MSNBC Democrats mock Cory Booker's ‘political theater' stunt on the Senate floor
Booker accused his fellow Democratic senators on Tuesday of aligning themselves with Trump because they are in favor of passing new police legislation.
Advertisement
He claimed that without amendments, the legislation would allow the president to pick winners and losers in terms of who receives the benefits.
'That is complicity with an authoritarian leader who is trashing our country,' Booker said.
'It is time for Democrats to have a backbone. It's time for us to fight. It's time for us to draw a line, and when it comes to the safety of my state being denied these grants, that's why I'm standing here.'
Panelists of MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' were not impressed.
Advertisement
'Well, it's great theater that we just saw. Cory Booker, a good guy, standing up and yelling on the floor of the United States Senate,' MSNBC contributor Mike Barnicle said on Wednesday.
'What I don't understand is he's yelling at two other Democrats. The Democrats have enough problems in this country defining themselves to people, making sure people know they are alive, they are interested in your life, they are interested in you, solving problems.'
3 Sen. Cory Booker was mocked by several Democratic MSNBC panelists for his recent behavior on the Senate floor.
ZUMAPRESS.com
MSNBC analyst and former Democratic senator Claire McCaskill argued that Booker is simply playing to the desires of the Democratic Party's base.
Advertisement
'Here's what's going on. The Democratic base is starving for a fighter. They're starving for a fight,' she said.
'They want people to fight Donald Trump, because everyone is so frustrated and angry and depressed at everything he's doing and how he's doing it, and the cowardice of the Republicans across the aisle in the Senate who are knowingly doing terrible things and casting votes that I would never dreamt they would have cast, when I was serving with them in the Senate.'
3 Booker accused his fellow constituents for aligning themselves with President Trump as they want certain police legislation passed.
MSNBC
But there's another key aspect to this as well, she said, defending Democrats like Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., as people trying to do the best they can under the Trump administration.
Advertisement
'On the other side, you have Cory Booker unfairly criticizing two strong Democrats that are doing everything they can in their power to fight Donald Trump. And, you know, Amy's right. There's a way to change a bill. And then there's a way to get in the opening segment of 'Morning Joe' and on the front page of The New York Times. And Cory chose the latter, rather than the former,' she said.
'He knew if he did this, it would be a viral moment, and he would be associated with Democrats who are willing to fight.'
3 Ex-Sen. Claire McCaskill was among the multiple MSNBC analysts appearing on 'Morning Joe' who ridiculed Booker's recent behavior.
MSNBC
'Meanwhile, this bill didn't impact funding, and there probably was not the leverage to do what Cory would like to do, which is defy Donald Trump, because we don't have the votes in the Senate,' McCaskill said.
She later added, 'Cory knows we don't have the votes in the Senate to do what the base wants us to do. So the way he criticized his colleagues is really unusual, kind of unheard of, and frankly, to me, a little worrisome, with what we have in front of us and the fights we have to — the Democratic Party needs to wage next year in the midterms.'
Fox News' Alec Schemmel contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
3 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
What to know as Trump's immigration crackdown strips tuition breaks from thousands of students
The tuition breaks once enjoyed wide bipartisan support but have increasingly come under criticism from Republicans in recent years. Advertisement Here's what to know about the tuition breaks: Texas' program was blocked first Texas' tuition policy was initially passed with sweeping bipartisan majorities in the Legislature and signed into law by then-Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, as a way to open access to higher education for students without legal residency already living in the state. Supporters then and now say it boosted the state's economy by creating a better-educated and better-prepared workforce. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The law allowed students without legal resident status to qualify for in-state tuition if they had lived in Texas for three years before graduating from high school and for a year before enrolling in college. They also had to sign an affidavit promising to apply for legal resident status as soon as possible. Texas now has about 73,000 qualifying students enrolled in its public universities and colleges, according to the most recent estimate from the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a nonpartisan nonprofit group of university leaders focused on immigration policy. The latest estimate is an increase over earlier projections because of a change in its methodology for identifying qualifying students. Advertisement Texas has about 690,000 students overall at its public universities. The difference in tuition rates is substantial. For example, at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, a 34,000-student campus along the border with Mexico, a state resident will pay about $10,000 in basic tuition for a minimum full-time class schedule in the upcoming school year. A nonresident