logo
Sen. Cory Booker in angry outburst says ‘complicit' Democrats need a ‘wake-up call'

Sen. Cory Booker in angry outburst says ‘complicit' Democrats need a ‘wake-up call'

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a rare public outburst on the Senate floor Tuesday, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker took his Democratic colleagues to task, declaring his party 'needs a wake-up call!'
Angrily screaming at two of his shocked Democratic colleagues, his words all but reverberating off the chamber walls, Booker blocked the passage of several bipartisan bills that would fund police programs, arguing that President Donald Trump's administration has been withholding law enforcement money from Democratic-leaning states.
'This is the problem with Democrats in America right now,' Booker bellowed. 'Is we're willing to be complicit with Donald Trump!'
The surprise Senate spat over bills that have broad bipartisan support — mental health resources and other help for police officers — strikes at the heart of the beleaguered Democratic party's dilemma in the second Trump era as they try to find a way back to power, and also their frustration as Republicans have pushed through legislation and nominations that they vehemently disagree with. Do they cooperate where they can, or do they fight everything, and shut down governance in the process?
'A lot of us in this caucus want to f—— fight,' Booker said with an expletive as he left the Senate floor after the exchange.
Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, one of the two Democrats on the floor who tried to pass the law enforcement bills that raised Booker's ire, said she had a different view.
'We can do both,' she said afterward. 'Support our communities, keep them safe, and take on Donald Trump and his bad policies.'
Booker's tirade began Tuesday afternoon when Cortez Masto tried to pass seven bipartisan bills by unanimous consent. But Booker objected to five of the seven bills, which would have directed resources to law enforcement agencies, arguing that the Trump administration is 'weaponizing' public safety grants by canceling them in many Democratic-leaning states like New Jersey.
'Why would we do something today that's playing into the president's politics and is going to hurt the officers in states like mine?' Booker asked.
Things escalated from there, with Cortez Masto and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., saying that Booker should have objected when the bill was passed unanimously out of committee. 'This is not the way to go about it,' Cortez Masto said.
Klobuchar said to Booker: 'You can't just do one thing on Police Week and not show up and not object and let these bills go through and then say another a few weeks later on the floor.'
'I like to show up at the markups and I like to make my case,' Klobuchar said.
Booker responded with a booming tirade. 'The Democratic party needs a wake up call!' he yelled, walking away from his desk and out into the aisle. 'I see law firms bending the knee to this president, not caring about the larger principles,' he said, along with 'universities that should be bastions of free speech.'
He added: 'You want to come at me that way, you will have to take it on with me because there's too much on the line.'
The arguments points to the tensions below the surface of the Democratic caucus as they head into important moments — both this week, as Republicans push to quickly confirm dozens of Trump administration nominees before the August recess, and this fall when Congress will have to pass bipartisan spending bills to avoid a government shutdown.
Democrats suffered a swift backlash from their base in the spring when Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., helped advance a Republican spending bill that kept the government open instead of forcing a shutdown. Schumer argued that shutting the government down would have been worse, and that they were both 'terrible' options. It is unclear whether Schumer and Democrats will want to force a shutdown in the fall if Republicans don't include some of their priorities in spending legislation.
Booker did not have specific advice for his colleagues beyond the need to fight harder. But other senators say they will have to find a balance.
Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut says he hears both things at home — 'why can't you all get along' and 'thank you for fighting.'
'Both are absolutely necessary at this moment in history,' Blumenthal said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Dozens of countries with no deals face higher tariffs as trade deadline nears
Dozens of countries with no deals face higher tariffs as trade deadline nears

