a shameful and unprecedented way to treat an ally, and an unconscionable interference in the internal politics of another democracy.” — Elliot Abrams on Chuck Schumer speech.
Another self-loathing Jews stabbing our people in the back.
Early in his political career, Schumer pretended to be religious in order to get elected. He’s the lowest of the low.
Just to be clear: the Jewish people support Netanyahu so Schumer is attacking the Jewish people.
Self-hating Jews have long been a pox on the Jewish people.
US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer gave a speech on “a pathway to peace and achieving a two-state solution” today (Thursday).
In his remarks, Schumer called for the holding of new elections in Israel, saying that “Netanyahu has lost his way.” He further called the Israeli Prime Minister an “obstacle to peace.”
According to Schumer, Netanyahu is one of four obstacles to peace, the others being Hamas, “radical Israelis,” and Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas.
Schumer’s criticism of Netanyahu centered on the prime minister’s “outright” rejection of the idea of the creation of a Palestinian state in the aftermath of October 7.
“The Netanyahu coalition no longer fits the needs of Israel,” he said. “The Israeli people are being stifled right now by a governing vision that is stuck in the past.”
“This is a grave mistake for Israel, for Palestinians, for the region, and for the world,” he claimed. “The only real and sustainable solution to this decades-old conflict is a negotiated two-state solution.”
According to Schumer, Netanyahu has “dangerous and inflammatory policies that test existing U.S. standards for assistance.”
“If Prime Minister Netanyahu’s current coalition remains in power after the war begins to wind down, and continues to pursue dangerous and inflammatory policies that test existing US standards for assistance, then the United States will have no choice but to play a more active role in shaping Israeli policy by using our leverage to change the present course,” he said.
New Direct Polls poll for @Now14Israel shows @netanyahu leading @gantzbe by 10 points, 47-37%. Likud is leading Gantz's party 25 to 22. The right-religious bloc has a 62-seat majority to 48 seats for the leftist bloc. Biden's fight with Netanyahu strengthened the PM. Does the…
Jews like Schumer, traitors, have plagued my people since time immemorial.. The same traitors who built and worshiped a golden calf when Moses went up the mountain to receive the tablets (Jewish law), the same Jews (of the ‘Twelve Spies) who were dispatched by Moses to scout out the Land of Canaan (Israel) for 40 days as a future home for the Jewish people, during the time when the Israelites were in the wilderness following their Exodus from Ancient Egypt. .Ten of the twelve spies (the same ratio of Democrat Jew to Republican Jew) they slandered the land of milk and honey. As a result, the entire nation was made to wander in the desert for 40 years.
Chuck Schumer is a total disgrace. Not only isn't the man who says that Prime Minister Netanyahu isn't fit to lead Israel not fit to lead the Senate. He isn't fit to lead a synagogue's Men's Club. He deserves to be primaried by AOC. She's a more convincing anti-Semite.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2024-03-15 05:29:172024-03-15 12:04:33Self-Hating Jew Chuck Schumer Blames Netanyahu, Turns Gun on the Jewish People
The Senate late Thursday rejected a Democratic effort to alter the filibuster in order to pass their long-sought voting bills over unanimous Republican opposition, capping one of the most consequential days in the history of the chamber.
The change, had it been adopted, would have established a “talking filibuster,” allowing any senator to speak for or against the bill for as long as they wanted but lowering the 60-vote threshold for passage to a simple majority.
Democrats’ attempt to change Senate rules concluded a marathon day of debating in the chamber that saw nearly half of the body speak about the voting bills. They failed, and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer moved to change the rules soon after.
Though senators engaged in genuine debate throughout the day, most expressed disdain for how deliberation seemed to have faded from the world’s greatest deliberative body.
“I don’t know what happened to the good old days,” said West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, “but I can’t tell you they aren’t here now.”
The Senate late Thursday rejected a Democratic effort to alter the filibuster in order to pass their long-sought voting bills over unanimous Republican opposition, capping one of the most consequential days in the history of the chamber.
The vote failed 48-52 after Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema voted as they said they would for months, joining a unanimous Republican caucus in opposition and denying their party the necessary support for the change to take effect. The change, had it been adopted, would have established a “talking filibuster” pertaining to the voting bills only, allowing any senator to speak for or against them for as long as they wanted but lowering the 60-vote threshold for passage to a simple majority.