student will pay $19,000. Political pushback and a swift end Texas' law stood mostly unchallenged for years, but it came under fire as debates over illegal immigration intensified. In the 2012 Republican presidential primary, Perry apologized after saying critics of the law 'did not have a heart.' The law withstood several repeal efforts in the Republican-dominated Legislature. During the legislative session that ended June 2, a repeal bill did not even get a vote. But the ax fell quickly. After the Trump administration filed a lawsuit calling the law unconstitutional, state Attorney General Ken Paxton, a key Trump ally, chose not to defend the law in court and instead filed a motion agreeing that it should not be enforced. In Oklahoma, which the Presidents' Alliance estimates will have about 2,700 students affected, Attorney General Gentner Drummond, also a Republican, filed a similar motion. 'Rewarding foreign nationals who are in our country illegally with lower tuition costs that are not made available to out-of-state American citizens is not only wrong — it is discriminatory and unlawful," Drummond said in a statement. Advertisement Campuses nationwide feel the impact At least 21 states and the University of Michigan system have laws or policies allowing tuition breaks for the immigrant students, according to the National Immigration Law Center, which favors them. Those states include Democratic-leaning ones such as California and New York, but also GOP-leaning ones such as Kansas and Nebraska. According to the center, at least 16 states allow the immigrant students to receive scholarships or other aid to go to college. Nationwide, the Presidents' Alliance estimates more than 510,000 students without legal resident status are enrolled in colleges and universities, about 85 percent of them in undergraduate programs. Immigration lawyers and education advocates said they are assessing whether there are legal avenues to challenge the rulings.
USA Today
3 minutes ago
- USA Today
GOP senator says FBI will help track down Texas Democrats who fled state
Sen. John Cornyn said FBI Director Kash Patel will have federal officers work with Texas state law enforcement to locate Democrats who fled the state. WASHINGTON - Sen. John Cornyn said FBI Director Kash Patel accepted his request for federal officers to work with Texas state law enforcement in tracking down the Democratic lawmakers who fled the Lone Star State to try to block Republicans' redistricting efforts. Cornyn, a Texas Republican, had sent a letter to Patel on Aug. 5 with his request, noting that "in a representative democracy, we resolve our differences by debating and voting, not by running away." More than 50 Texas Democrats left their state on Aug. 3 in order to deny Republicans the quorum they need to move ahead with their plan to carry out an unusual mid-decade redistricting. The effort could give Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives up to five more seats in the 2026 midterms. The legislators fled to blue states, including Illinois, Massachusetts and New York. Cornyn had noted in his letter there are only about two weeks left in Texas legislature's special session, called by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. "I am proud to announce that Director Kash Patel has approved my request for the FBI to assist state and local law enforcement in locating runaway Texas House Democrats," Cornyn said in a statement on Aug. 7. "I thank President Trump and Director Patel for supporting and swiftly acting on my call for the federal government to hold these supposed lawmakers accountable for fleeing Texas. We cannot allow these rogue legislators to avoid their constitutional responsibilities." House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, fired back on X. "Shouldn't the FBI be tracking down terrorists, drug traffickers and child predators? The Trump administration continues to weaponize law enforcement to target political adversaries. These extremists don't give a damn about public safety. We will not be intimidated," he wrote. Cornyn, who has served in the Senate since 2002, is heading toward a tough 2026 Republican primary against the state's attorney general, Ken Paxton. Early polls show Cornyn trailing Paxton by double digits. Contributing: Savannah Kuchar
Atlantic
3 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Trump Just Did What Not Even Nixon Dared
'Is it Goldstein again?' Richard Nixon demanded. In July of 1971, the president was infuriated that an unnamed official at the Bureau of Labor Statistics had seemed to downplay the administration's progress on reducing unemployment while briefing reporters. His suspicions fell on Harold Goldstein, the longtime civil servant and BLS official in charge of the jobs numbers, who had attracted his ire for other comments earlier in the year. Nixon ordered his political counselor, Charles Colson, to investigate. If it had been Goldstein, he said, 'he's got to be fired.' When three hours elapsed without Colson reporting back, the president called Colson twice within the span of two minutes, insisting that Goldstein had to be guilty. 'Give Goldstein, the goddamn kike, a polygraph!' he yelled into the phone. By the next morning, Nixon's animus toward Goldstein had hardened into the conviction that the inconvenient numbers from the BLS reflected a problem much larger than one civil servant. He asked his chief of staff, Bob Haldeman, to conduct a review. 'I want a look at any sensitive areas around where Jews are involved, Bob,' he said. 