Winnipeg Free Press

time23 minutes ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

Dozens of countries with no deals face higher tariffs as trade deadline nears

WASHINGTON (AP) — Numerous countries around the world are facing the prospect of much higher duties on their exports to the United States on Friday, a potential blow to the global economy, because they haven't yet reached a trade deal with the Trump administration. Some of the United States' biggest trading partners have reached agreements, or at least the outlines of one, including the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Japan. Even so, those countries face much higher tariffs than were in effect before Trump took office. And other large trading partners — most notably China and Mexico — received an extension to keep negotiating and won't be hit with new duties Friday, but they will likely end up paying more. President Donald Trump intends the duties to bring back manufacturing to the United States, while also forcing other countries to reduce their trade barriers to U.S. exports. Trump argues that foreign exporters will pay the cost of the tariffs, but so far economists have found that most are being paid by U.S. companies. And measures of U.S. inflation have started to tick higher as prices of imported goods, such as furniture, appliances, and toys rise. For those countries without an agreement, they could face duties of as much as 50%, including on large economies such as Brazil, Canada, Taiwan, and India. Many smaller countries are also on track to pay more, including South Africa, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and even tiny Lesotho. The duties originated from Trump's April 2 'Liberation Day' announcement that the United States would impose import taxes of up to 50% on nearly 60 countries and economies, including the 27-nation European Union. Those duties, originally scheduled for April 9, were then postponed twice, first to July 9 and then Aug. 1. Will the deadline hold this time? As of Thursday afternoon, White House representatives — and Trump himself — insisted that no more delays were possible. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday that Trump 'at some point this afternoon or later this evening' will sign an order to impose new tariff rates starting midnight on Friday. Countries that have not received a prior letter on tariffs from Trump or negotiated a trade framework will be notified of their likely tariff rates, Leavitt said, either in the form of a letter or Trump's executive order. At least two dozen countries were sent letters setting out their tariff rates. On Wednesday, Trump said on his social media platform Truth Social, 'THE AUGUST FIRST DEADLINE IS THE AUGUST FIRST DEADLINE — IT STANDS STRONG, AND WILL NOT BE EXTENDED.' Which countries have a trade agreement? In a flurry of last minute deal-making, the Trump has been announcing agreements as late as Thursday, but they are largely short on details. On Thursday, the U.S. and Pakistan reached a trade agreement expected to allow Washington to help develop Pakistan's largely untapped oil reserves and lower tariffs for the South Asian country. And on Wednesday, Trump announced a deal with South Korea that would impose 15% tariffs on goods from that country. That is below the 25% duties that Trump threatened in April. Agreements have also been reached with the European Union, Pakistan, Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, and the United Kingdom. The agreement with the Philippines barely reduced the tariff it will pay, from 20% to 19%. And which countries don't? The exact number of countries facing higher duties isn't clear, but the majority of the 200 have not made a deal. Trump has already slapped large duties on Brazil and India even before the deadline was reached. In the case of Brazil, Trump signed an executive order late Wednesday imposing a 50% duty on imports, though he exempted several large categories, including aircraft, aluminum, and energy products. Trump is angry at Brazil's government because it is prosecuting its former president, Jair Bolsonaro, for attempting to overturn his election loss in 2022. Trump was indicted on a similar charge in 2023. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. While Trump has sought to justify the widespread tariffs as an effort to combat the United States' chronic trade deficits, the U.S. actually has a trade surplus with Brazil — meaning it sells more goods and services to Brazil than it buys from that country. Late Wednesday, Trump said that India would pay a 25% duty on all its exports, in part because it has continued to purchase oil from Russia. On Thursday, the White House said it had extended the deadline to reach a deal with Mexico for another 90 days, citing the complexity of the trade relationship, which is governed by the trade agreement Trump reached when he updated NAFTA in his first term. ___ AP Writers Josh Boak and Wyatte Grantham-Philipps contributed to this report.

35% tariff on Canada still in the cards, Lutnick says
35% tariff on Canada still in the cards, Lutnick says

CTV News

time23 minutes ago

  • CTV News

35% tariff on Canada still in the cards, Lutnick says

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick testifies before House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee budget hearing on the Fiscal Year 2026 request for the Department of Commerce on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, June 5, 2025. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana) WASHINGTON, July 31 - U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Thursday that a 35 per cent tariff on all Canadian goods not covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement is still 'surely in the cards,' ahead of an Aug. 1 deadline imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump. He made the comments during an interview with Fox Business' Kudlow. (Reporting by Jasper Ward, Editing by Ryan Patrick Jones in Toronto)

Should Canada have warned the U.S. about recognizing Palestinian statehood?
Should Canada have warned the U.S. about recognizing Palestinian statehood?

National Post

time23 minutes ago

  • National Post

Should Canada have warned the U.S. about recognizing Palestinian statehood?

OTTAWA — When Prime Minister Mark Carney was asked if he consulted with the United States prior to announcing Canada's intention of recognizing a State of Palestine, he did not offer a clear 'no' but his response pointed in that direction. Article content Carney clearly mentioned speaking this week with France President Emmanuel Macron and U.K. Prime Minister Kier Starmer — both of which have announced their intention to recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly in September. Article content Article content Carney said he also had conversations with the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and Canada's Ambassador to the UN, Bob Rae. Article content Article content U.S. President Donald Trump was apparently not given the same heads up, and he promptly expressed his displeasure on his social media platform hours later. Article content 'Wow! Canada has just announced that it is backing statehood for Palestine,' he wrote on Truth Social. 'That will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them. Oh' Canada!!!' Article content After meeting with his cabinet Wednesday, Carney told reporters that the recognition was conditional on the Palestinian Authority, which governs the West Bank, going forward with significant reforms which include demilitarization and holding a general election in 2026. Article content He added Canada's longstanding hope for a two-state solution negotiated between the Palestinian Authority and Israel was 'no longer tenable' because of the war in Gaza. Article content Carney called the U.S. an 'essential partner' for peace in the Middle East, among many areas of the world, but made it clear Canada would be moving without its neighbour. Article content Article content 'We make our own independent foreign policy positions,' he said, later clarifying 'independent of the United States.' Article content Article content Louise Blais, who was Canada's Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York from 2017-2021, said this announcement marks a significant change of position for Canada, which has been more or less aligned with the U.S. on Israel for years. Article content 'At minimum, I think it would have been prudent … to have had a conversation. It's possible it took place. But it certainly doesn't seem that way,' said Blais in an interview. Article content A source close to Carney's thinking, speaking on a not-for-attribution basis to speak more freely, said there has been a sharing of views between Canada, France and the U.K., but their subsequent announcements on Palestinian statehood were not a co-ordinated effort.

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