General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSchumer supports Trump's decision to pull $400 million from Columbia
@marisakabas.bsky.social
In this interview Schumer says he agrees with Trump’s decision to pull $400 million from Columbia. A university in his own state. And he’s unconcerned about the unlawful arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, one of his constituents.
He is a traitor who needs to resign.
In this interview Schumer says he agrees with Trump’s decision to pull 0 million from Columbia. A university in his own state. And he’s unconcerned about the unlawful arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, one of his constituents.
— Marisa Kabas (@marisakabas.bsky.social) 2025-03-16T14:19:31.123Z
He is a traitor who needs to resign.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Walleye
(43,710 posts)
hatrack
(64,176 posts)Priorities, people!!!
Walleye
(43,710 posts)It’s not important to us though.
Nanjeanne
(6,492 posts)
republianmushroom
(22,122 posts)
Celerity
(53,550 posts)WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer is postponing several planned events this week to promote his new book, “ Antisemitism in America: A Warning,” after some liberal groups had planned to stage protests. The cancellations of events in Baltimore, Washington, D.C. and other cities came amid widespread criticism from the party’s liberal base over Schumer’s vote to move forward with Republican spending legislation last week. Risa Heller, a representative for Schumer’s book, said that the tour would be rescheduled “due to security concerns.”
Schumer said the spending bill was “terrible” but that a shutdown would have been far worse, and difficult to end, as President Donald Trump has already slashed jobs and funding for agencies across the government. A shutdown would have given Trump even more power to make cuts, Schumer said, “and so many programs would be lost.”
House Democrats strongly disagreed with Schumer’s decision and criticized him directly: “We will not be complicit,” Democratic leaders said in a joint statement. The public rift among Democrats, and the onslaught of criticism toward Schumer, came after years of relative unity during Trump’s first term and during President Joe Biden’s time in the White House. It’s a reflection of how Democrats have become increasingly frustrated with their inability to stop Trump’s Cabinet confirmations and mass firings of federal workers.
At a news conference on Friday, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries repeatedly refused to say whether he has confidence in Schumer — a rare break for the two longtime New York colleagues. “We do not want to shut down the government. But we are not afraid of a government funding showdown,” Jeffries said. Schumer and Jeffries met in Brooklyn on Sunday, according to two people familiar with the meeting. But the discontent with Schumer went far beyond House leadership, and some of the nation’s most influential progressive groups warned of serious political consequences.
snip
I don’t think Schumer is exactly the right person to taunt Republican members of Congress about being afraid to do town halls after canceling his book tour because he’s afraid to face Democrats.
— Ron Filipkowski (@ronfilipkowski.bsky.social) 2025-03-17T15:07:35.481Z
JanMichael
(25,725 posts)
spanone
(140,917 posts)
jalan48
(14,914 posts)johnnyfins
(3,388 posts)To be anti semitic. It is also not illegal to protest whatever the hell you want as long as violence is not used.
ZRB
(465 posts)It's not "illegal" to send these antisemites packing. I'm here for the FAFO.
LW1977
(1,611 posts)Spineless wimp Schumer is! And fuck you to the people who send this to jury! He’s barely a “Democratic” elected official anymore anyways!
sdaz
(11 posts)
Ellipsis
(9,410 posts)sop
(17,288 posts)"Cuck Schumer" is going to stick
Phoenix61
(18,684 posts)“I’m curious how you think about how protests should be addressed, considering the context of what you just said. The Trump administration just announced it’s pulling $400 million in funding from Columbia University, giving the reason as “relentless violence, intimidation and antisemitic harassment.” I’m wondering what you make of that. Columbia did not do enough. I criticized them. And believe me, I believe in free speech, I believe in the right to protest, as you read in my book. I started my career protesting the Vietnam War. I say to some people, “If I were your age, I’d be protesting something or other.” So I get that, and I love it, and it’s about America. But when it shades over to violence and antisemitism, the colleges had to do something, and a lot of them didn’t do enough. They shrugged their shoulders, looked the other way. Columbia among them. So what did they do? They took away $400 million. I’m trying to find out what they took away. Are they taking away money from cancer research, or Alzheimer’s? What is the $400 million? It could be hurting all students. Students who go there who have nothing to do with the protest, students who might have protested peacefully, or Jewish students who were victims of some of those protests. So I think we have to see. My worry is that this $400 million was just done in typical Trump fashion: indiscriminately, without looking at its effect.”
