Thune warns Schumer may let govt shut down as ‘struggling' Dems scramble to appease far-left
Thune (R-SD) observed that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has faced intense pressure from his base and mused that a few upcoming votes will provide more clarity about the risks of a partial shutdown.
'I think he [Schumer] probably thinks that it's beneficial to their political base, the far left of the Democrat Party, and you can kind of see what's happening up there in New York politics,' Thune told Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures.'
In March, Schumer faced fierce progressive backlash after he declined to block a GOP-backed spending patch to avert a partial government shutdown.
The blowback was so pronounced that Schumer was forced to reschedule parts of his book tour as progressives demanded Democrats in Congress put up more of a fight against President Trump.
3 Senate Majority Leader John Thune indicated that a few upcoming votes on appropriations bills will help determine the likelihood of a government shutdown.
Getty Images
3 Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer faced progressive backlash when he moved to avert a partial government shutdown in March.
AP
Government shutdown showdowns are one of the few instances in which Democrats have leverage with the Trump administration, given that they are the minority party in both the House and the Senate.
Every new fiscal year, which starts on Oct. 1, Congress is required to fund the government via 12 appropriations bills or through a continuing resolution in order to avoid a shutdown.
Both avenues are subject to the Senate fillibuster, which requires 60 votes to overcome. Republicans only have 53, which means they need cooperation from Democrats.
At the moment, Congress has funded the government via a continuing resolution, which essentially means that it is running on autopilot until the fall.
'This is a party struggling for an identity. This is a party that's completely out of step with the mainstream of this country,' Thune added.
'We're going to be waiting to see anxiously what Chuck Schumer and other leaders on the Democrat side decide to do.'
Earlier this month, Schumer railed against Republicans for advancing a rescissions package, which allows them to cancel previously approved spending without support from Democrats.
Schumer argued that such a move jeopardizes negotiations over the government shutdown showdown.
'We are doing everything we can to keep the bipartisan appropriations process going,' Schumer told reporters earlier this month. 'And they're undermining it with rescissions, with pocket rescissions, with impoundment and every other way.'
The implication from Schumer is that Democrats can't trust Republicans to stick to the terms of a bipartisan appropriations deal because they've shown a willingness to bypass them via rescissions and presidential impoundment, when Trump decides not to spend certain authorized funds.
On the Republican side, GOP leaders, particularly in the House, have long struggled to get fiscal hawks on board with either a continuing resolution or the 12 appropriations bills. There's been a strong push from the right flank for deeper cuts to spending, something that is a dealbreaker for Democrats.
3 Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hasn't said what her 2028 intentions are yet.
LP Media
Schumer also has to navigate dicey progressive politics. The Democratic establishment was upended last month when Zohran Mamdani bested former Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary.
The top Senate Democrat is up for reelection in 2028 and hasn't said whether or not he will run amid the threat of a challenge from 'Squad' Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
'Ultimately, keeping the government funded is good for the country, and hopefully we will have bipartisan cooperation to do that,' Thune added.
'If their recent track record is any indication, they're under a tremendous amount of pressure from that far left wing of the Democrat Party to shut the government down.'
The last partial government shutdown, which lasted 35 days, took place between late 2018 and early 2019 due to a feud between Trump and Democrats over border wall funding.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
27 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
At least 34 killed in attack on Congo church by Islamic State-backed rebels, official says
GOMA, Congo — The death toll from an attack on a Catholic church in eastern Congo by Islamic State-backed rebels has risen to 34, according to a civil society leader. 'The bodies of the victims are still at the scene of the tragedy, and volunteers are preparing how to bury them in a mass grave that we are preparing in a compound of the Catholic church,' Dieudonne Duranthabo, a civil society coordinator in Komanda, in the Ituri province, told the Associated Press. At least five other people were killed in an earlier attack on the nearby village of Machongani, where a search is ongoing. 'They took several people into the bush; we do not know their destination or their number,' Lossa Dhekana, a civil society leader in Ituri, told the AP. Both attacks are believed to have been carried out by members of the Islamic State-allied Allied Democratic Force, or ADF, armed with guns and machetes. The military has confirmed at least 10 fatalities, while local media reports put the total death toll at more than 40. Duranthabo said attackers stormed the church in Komanda town around 1 a.m. Several houses and shops were also burned. Lt. Jules Ngongo, a Congolese army spokesperson in Ituri province, confirmed 10 killed in the church attack. Video from the scene shared online appeared to show burning structures and bodies on the floor of the church. Those who were able to identify some of the victims wailed while others stood in shock. A United Nations-backed radio station said 43 people were killed, citing security sources. It said the attackers came from a stronghold around 7 miles from the center of Komanda and fled before security forces could arrive. Duranthabo condemned the attack 'in a town where all the security officials are present.' He added: 'We demand military intervention as soon as possible, since we are told the enemy is still near our town.' Eastern Congo has suffered deadly attacks in recent years by armed groups, including the ADF and Rwanda-backed rebels. The ADF, which has ties to the Islamic State, operates in the borderland between Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and often targets civilians. The group killed dozens of people in Ituri this month in what a U.N. spokesperson described as a bloodbath. The ADF was formed by disparate small groups in Uganda in the late 1990s amid reported discontent with President Yoweri Museveni. In 2002, following military assaults by Ugandan forces, the group moved its activities to neighboring Congo and has since been responsible for the killings of thousands of civilians. In 2019, it pledged allegiance to Islamic State. The Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo, known as FARDC, which has long struggled against the rebel group, has been facing attacks since the renewed hostilities with the Rwanda-backed M23 rebels. Kabumba and Adetayo write for the Associated Press and reported from Goma and Lagos, Nigeria, respectively. AP writer Saleh Mwanamilongo contributed to this report.