'See, the Jews are all through the government, and we have got to get in those areas. We've got to get a man in charge who is not Jewish to control the Jewish. Do you understand?' Haldeman affirmed that he did. 'The government is full of Jews,' Nixon continued. 'Second, most Jews are disloyal.' What had started as a fit of pique over jobs numbers was swiftly metastasizing into an extraordinary abuse of presidential power. Students and survivors of the Nixon era can be excused for feeling a little déjà vu when they heard the news at the end of last week that President Donald Trump had fired Erika McEntarfer, the BLS commissioner. Trump claimed that the bureau's latest jobs report was 'a scam' that was 'RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad.' As the first federal director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, I quickly thought of the summer of 1971. James Surowiecki: What's holding Trump back from firing Powell For most of its history, the BLS has been as professionally obscure as it has been essential. The bureau's economists produce the respected and strictly nonpartisan numbers that the White House, Congress, investors, and American workers rely on to know how the enormous and complex U.S. economy is doing—and how likely their next wage increase, job opportunity, or pink slip might be. For presidents to be unhappy with the numbers they get from the BLS is commonplace. But it's not normal for them to take their disappointment or rage out on the economists who compile them. In the summer of 1971, Nixon was in the grip of dark conspiratorial thinking. He had been looking forward to positive press from his daughter Tricia's June White House wedding. Instead, The New York Times published the Pentagon Papers—a classified multivolume compendium of national-security materials pulled together for Lyndon B. Johnson's secretary of defense Robert McNamara to explain why the United States had gotten into the quagmire of Vietnam. When the former Johnson-era national-security analyst Daniel Ellsberg announced that he was the papers' leaker, Nixon became convinced that his administration was under assault from smart, well-connected enemies of his Vietnam strategy. So when the BLS official told reporters that a drop in the unemployment rate from 6.2 to 5.6 percent was 'a statistical fluke,' Nixon became convinced that Jews within the government were out to sabotage his administration. Haldeman, although himself an anti-Semite, worried that Nixon's rage could cause chaos across the government. He decided to try to satisfy the president by focusing only on the BLS. He asked a White House staffer named Frederic Malek to determine how many Jews were in the BLS, and to recommend what to do with them. Knowing that White House documents should not reflect what this investigation was really about, Malek and his assistant used the code word ethnics in their memos as they counted Jews. In February, during Nixon's earlier bout of rage, Malek had determined that Goldstein had not acted in a partisan manner. But now, instead of questioning his partisan loyalties, Nixon fixated instead on his faith. The president didn't get all that he wanted. Although Labor Secretary James Hodgson refused to subject Goldstein to a polygraph test, Nixon didn't fire Hodgson for his defiance. He also didn't immediately force out the head of the BLS, Geoffrey Moore, who worked for Hodgson. When Malek found that there were 19 'ethnics' among the 52 top officials working at the BLS, Nixon respected the civil-service protections that shielded most of them, including Goldstein, from dismissal. Instead, he had a supervisor placed above Goldstein and removed some of his responsibilities. Peter Henle, another Jewish economist in the bureau, was transferred out. After winning reelection in 1972, Nixon required resignations from all of his political appointees. Nixon ignored most of them, but he accepted Moore's, and the BLS commissioner left a few months shy of the end of his four-year term in 1973. Moore—who wasn't even Jewish—was the only person to lose his job because of Nixon's anti-Semitic paranoia. Nixon's motives were worse than Trump's. But in most other respects, the events of the past week provide a vivid illustration of how much more dangerous attempts to abuse presidential authority have become. Unlike Trump, who lashed out publicly against McEntarfer, Nixon was afraid to own his bad behavior. He did not force out his BLS commissioner in 1971, instead waiting for the chance to accept his resignation two years later. Not wanting his hands to be dirty—as defined by the presidential norms of his era—Nixon constrained himself to abuse power only indirectly. He had no desire to risk public disapproval by firing bureaucrats for specious and explosive reasons. David Frum: Sorry, Richard Nixon Moreover, the Haldeman system for running the White House that Nixon first authorized and then tolerated sought to control an impulsive president, not fully empower him. Nixon lacked perfect instruments to carry out his desires; his environment wasn't greased for enabling. Although he was clear that he wanted to fire a large number of government workers because of their religious background, he proved unwilling or unable to follow through. Trump exhibits no such constraints. The loyal voters who give him his grip on Congress don't seem to care what norms he violates. Neither Trump's Cabinet members nor his White House staff are willing to serve as a check on presidential bad behavior. And so last week, Trump did what not even Nixon had dared, becoming the first president ever to fire his BLS commissioner.