“That sounds easy. But when we’re talking about the right to protest, breaking the law, not breaking the law — those things can be weaponized for political purposes. You can arrest political protesters, put them in prison, but they’re actually taking part in what is their constitutionally protected right. Well, if they’re just protesting, and they’re arrested, they shouldn’t be arrested for protesting as long as they go by the rules. Look, I get protests in front of my house all the time, but they have to have a permit and they have to obey certain rules. There are rules. But the bottom line is we have courts, and Khalil will go to court. And I have a lot of faith that the judge will give a fair ruling. It’s not the Trump administration, it’s an independent federal judge. [The day after we spoke, Schumer tweeted that Khalil should be punished by the legal system only for breaking criminal law, not for breaking university rules.]”
Response to Phoenix61 (Reply #11)
tritsofme This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to tritsofme (Reply #14)
rollin74 This message was self-deleted by its author.
hatrack
(64,176 posts)Pro tip: "So I think we have to see" and "I'm trying to find out what they took away" and "It could be hurting all students" aren't exactly forthright condemnations.
Note: Since I can't access the article, there may well be paragraphs where he opposes this action that I wasn't able to see.
EdmondDantes_
(1,311 posts)The Bluesky poster is overstating things. But you could have known that by reading the parts she clipped from the transcript where Schumer says that he's only in favor of the Colombia protestor being deported if he did something illegal. That she changes that to Schumer being in favor of the guy being deported without caveat should tell you what you need to know about her honesty.
hatrack
(64,176 posts).
rollin74
(2,265 posts)I don’t see anything unreasonable about what he said
edhopper
(37,017 posts)just where the money was taken from. But he is okay attacking a major University because some of the students protested Israel.
Sounds like a wishy washy weenie to me.
chowder66
(11,761 posts)Colleges that receive federal funding are obligated to follow the law. He also specifically states he's for free speech and goes further about that in the interview.
As for the $400 million, he isn't advocating for that... he sums it up (rightfully so) that it's an arbitrary number that the Republicans and their leaders pulled out of their ass. He wants to know where $400 mil would be pulled from. He wants an explanation about their bullshit number.
angrychair
(11,639 posts)That sometimes it's acceptable depending on the target. That is not acceptable. The university has an obligation to mitigate violence but it's interesting that people seem to suddenly care more about antisemitism than years of uninvestigated SAs... interesting.
chowder66
(11,761 posts)I agree about the imbalance but that was not included in the question.
The democrats have increased funding in the past to universities to help combat sexual assaults and aftercare but Trump altered or overturned some policies in his first term. Biden overturned Trump and now Trump is doing it again. I don't know about any funds being withheld as a consequence for not doing enough but that may be because the universities didn't have enough resources or guidance on how to deal with the problem. Hence the increase in funding. It's a problem that needs focus but with Trump in office that is not going to happen in any meaningful way most likely.
There will always be a surge of interest on news worthy issues but it doesn't last for long at all. It lasts longer on the hill (legally, politically) than in many peoples kitchens.
Peaceful protests are fine and encouraged but when they devolve into violence and nothing is done to mitigate the fallout then it does need to be addressed and consequences may follow; but withholding $400 million in funding is absurd. He sees that as arbitrary.
Sorry, the answer is not asking for an explanation, it's saying it's unacceptable. Period.
chowder66
(11,761 posts)
GreenWave
(12,211 posts)Goes after Democrats relentlessly.
Goes after Musk.
Seems like she cannot put a banner out about Trump. (I only went two pages deep)
https://www.thehandbasket.co/archive?page=2
HereForTheParty
(915 posts)Just went on about where he took it from.
hlthe2b
(112,627 posts)I TRIED to give him the benefit of the doubt, but this is beyond it. Those screaming for Schumer to be deposed as Minority Leader have a much louder voice now.