New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
How the Hunter Biden cover-up continues to this day
In the same week that Hunter Biden burst back onto the public stage to play the victim and lash out at Democrats, we also heard from his one time protector turned reluctant nemesis, Special Counsel David Weiss, with similarly self serving and disingenuous testimony to Congress. Weiss, the former US Attorney in the Bidens' home state of Delaware who presided over the troubled five year investigation into the former First Son, told the House Judiciary Committee that there just wasn't enough evidence to justify charging Hunter under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). His investigators 'couldn't put together a sufficient case,' he said in June testimony released last week. Advertisement That's pretty rich, considering that those very IRS investigators complained bitterly about the obstruction and slow walking they faced on Weiss' watch every time they pursued an investigative trail that led to Joe Biden and the lucrative foreign lobbying Hunter did in his father's name. That's why IRS Supervisory Special Agent Gary Shapley and Special Agent Joseph Ziegler blew up their successful careers and became whistleblowers. Hunter's business model during his father's vice presidency and beyond revolved around foreign lobbying — including for the corrupt Ukrainian energy company Burisma that was paying him a million dollars a year, Chinese government-linked firms BHR and CEFC, and an oligarch client in Romania. Advertisement In fact, the very first email this newspaper published from Hunter's infamous laptop was from a Burisma executive, thanking him for arranging a meeting with his father the previous night. It wasn't just any old meeting, either. Hunter had invited VP Biden to a private dinner at Georgetown restaurant Cafe Milano in April 2015 to meet his partners from Ukraine, Russia and Kazakhstan, as his former 'best friend in business' Devon Archer told Congress. In their upcoming tell-all book, 'The Whistleblowers v the Big Guy,' Shapley and Ziegler point out that, along with that Burisma bombshell, emails and communications they recovered from the laptop showed that Hunter's relationship with DC lobbying shop Blue Star Strategies was tied to his position on the Burisma board and that the firm had been hired 'to influence U.S. government officials on Burisma's behalf.' Advertisement 'These connections raised red flags about potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act FARA and any comprehensive warrant would naturally include references to individuals who may have been involved, even tangentially.' And so, when their team drafted a search warrant related to potential FARA violation, Weiss' top U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf ordered them to remove all references to 'Political Figure 1,' the DOJ pseudonym for Joe Biden. 'Please focus on FARA evidence only. There should be nothing about Political Figure 1 in here,' Wolf wrote in an August 2020 email, according to their whistleblower testimony to Congress. Advertisement Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! Whenever their investigations might lead to Joe Biden they found subpoenas were denied, interviews were canceled or not allowed, and Hunter's lawyers were tipped off before search warrants could be executed. Prosecutors cited bad 'optics' or questioned whether the 'juice was worth the squeeze' For instance, Shapley testified that Wolf refused to approve a search warrant for a guest house Hunter had been staying in on Joe's palatial Delaware estate as part of FARA-related evidence collection. When they discovered incriminating WhatsApp messages Hunter wrote to a business partner at Chinese energy company CEFC on July 30, 2017, citing his father, the investigators were blocked from using phone location data to confirm that Joe really was in the room. 'I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled,' Hunter wrote, demanding $10 million. 'I am very concerned that the Chairman has either changed his mind and broken our deal without telling me or that he is unaware of the promises and assurances that have been made have not been kept.' Advertisement Hunter also threatened that his father would retaliate if the Chinese did not do as he commanded: 'I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction.' Here was Hunter explicitly claiming his father was involved in his business negotiations. Apart from the fact that Joe claimed that he knew nothing about his son's overseas business dealings, Shapley and Ziegler decided there were serious tax implications to the conversation, but they were blocked from pursuing them. They weren't even allowed to find out if Hunter had sent the message from Joe's house. 'The message was clear,' Shapley and Ziegler write in 'The Whistleblowers v. the Big Guy.' 'Although we were investigating Joe Biden's son — who, it seemed, had often involved his father in his shady overseas business dealings — none of our materials were supposed to mention Joe Biden. Advertisement 'Even when we needed material that might be in one of Joe Biden's homes or storage units, we couldn't mention him. The document might leak to the press, and that would make the Biden campaign look bad. 