logo
Schumer on confronting antisemitism: ‘Best antidote is for people to know the truth'

Schumer on confronting antisemitism: ‘Best antidote is for people to know the truth'

CNN27-04-2025
CNN's Dana Bash talks with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer about his new book, 'Antisemitism in America: A Warning.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Summertime and the living is uneasy on Capitol Hill
Summertime and the living is uneasy on Capitol Hill

Fox News

time5 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Summertime and the living is uneasy on Capitol Hill

Senate Republicans faced a choice recently: Remain in session and confirm more of President Trump's nominees, or finally abandon Washington for the vaunted August recess. Senators hung around – a little while – knocking out some of the President's nominees for administration positions. But not all. That drew the ire of some conservatives, Trump loyalists and President Donald Trump himself. Trump seethed at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., for requiring the Senate to run lengthy parliamentary traps and incinerate valuable floor time to confirm even non-controversial nominees. The President finally unloaded on the New York Democrat in a digital coup de grace, telling him to "GO TO HELL!" It's notable that Trump has not yet met with Schumer or House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., during his second term. But then again, this is a two-way street. And Democrats remember multiple tumultuous meetings with Mr. Trump during the last time he was in office. It culminated in verbal grappling between the President and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, and ended with Democrats abandoning the meeting after only a few moments. So, it's far from certain any such meeting would yield anything remotely productive. But back to the "August recess." First, it's important to establish that members of the House and Senate are not on "summer vacation." Sure, there are always some breaks to visit with family and friends. Lawmakers are people, too. But truly, this is not a "break." Lawmakers are always "on." Not everything they do is centered around Washington. Any congressman or senator worth their salt will tell you that spending time back in their home states or districts is just as important – if not more so – than what goes down on Capitol Hill. Meeting with constituents. Visiting businesses. Conducting town hall meetings. Stopping by local coffee bars. Breaking bread at diners. Chatting up the local press corps. Members also use this longer respite for political travel and fact-finding missions overseas. These "CODELS" – short for "Congressional Delegation" – are a critical function for lawmakers to build bridges with foreign leaders and make their marks on how the U.S. approaches the rest of the globe. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., have recently led groups on trips to Israel. At least one other major trip is booked for later this month. So, the "August recess" is not inherently a "bad" thing. It's an essential part of the job and probably one of the biggest misnomers in American politics. Still, many Americans simply dismiss August as a "vacation" for House members and senators, and it is a challenging optic for Congress. Which brings us back to the tension between staying in session to get "something" done and returning home. It's clear the Senate could have stayed in session to plow through more of President Trump's nominees. Schumer and other Democrats simply weren't going to relent and allow Republicans to confirm a slate of nominees "en bloc." That's where the Senate greenlights a large slate of nominees all at once and approves them either by unanimous consent or via voice vote. The Senate confirms the nominees all at once. The House certainly could have stayed in session to hammer out a few spending bills ahead of the deadline to fund the government by October 1. But here's a stark reality – especially for the Senate: Lawmakers and staff desperately needed a break. Period. Full stop. Since May, the Senate in particular has conducted multiple overnight, round-the-clock and weekend sessions. Not just a few. The Senate voted deep into the night or overnight on the Big, Beautiful Bill. Then the Senate was back for late-night sessions confirming nominees. Yes. This is the people's business. But the floor staff and support teams were exhausted. Senate leaders were mindful of that. And that's to say nothing of the lawmakers themselves. It's anecdotal, but lawmakers probably needed a break from one another, too. That makes them happier – and probably more productive when they return to Washington. But this still doesn't solve the political dilemma facing Republican senators with a substantial core of their party demanding they remain moored in Washington to grind out nominees. And it may not satisfy President Trump, either. There's lots of Senate talk now about "changing the rules" to accelerate the confirmation of nominees. One thing is for sure: the Senate won't change the "rules" to expedite the confirmation process. The Senate boasts 44 standing rules. It takes 67 votes to break a filibuster on an actual rules change. But what Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., could do is back the Senate into a special parliamentary posture where he can initiate a new "precedent" to confirm different types of nominees. That's a maneuver that late Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., executed to confirm some of former President Obama's nominees. The same with former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to confirm Supreme Court nominees. "New precedents" in the Senate require some complicated parliamentary wrangling. But only a simple majority is necessary to make good on this gambit for nominees. So, it's easier and much more plausible than "changing the rules." To the lay person, a new "precedent" doesn't sound important. But there's a reason why the Senate only has 44 standing rules and a voluminous book of precedents. You can accomplish a lot in the Senate if you're able to concoct a new precedent. And note that it's not just Republicans who want to change the way the Senate does things for some lower-tier, non-controversial nominees. Some Senate Democrats have expressed interest in changes, too. There are only so many minutes and so many hours. Time is just as valuable to Democrats as it is to Republicans. Everyone on Capitol Hill knows that more long nights and overnight sessions await lawmakers in September and the fall as the Senate attempts to confirm additional nominees. That's to say nothing of avoiding a government shutdown in October. This is why Senate Republicans elected to stick around for a bit recently – and then call it a day. Or a month. After all, there is only so much time available in August.