2naSalit
(99,709 posts)
Response to 2naSalit (Reply #15)
Initech This message was self-deleted by its author.
chowder66
(11,761 posts)archive.com but it wouldn't fully load.
https://archive.ph/35bXs
snip
Schumer:
Columbia did not do enough. I criticized them. And believe me, I believe in free speech, I believe in the right to protest, as you read in my book. I started my career protesting the Vietnam War. I say to some people, “If I were your age, I’d be protesting something or other.” So I get that, and I love it, and it’s about America. But when it shades over to violence and antisemitism, the colleges had to do something, and a lot of them didn’t do enough. They shrugged their shoulders, looked the other way. Columbia among them. So what did they do? They took away $400 million. I’m trying to find out what they took away. Are they taking away money from cancer research, or Alzheimer’s? What is the $400 million? It could be hurting all students. Students who go there who have nothing to do with the protest, students who might have protested peacefully, or Jewish students who were victims of some of those protests. So I think we have to see. My worry is that this $400 million was just done in typical Trump fashion: indiscriminately, without looking at its effect.
ibegurpard
(17,073 posts)This BSky post cherry-picks pieces of quotes and effectively misrepresents his stances.
tritsofme
(19,766 posts)chowder66
(11,761 posts)"Kabas broke the news that Trump's second administration ordered staff at the National Institutes of Health to stop travelling.[4] Days later, she broke the news that it was also was freezing federal grants, first posting on Bluesky about it.[2] Her scoops increased the amount of paid subscribers from 800 to 1,900.[5] The memo on federal grants was reversed two days after Kabas posted about it.[2] The Associated Press called it "a key moment for a growing cadre of journalists who work independently to gather and analyze news and market themselves as brands."[9]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marisa_Kabas
With that said, her article is for the NYT and unfortunately I cannot access it.
Her take seems wholly biased and contradicts the little bit of the article I have seen (which she even posted herself under the original post).
Maybe the increase in her profile is influencing her biases?
https://archive.ph/35bXs
snip
Schumer:
Columbia did not do enough. I criticized them. And believe me, I believe in free speech, I believe in the right to protest, as you read in my book. I started my career protesting the Vietnam War. I say to some people, “If I were your age, I’d be protesting something or other.” So I get that, and I love it, and it’s about America. But when it shades over to violence and antisemitism, the colleges had to do something, and a lot of them didn’t do enough. They shrugged their shoulders, looked the other way. Columbia among them. So what did they do? They took away $400 million. I’m trying to find out what they took away. Are they taking away money from cancer research, or Alzheimer’s? What is the $400 million? It could be hurting all students. Students who go there who have nothing to do with the protest, students who might have protested peacefully, or Jewish students who were victims of some of those protests. So I think we have to see. My worry is that this $400 million was just done in typical Trump fashion: indiscriminately, without looking at its effect.
MineralMan
(150,525 posts)Perhaps the bsky person is not correct?
Response to HereForTheParty (Original post)
ananda This message was self-deleted by its author.
alarimer
(17,146 posts)Students are entitled to protest and I really don't care why.
"Law and Order" is just a fucking excuse for blowing up the 1st Amendment.
I really want leaders that oppose EVERYTHING Trump does.
stoned
(334 posts)What are his reasons for supporting this?
Demsrule86
(71,465 posts)And he should not be in leadership.
Ping Tung
(4,121 posts)Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
MichMan
(16,533 posts)Ping Tung
(4,121 posts)Has Columbia University been charged with hate speech?
If anyone should be tried for hate speech don should be the first in the dock.
MichMan
(16,533 posts)Your reply indicated that free speech is an absolute. It does have restrictions.
Ping Tung
(4,121 posts)Are you talking about collective punishment? Are all the students, staff, and employees to be punished by de-funding for an alleged crime that hasn't gone to trial.
The Geneva Conventions, particularly Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, explicitly prohibit collective punishment, meaning that no protected person may be punished for an offense they did not personally commit, and collective penalties, intimidation, terrorism, and reprisals are also prohibited