'And in the summer of 2020, there was nothing that the leadership of the FBI wanted less than to make Joe Biden look bad. Doing so might help elect Donald Trump for a second time.' How different was the way the FBI handled Donald Trump compared to Joe Biden. Whether it was the fake Steele Dossier the FBI treated as if it were legitimate evidence, or the raid on Mar a Lago, there was no concern about the 'optics' of investigating a sitting president or presidential candidate when it was Trump. Advertisement As for FARA, the once little-used law against lobbying the US on behalf of foreign interests has been selectively used to target Trump allies and Democrat enemies. For example, Paul Manafort, former chairman of Trump's 2016 campaign, was charged with FARA. So, too, was Gal Luft, the original Hunter Biden whistleblower, who told FBI and DOJ officials in a March 2019 secret meeting in Brussels that Hunter and his uncle Jim Biden were on the payroll of the Chinese. His accurate information was buried and then, one week before Republicans took back the House in 2022, Luft was charged with FARA and other violations. He is currently languishing in jail in Cyprus while Hunter escaped scot free. Advertisement In the last days of his presidency, Joe issued a uniquely tailored pardon for his son, stretching back 11 years and covering Hunter's conviction on gun charges and guilty plea on felony tax evasion charges that Weiss was forced to press after the sweetheart plea deal he'd stitched together with Hunter's lawyers fell apart in the wake of Shapley and Ziegler's revelations. In the end, Weiss forced the IRS to remove Shapley and Ziegler from the investigation as soon as he suspected Shapley had blown the whistle. The Office of Special Counsel last year determined that the IRS had illegally retaliated against the pair by removing them from the investigation after they made protected disclosures to Congress about DOJ interference in the probe. All the obstruction and interference and slow walking past statutes of limitation happened under the benign leadership of David Weiss. So spare us his mealy mouthed justifications for squibbing what should have been the most consequential political corruption investigation in history.
CBS News
28 minutes ago
- CBS News
Transcript: Sen. Chris Van Hollen on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," July 27, 2025
The following is the transcript of an interview with Sen Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland, that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on July 27, 2025. MARGARET BRENNAN: And we're joined now by Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen, who is one of those appropriators we were just speaking about with the budget director. You just heard everything he laid out. There were no specifics on when these clawbacks could be coming, but they're on the table. He says they don't want to shut down. He didn't seem to say they want, you know, a continuing resolution. Do you know what's coming? SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Not really. The one thing we know, and you asked Russ Vought about this, was he says that the process is too bipartisan right now, meaning that they want to use this process just to ram through the agenda and the overall agenda we saw when they passed the so-called Big, Beautiful Bill, which was beautiful for billionaires, but not really for anybody else, which is to provide tax cuts for very wealthy people at the expense of everybody else. And I do want to say Margaret, I heard him deny that that bill increased the deficit and debt. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office just said it increased our debt by 3.5 trillion before added interest. MARGARET BRENNAN: He's using an accounting gimmick in regard to the benchmark. SEN. VAN HOLLEN: As- and Republicans have called out this accounting gimmick, so when-- MARGARET BRENNAN: --And it was accepted-- SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Well, they sort of unilaterally imposed it, it was not accepted by Democrats, and it was a departure from previous efforts. But you know, then they come back and they say that they want to cut these important programs, NIH and other things to reduce the deficit, when, in fact, what they're doing it for is to help try finance those tax cuts for very wealthy people. MARGARET BRENNAN: So it's just heading us towards pretty unchartered territory and very unclear whether we will be able to avoid a government shutdown. Democrats are going to be blamed if there's a shutdown, don't you think? I mean, how do you sidestep this? SEN. VAN HOLLEN : We certainly don't want a government shutdown. And I think everybody has heard Russ Vought say that they want a less bipartisan process. What that tells me is they're willing just to use their powers to try to shut down the government if they don't get their way. And what's ironic about this Margaret is you have Russ Vought calling for these deep cuts to education NIH, when he has asked for an increase for his OMB budget. He asked for a 13% increase for his OMB budget. He's asked for more people to join the OMB staff, while he's talking about RIFing people at other departments, like the Department of yeah- getting rid of firing people at the Department of Veterans Affairs and other important priorities. So it's hard to take the OMB Director seriously when he says that they didn't increase the debt and when he says he wants to cut things except for his own budget and staff. MARGARET BRENNAN: But if they do head towards a government shutdown, why would there be any benefit unless it is to prioritize funding certain agencies and