NATO chief on whether Trump is at risk of rewarding Russia for invading Ukraine: ‘I don't think the risk is there'
NATO chief on whether Trump is at risk of rewarding Russia for invading Ukraine: ‘I don't think the risk is there'

The Hill

time34 minutes ago

  • The Hill

NATO chief on whether Trump is at risk of rewarding Russia for invading Ukraine: ‘I don't think the risk is there'

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said Sunday that he doesn't believe there is a risk that peace negotiations in Alaska with President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin will reward Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. ABC News's Jonathan Karl asked Rutte on 'This Week' if he believed, like former national security adviser John Bolton does, that negotiations are sliding in Russia's favor, which could potentially reward the country for its invasion. 'No, I don't think the risk is there,' Rutte replied. 'And all my respects for John, and please send him my best regards, but I would not agree on this point with him. We have seen President Trump putting incredible pressure on Russia.' 'So, this is all clear evidence that President Trump is absolutely adamant to bring this war to an end, but also to keep maximum pressure on Putin,' Rutte later added. Rutte said the Friday meeting between to two leaders was important because it 'is testing Putin, how serious he is in this whole process, which will then have to continue after Friday, with Ukraine involved, with others involved, to bring this war to an end.' Trump and Putin are set to meet in Alaska on Friday to discuss peace negotiations. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was not invited to the summit; however, the White House and the NATO Ambassador Matthew Whitaker said there is a possibility he will attend. Bolton, who was the national security advisor during Trump's first term, said Saturday on CNN's 'The Source' with host Kaitlan Collins, 'The only better place for Putin than Alaska would be if the summit were being held in Moscow.' 'So, the initial setup, I think, is a great victory for Putin,' he continued. On Aug. 6, Trump signed an executive order adding a 25 percent tariff on India's purchases of Russian oil, bringing the tariffs up to a total of 50 percent. The tariffs will be in effect 21 days after Trump signed the executive order. This was intended to let India negotiate with Russia; however, in the meantime, India's leader has reaffirmed its bipartisan relations with the Kremlin. 'We also reviewed the progress in our bilateral agenda, and reaffirmed our commitment to further deepen the India-Russia Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership. I look forward to hosting President Putin in India later this year,' Narendra Modi said. The NATO chief also mentioned Trump's actions within the international organization as proof that the president is dedicated to this peace deal. 'He was the one delivering the big success at the NATO summit, the 5 percent spending commitments in June, one of the biggest foreign policy successes of the U.S. in the last couple of years,' he said. Rutte also mentioned the deal struck in July between the Trump administration and NATO countries to send more weapons to Ukraine. The meeting in Alaska will discuss territorial claims. Last week, Putin shared a ceasefire agreement with the Trump administration, which asked for control of Eastern Ukraine. Zelensky adamantly opposed the deal by posting on X, 'Any decisions that are against us, any decisions that are without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace.' Rutte said the negotiations would include talks about territory as well as 'security guarantees' and 'the absolute need to acknowledge that Ukraine decides of its own future, that Ukraine has to be a sovereign nation, deciding on its own geopolitical future, of course, having no limitations to its own military troop levels, and for NATO to have no limitations on our presence on the Eastern flank in countries like Latvia, Estonia and Finland.' Whitaker reassured on Sunday that no matter what deal is struck between the parties, there will be verification that both countries are acting towards peace.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store