Donald Trump Shouldn’t Trust Anything Chuck Schumer Says on Supreme Court Nominees

When it comes to loathsome political figures, there isn’t a person serving at any level of government than Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. (F, 2%). He’s just awful, and the Senate will be a better place now that he is leaving. That said, one of those most conniving, back-stabbing Senators will be taking his place.

New York Senator Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. (F, 2%) is a career politician through and through. Schumer was elected to office in 1974, soon after graduating from Harvard Law School. Schumer passed the New York State Bar Exam but never practiced. He’s never worked a single day in the private sector. He is also fond of using the word “bipartisan” when he engages in some of the most partisan nonsense of anybody in the entire Congress.

Schumer was on Fox News Sunday this week. When asked by Chris Wallace about the Supreme Court and Donald Trump, Schumer said the following:

WALLACE: Let’s talk about an issue where you won’t agree and that is that Donald Trump intends to name a conservative, a real conservative, to the Supreme Court.


WALLACE: If you think that it’s the wrong person, are you prepared — and will Democrats be prepared to filibuster that nomination, which has only happened once in the history of the Senate.

SCHUMER: I would hope first and foremost that President Trump nominates a mainstream nominee capable of getting bipartisan support.

If he does, then we’ll give it just a very, very thorough vetting, but we won’t ipso facto say no.

If it’s out of the mainstream, yes, we’re going to fight that nominee tooth and nail. And let’s remember two things. Let’s —

WALLACE: But wait. Fight — does that mean filibuster?

SCHUMER: Let me say two things.

First, we — when we had power, we changed the rules, but I argued with Harry Reid not to change it for Supreme Court, because it should get that bipartisan support.

So, it’s still 60 votes. We didn’t change the rules. If they, you know, I hope our Republicans won’t.

And second, when our Republican colleagues say, “Let’s do this quickly, without filibuster,” they don’t come here with clear, clean hands. After what they did to Merrick Garland and held him up for a whole year, a bipartisan nominee who Senator Hatch, conservative Republican, Utah, former head of Judiciary, said would be a very good nominee.

So, let’s — let’s try to get a mainstream nominee, but let’s not jump to conclusions, because what the Republicans did, past is sometimes prologue.

To get straight to the point: A “mainstream” nominee is one Schumer supports. In 2010, Schumer had the audacity to say about Sonia Sotomayor, “…no one questioned that she was out of the mainstream.” Not even Politifact bought this and rated the claim “false” showing some Republicans said she was out of the mainstream.

Schumer’s blather about bipartisanship and the treatment of Merrick Garland is ridiculous considering he gave a speech in 2007 imploring Democrats to reject any Supreme Court nominee by President George W. Bush in the wake of the confirmations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Schumer said:

We should reverse the presumption of confirmation. The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts; or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.

Given the track record of this President and the experience of obfuscation at the hearings, with respect to the Supreme Court, at least: I will recommend to my colleagues that we should not confirm a Supreme Court nominee except in extraordinary circumstances.

There are a few things to consider. First, the Republicans did not engage in any poor treatment of Garland. When Justice Scalia died, the GOP immediately informed President Obama they would not consider a Supreme Court nominee during an election year. Obama went ahead and nominated Garland anyway, arguing the Senate had some constitutional obligation to consider him, even though no such legal edict exists.

Secondly, Schumer’s complaints about a one year wait for Garland are hypocritical given there were 543 days left in Bush’s administration when he gave this speech. Schumer was perfectly fine with filibustering a nominee for nearly 18 months.

Finally, exactly what obfuscation is Schumer talking about? He not only voted against Roberts and Alito, but he also worked with then-Senator Obama to filibuster Alito’s nomination. Is Senator Schumer arguing his Democratic colleagues are not smart enough to see they were being hoodwinked? Also, if he’s so concerned about obfuscation, where was his denouncement of Elana Kagan who ruled to affirm same-sex marriage is a constitutionally protected right when she testified to the exact opposite during her confirmation hearings?

Donald Trump submitted a list of very well qualified people to nominate to the Supreme Court. Charles Schumer will no doubt argue all of them are out of the “mainstream.” It’s going to be up to President Trump to tell Schumer he doesn’t get to make a choice. His role is to take part in the hearings and then put it to an up or down vote. (For more from the author of “Donald Trump Shouldn’t Trust Anything Chuck Schumer Says on Supreme Court Nominees” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.