“What we have now … is not a filibuster,” Maine Sen. Angus King, and independent who caucuses with Democrats, said ahead of the vote. “It doesn’t require any effort. It doesn’t require any speeches. It doesn’t require to hold the floor.”
“Strom Thurmond would have loved this filibuster,” King added, invoking the late segregationist senator who set the record for the longest filibuster speech ever while speaking against the 1957 Civil Rights Act.
Democrats’ attempt to change Senate rules concluded a marathon day of debating in the chamber that saw nearly half of the body speak either for the John Lewis Voting Rights Reauthorization Act and the Freedom to Vote Act, the twin bills that passed the House Thursday with a quirk that prevented Senate Republicans from blocking debate on them as they had in the past.
The voting bills failed to garner 60 Senate votes earlier Wednesday night even though Manchin and Sinema voted in favor, sparking Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s motion to change Senate rules to allow them to pass without GOP support.
“For those who believe bipartisanship is possible, we have proven them wrong,” Manchin said ahead of the vote. “Ending the filibuster would be the easy way out. I cannot support such a perilous course for this nation when elected leaders are sent to Washington to unite our country by putting politics and party aside.”
Democrats have said the bills are necessary to counter election reform laws that Republican state legislatures across the country have passed in the wake of the 2020 election that allegedly suppress people’s ability to vote. As a result, nearly all have endorsed altering the filibuster to ensure their passage even if done on a partisan basis.
“I share with many of you … a vision of the Senate that collaborates and negotiates the most important issue of our time,” Georgia Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock said. “I believe in bipartisanship. But at what cost? Who is being asked to foot the bill for this bipartisanship and is liberty itself the cost?”
Republicans, however, have countered that the federal legislation, which sets uniform voting standards and outlaws partisan gerrymandering, will invite voter fraud and infringe on states’ rights to oversee their own elections.
“The president and his party will try to use fear and panic to smash the Senate, silence millions of Americans and size control of our democracy,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday.
McConnell said hours later that while the day was one of the most consequential in the history of the Senate, it really boiled down to a simple question: “Will it take 60 votes to pass massive changes or a simple majority to ram them through? That’s what’s at stake here.”
Though senators engaged in genuine debate throughout the day, most expressed disdain for how deliberation seemed to have faded from the world’s greatest deliberative body. Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, the only Republican who backed the John Lewis voting bill, said Wednesday that the rhetoric surrounding voting has become very concerning.
“I was part of a very troubling conversation last evening,” she said. “It was shared depending on which side you’re on in this body today on this issue, you’re either a racist or a hypocrite. Really, is that where we are?”
Manchin echoed her hours later in his speech, criticizing the lack of bipartisanship as he has time and time again throughout his filibuster defenses.
“I don’t know what happened to the good old days,” he said, “but I can’t tell you they aren’t here now.”
On support of Jewish communities, @MeghanMcCain asks @SenSchumer, “Do you understand critics that think you were too silent during the last attack?”
“I’ve talked repeatedly against anti-Semitism,” he responds. “I continue to defend Israel. I believe in a two-state solution.” pic.twitter.com/5VRPW2NDBB
Senator Chuck Schumer will not condemn anti-Semitic attacks from Palestinian activists, because he knows that will result in a primary challenge from the Left. Chuck Schumer is one of the worst cowards in American politics, and an utter disgrace to the Jewish people. Schumer doesn’t even have the courage to look at the camera as he spews his nonsense. And could barely speak coherently.
On a recent segment of ABC’s talk show “The View,” co-host Meghan McCain took Senator Chuck Schumer to task for not reaching out to Joseph Borgen, who was brutally beaten in broad daylight in New York City.
Borgen was headed to a pro-Israel rally in May when he was viciously attacked by pro-Palestinians thugs. He said that Senator Schumer never reached out to him directly.
McCain grills Schumer on his silence over the anti-Semitic attacks.
Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2021-08-01 05:30:132021-10-07 20:21:35WATCH: Senator Schumer Grilled About Silence on Anti-Semitic Attacks
In the movies sequels are usually worse than the original. Since Washington has often been referred to as “Hollywood for ugly people,” it is perhaps appropriate to consider another sequel in the making, not in film but in politics. Nancy Pelosi, the former Speaker of the House and soon-to-be Speaker of the House of Representatives, once again was the subject of a video posted on December 7, 2018 by Fox News, in which she rejected the notion of constructing a wall along the highly porous U.S./Mexican border to prevent the entry of illegal aliens, narcotics and other contraband.
Her outrageous statements and positions on immigration law enforcement and border security seemed to strike a new low during her first stint as Speaker. She has yet to resume that position and is already providing a disturbing peek into what America and Americans are in for with her in the position that provides her with a “leadership” role in the Congress and puts her in the chain of succession to the U.S. Presidency.
As my dad used to say, “Nothing is so good it could not be better or be so bad it could not get worse.” As hard as it might be to imagine, bad as Pelosi was the last time she held the position of Speaker, she may actually prove my dad was right.
This is the Fox News video:
It is unfathomable how Pelosi could declare that protecting the United States from threats posed by international terrorists, transnational gangs and the flow of narcotics into the United States is “immoral.”
It is similarly impossible to understand how Pelosi could determine that it is immoral to prevent the illegal entry of foreign workers who all too frequently displace American and lawful immigrant workers and drive down wages and working conditions of American and lawful immigrant workers who are similarly employed.
A wall would not prevent the lawfulentry of a single person into the United States. The wall would not block America’s ports of entry but would funnel all traffic destined to the United States through ports of entry where they are subject to inspection by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Inspectors and where a record of their entry into the United States is created. These issues have significant national security implications.
This is comparable to the way that guests who visit us are expected to knock on our front doors to ask permission to enter our homes. It would certainly be unacceptable for a stranger to enter our homes by climbing through a back window. Similarly an effective border wall would prevent aliens entering the United States surreptitiously.
In a very real sense, entering without inspection is, at a minimum, comparable to trespassing and, as I noted in my recent article, “Democrats Stand With Foreign Rioters,” Chuck Schumer’s hypocritical and contradictory position on trespassing on critical infrastructure and national landmarks versus aliens who trespass on America is astonishing.
Here is the relevant excerpt from my commentary:
Aliens who evade the vital inspections process conducted at ports of entry are, at a minimum, trespassing on the United States. This is a violation of law and poses a threat to national security and public safety.
On October 13, 2014 Schumer posted a press release on his official website which announced that because of dangers created by trespassers, particularly in this era of terrorism, that he had proposed legislation that would make trespassing on critical infrastructure and/or landmarks a federal crime with a maximum prison sentence of five years.
However, Schumer, who actually cited the antics of a 16-year-old boy in his press release, had declared that anyone who trespasses, including “adrenaline junkies,” should face a five-year prison sentence.
However, when aliens trespass on the United States, even where violence is concerned, Schumer and his Democratic colleagues are determined to provide those illegal aliens with U.S. citizenship!
The open-borders immigration anarchists refer to aliens who run our borders as being “undocumented immigrants.” In point of fact, aliens who evade the inspections process conducted at ports of enter the United States without inspection.
Such an entry is in violation of U.S. Code § 1325, a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
Some “journalists” have actually seized upon this linguistic sleight of tongue and have come to refer to illegal aliens as “immigrants who lack documents,” conjuring up the image of a student who went to the bathroom without taking the hall pass. The issue is not a lack of paperwork but legal authorization to enter the United States and remain here. Some of these aliens have no shortage of documents. In my 30-year career I encountered quite a few aliens who had been deported numerous times, some having been arrested and convicted of so many crimes during each of their illegal forays into the United States that their arrest record or “rap sheet” and their immigration files could have provided wallpaper to decorate a moderately-sized house, if you like hanging garbage on walls!
Aliens who seek to evade the inspections process do so because they know that they belong to one or more categories of aliens who are legally ineligible to enter the United States. Race, religion and/or ethnicity do not have any bearing whatsoever on the admissibility of aliens who seek to enter the United States.
In fact, 8 U.S. Code § 1182 enumerates the categories of aliens who are to be excluded from the United States. It is clear that the purpose for this section of law is protect national security, public safety and public health and protect the jobs and wages of American workers.