de-prioritizing other agencies. Well, that goes back to the executive, doesn't it, that authority? SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Well, that ultimately, though you need, for example, four Republican senators to stand behind what he's calling for. And what they've called for is sort of just a double cross on the process, right? That's what the so-called rescissions, is just a Washington name for double cross. They support one thing, one day, President even signs off, and then they come back and say they changed their mind. And what we're asking is for four Republican senators just to publicly declare that when they say they're going to fund the Veterans Affairs Department that they actually mean it. MARGARET BRENNAN: That they won't later agree to claw that money back. SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Exactly MARGARET BRENNAN: Right. So one of the things the Trump administration is clear and did get clawbacks of is foreign assistance. However, there's an exception. In June, the administration announced it would give $30 million to this Israeli-backed organization called the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the GHF, I know you're familiar with it. It delivers aid through armed military contractors who stand behind the Israeli military in four designated zones that Gazans then have to get themselves to in order to receive the aid. The State Department says they're sending this money. Have they? SEN. VAN HOLLEN: To my knowledge, they have, although we've asked for the details, we haven't gotten them. In fact, just today, I'm sending a letter to Secretary Rubio, signed with 20 of my colleagues, calling for more information, but also calling for defunding this. American taxpayers should not be spending one penny to fund this private organization backed by mercenaries and by the IDF that has become a death trap. Over 1000 people have died from being shot and killed as starving people crowd to try to get food at just these four sites. MARGARET BRENNAN: The- just to be clear here, the State Department says they're going to send $30 million. Reuters had reported that there were documents they obtained showing 7 million had already been sent to these, what you call, armed mercenaries. But the Trump administration says this is the best way, this is the only way, to keep money- to keep food out of the hands of Hamas, which financially benefits off reselling it to desperate starving people. Is there another way to feed desperate starving people? SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Yes. And this is a- a big lie, the claim that when the UN organizations were delivering food to Palestinians civilians, that it was being systematically diverted to Hamas. I want to say loudly and clearly, this is a big lie. Trump is-- MARGARET BRENNAN: The systematic part of that. SEN. VAN HOLLEN: The systematic, but that is their claim. They claim that essentially, large amounts of aid are being diverted to Hamas. What we know now, from testimony of American officials, Cindy McCain, and just this week, high level Israeli military officials, is that there's no evidence to support that. AID, USAID, just released a report saying there's no evidence to support that. So what the Netanyahu government did was scrap a delivery system that was working at delivering food and assistance in favor of this other effort. That was a pretext, this claim that Hamas was systematically diverting food. The real goal of this other effort is to use food as a weapon of war and population control. MARGARET BRENNAN: That's a violation of international law. SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Yes, it is. MARGARET BRENNAN: That's a human rights abuse. Senator Lindsey Graham was on "Meet the Press" this morning, and I want to ask for your reaction to something he said, because he was very strong in his words. He said, because the ceasefire talks fell apart, Israel is reassessing. He said to expect a full military effort by Israel to take Gaza down, quote, "like we did in Tokyo and Berlin. They're going to do in Gaza what we did in Tokyo and Berlin, take the place by force, start over again, present a better future." The United States is a huge supporter of the State of Israel. Is there anything that could prevent what he says is about to happen? SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Well, the United States should make very clear that it's unacceptable to use U.S. weapons to target or indiscriminately fire on civilians and civilian infrastructure. So-- MARGARET BRENNAN: Because this sounds like an occupation. SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Well, we also know, just this week, members of the Netanyahu coalition, in fact, government ministers, called for essentially erasing Gaza, and they said, it will become a Jewish state, statelet. And part of- so- this was one of the-- MARGARET BRENNAN: Netanyahu did say he didn't agree with his statement. SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Well, here's the problem though, Margaret, we continually see that Netanyahu, at the end of the day, does cater to his most far right wing of his- of his government, people like Ben Gvir, people like Smotrich. That is what has allowed him to stay in power, and so at the end of the day, he takes the most extreme positions. MARGARET BRENNAN: Senator Van Hollen, thank you for your time today. We'll be right back with a lot more "Face the Nation." Stay with us.