Among these classes of aliens who are to be prevented from entering the United States are aliens who had been previously deported from the United States, aliens who suffer from dangerous communicable diseases or extreme mental illness, are convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists and spies are to be excluded as well as aliens who would seek unlawful employment, thus displacing American workers or driving down the wages of American workers who are similarly employed and aliens who would likely become public charges, thereby burdening the economies of the towns and cities where they would live.
Pelosi claims that the wall would be “ineffective.” In fact, had a wall been erected the “Caravan of Migrants” (aspiring illegal aliens) would likely have been deterred from streaming to the U.S./Mexican border.
However, more must be done to address the immigration crisis than simply constructing a wall along the southern border. As I have frequently noted, a wall along the border is comparable to a wing on an airplane. Without a wing the airplane will not fly, but a wing by itself goes nowhere. A border wall must be erected and additional enhancements must also be made to the enforcement program of the Department of Homeland Security. Currently ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) has about 6,000 agents for the entire United States and they do not only enforce immigration laws but customs laws and other laws that have nothing to do with immigration. (The “C” in ICE is, after all, Customs.) ICE is more focused on those who produce counterfeit Gucci loafers than counterfeit passports. To put things in perspective, the NYPD has about 38,000 police officers, the Border Patrol has about 20,000 agents, and our armed forces have more than one million enlisted men and women.
Obviously many more ICE agents, immigration judges and support staff should be hired, not to deport all of the illegal aliens who are present in the United States (likely more than 30,000), but to imbue the immigration system with meaningful integrity and convince aspiring illegal aliens around the world that the United States takes its laws and its borders seriously.
Finally, as to the issue of the cost of constructing the wall, the wall would pay for itself just as the cost of insulating a house is payed back to the homeowner many times over through savings in the costs of heating and cooling the house. I drew upon that analogy in my article “America Needs A Border Wall Like Houses Need Insulation,” in which I noted that each year tens of billions of ill-gotten dollars flow out of the United States in the form of remittances and other means of moving the money out of the U.S. that is earned by illegal aliens and as the result of the drug trade. Finally securing that border would help to stanch the flow of money and save many, many lives as an added bonus.
Of course, as I have noted in my article “Sanctuary Country – Immigration failures by design,” the multiple failures of the immigration system are not the result of inability to enforce our laws but an abject lack of desire by political leaders of both parties to enforce the immigration laws.
To put it bluntly, while our borders and our immigration laws are America’s first and last lines of defense against transnational criminals and fugitives and international terrorists, to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a laundry list of other organizations and special interest groups including immigration lawyers, they are viewed as an impediment to their wealth.
While Nancy is a highly-visible proponent for open borders, there are precious few members of Congress in either party who actually disagree with her.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/pelosi-4-e1545000194490.jpg360640Michael Cutlerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMichael Cutler2018-12-16 17:46:072018-12-16 17:49:38Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House — The Sequel [Worse than the Original]
President Donald Trump sparred with House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, in an extraordinary Oval Office session before TV cameras.
Schumer and Pelosi visited The White House on Tuesday to negotiate with Trump over border wall funding in the next spending bill. The pair offered Trump approximately 1.3 billion dollars in funding for the wall, while the president demanded 5 billion dollars. The impasse could lead to a partial government shutdown.
Pelosi set the tone for the discussion at the beginning of her statement noting that any shutdown would be known as “The Trump Shutdown,” prompting the president to immediately interrupt her. The two continued to spar over whether Trump had the votes for proposed border wall funding in the House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate.
“If we thought we would get it passed in the Senate, Nancy, we would do it immediately,” Trump declared, adding, “It doesn’t matter, though, because you can’t get it passed in the Senate because we need ten Democrats’ vote.”
Pelosi then questioned why TV camera’s were present during budget negotiations prompting Trump to declare, “It’s called transparency, Nancy.”
Trump then turned the floor over to Schumer, who also castigated the president for declaring that he would rather shut the government down than accept the Democrats’ proposals. Trump angrily turned to Schumer and said, “you want to know something? Yes, if we don’t get what we want whether its through you, one way or the other, I will shut down the government.”
“I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck,” he continued. “People in this country don’t want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring into our country. I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I won’t blame you for it. The last time, you shut it down. It didn’t work.”
The pair of lawmakers said after the meeting that they had no intention of meeting Trump’s demands and told him they would only offer him the option of passing existing levels of funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Schumer and Pelosi both said Trump would be to blame for any potential government shutdown.
The deadline for spending occurs Dec. 21, with no current breakthroughs on negotiations.
As Republicans in the U.S. Congress are debating the pluses and minuses of their repeal and replacement legislation for Obamacare, the Democrats are accusing their colleagues of wanting “thousands of people to die.”
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
It was The Agenda Project Action Fund that in 2011 released the video of a “Republican” pushing an old woman in a wheel chair off of a cliff. The Agenda Project Action Fund in 2016 endorsed Senator Bernie Sanders for President of the United States. The “thousands of people to die” rhetoric has been repeated on major news channels most recently by Senator Sanders and other Democrats, such as Senator Elizabeth Warren and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.
The scheme is to paint Republicans as murderers. It’s the “big lie.”
Master propagandist of the Nazi regime and dictator of its cultural life for twelve years, Joseph Goebbels wrote,
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Watch the below video to understand how a variety of Democrats, and media pundits, are repeating the “big lie” that “thousands will die”:
TRUTH: It’s Democrats who have embraced the policy of death and thousands of people are dying.
Here are a few examples of policies and legislation supported by Democrats that are causing people to die:
A total of 111 people in California took their own lives using lethal prescriptions during the first six months of a law that allows terminally ill people to request life-ending drugs from their doctors, according to data released Tuesday.
A snapshot of the patients who took advantage of the law mirrors what’s been seen in Oregon, which was the first state to legalize the practice nearly two decades ago. Though California is far more diverse than Oregon, the majority of those who have died under aid-in-dying laws in both states were white, college-educated cancer patients older than 60.
The End of Life Option Act made California the fifth state in the nation to allow patients with less than six months to live to request end-of-life drugs from their doctors.
Illinois is in a fiscal meltdown, the state is bankrupt. In 2016 the Illinois Obamacare co-op became 16th to collapse. Americans for Tax Reform reported:
Sixteen Obamacare co-ops have now failed. Illinois announced that Land of Lincoln Health, a taxpayer funded Obamacare co-op, would close its doors, leaving 49,000 without insurance. The co-op now joins a list of 15 other Obamacare co-ops that have collapsed since Obamacare has been implemented. Failed co-ops have now cost taxpayers more than $1.7 billion in funds that may never be recovered.
Co-ops were hyped as not-for-profit alternatives to traditional insurance companies created under Obamacare. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) financed co-ops with startup and solvency loans, totaling more than $2.4 billion in taxpayer dollars. They have failed to become sustainable with many collapsing amid the failure of Obamacare exchanges.
Since September, 13 Obamacare co-ops have collapsed, with only seven of the original 23 co-ops remaining. Illinois’ Land of Lincoln co-op faced losses of $90 million last year and is suing the federal government for the deficit caused by Obamacare. Co-ops across the country have struggled to operate in Obamacare exchanges, losing millions despite receiving enormous government subsidies.
Tens of thousands of people in the Land of Lincoln are without healthcare. Illinois is ruled by Democrats.
St. Paul, MN, June 27, 2017 – Planned Parenthood abortionists in St. Paul, Minn. would “break the baby’s neck” if the child was born alive, according to a new video just released by Pro-Life Action Ministries. This would be a violation of both federal and Minnesota law.
Braun notes:
In the video, a former Planned Parenthood client says that when she went to Planned Parenthood earlier this year for a late-term abortion (at 22 weeks, 1 day), she asked the two abortionists, “If you guys were to take him out right now while he’s still, his heart rate is still, you know, going, what would you guys do?” According to the woman, one of the abortionists looked at the other one, then looked back at the client, “and she told me that we don’t tell women this, and a lot of women don’t even ask this question, but if we was to proceed with the abortion and the baby was to come out still alive and active, most likely we would break the baby’s neck.”
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/sanders-people-die.jpg360640Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)2017-06-28 06:56:332017-07-20 19:14:58It’s Democrats who have embraced the policy of death and thousands of people are dying!
