Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bigtree

(94,265 posts)
63. that's how the conversation was described in papers like Daily Mail and NYPost
Fri Apr 15, 2022, 09:16 PM
Apr 2022

...second hand claims that Schumer was pressing the line progressives had been spreading around that her hug of Graham or her praise of republican cooperation on the committee was some sign that she was senile.

It was a vile attack and basically just blaming Feinstein for the inevitable advancement of Trump;s SC nominees. Schumer caved to progressive senator's complaints and removed her after discussions.

There isn't a Schumer quote because he hasn't made one about Feinstein's mental state. The suggestion that it was discussed is an extension of the vile blame game that followed the SC hearings, and basically an unsupported rumor. A lie, imo.

The discussions with Schumer were about removing her from the committee - basically making her the fall person for some absurd notion that there was something she could have done in those hearings to win over republicans against Barrett and Kavanaugh. The accusations about her mental health which followed those hearings were from horribly insensitive people making unsupported claims to suit their political agenda.

And here we are with the worst of the unproven, denied demagoguery flying around a Democratic board like the truth is just an afterthought to political interest and expediency.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

How do you know it was a Democrat that said something? dem4decades Apr 2022 #1
Because the SF Chronicle reported three unnamed Democratic Senators as doing it JohnSJ Apr 2022 #3
Article said it was from staffers/Senators. But the only name dropped was Feinstein's. Budi Apr 2022 #5
Here is the SF Chronicle link, and they said specifically there were three Democratic Senators JohnSJ Apr 2022 #14
Since they were public figures, they should be named. Budi Apr 2022 #16
I agree. Shame on them JohnSJ Apr 2022 #18
Yup. This is their predictable M.O. as an election nears. Budi Apr 2022 #24
I Can Say There ARe Six Democratic Senators But THat Doesn't Make It True Me. Apr 2022 #27
why would the newspaper make it up? JohnSJ Apr 2022 #28
THere Could Be A Number Of Reasons Why They printed It Me. Apr 2022 #29
touche' JohnSJ Apr 2022 #30
I know. I was thinking of rightwing trolls. ananda Apr 2022 #13
Vote blue no matter who. Tetrachloride Apr 2022 #2
I don't think that's why the party loses elections leftstreet Apr 2022 #4
Your post sure looks like an attack on Democrats from here. Kingofalldems Apr 2022 #6
Then be my guest JohnSJ Apr 2022 #9
No. It looks like sabotage with a gossip scoop to a sleazy journalist. Budi Apr 2022 #10
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 onecaliberal Apr 2022 #23
the SF Chronicle is hardly 'sleazy', it is the No Cal paper of record and extremely well respected Celerity Apr 2022 #36
why don't the Democrats who spread these rumors reveal themselves? bigtree Apr 2022 #62
The Chronicle is hardly some flaming radical lefty paper. Celerity Apr 2022 #65
it's an old political attack on Feinstein bigtree Apr 2022 #66
I disagree, and you are trying to frame your opinion as the only valid one, whist falsely assigning Celerity Apr 2022 #68
this is vile politics. I don't care if you're offended by my saying that bigtree Apr 2022 #70
Why do you keep trying to drag in progressives in to this? I never raised that issue. Perhaps Celerity Apr 2022 #72
did you forget the progressive leaning newspaper? bigtree Apr 2022 #73
Your attempts to frame the San Francisco Chronicle as some sort of leftie prog-hugging newspaper Celerity Apr 2022 #74
calling the paper progressive-leaning isn't a 'frame,' not even a criticism, just an observation bigtree Apr 2022 #75
No deflection at all. You have repeatedly tried to falsely assign a lefty prog-loving agenda to the Celerity Apr 2022 #77
well, it's really not the cornerstone of my argument bigtree Apr 2022 #78
Funny how that works, eh? BradAllison Apr 2022 #69
Yes BannonsLiver Apr 2022 #7
No one said that. But you. Budi Apr 2022 #11
Because doing unnamed through the media is such a courageous thing. JohnSJ Apr 2022 #12
Idgaf if they stuff her and roll her around like a weekend with Bernie. I WILL vote straight ticket onecaliberal Apr 2022 #8
Of course, but it is just the typical circular firing squad JohnSJ Apr 2022 #15
I literally just got a local news alert about this. This makes me really fucking mad. onecaliberal Apr 2022 #22
Boy, remember how Republicans did all that back-biting on Strom Thurmond? gratuitous Apr 2022 #17
They are doing and continue to do a lot of back stabbing of TFG Kaleva Apr 2022 #20
I do remember trent lott praising Thurmond's and his segregationist views, and how much better the JohnSJ Apr 2022 #21
Well if you remember Thurmond asked Joe Biden to do his eulogy. former9thward Apr 2022 #48
No, I probably wasn't paying attention, regardless it definitely isn't the same club that it was the JohnSJ Apr 2022 #55
Maybe it isn't. former9thward Apr 2022 #56
Thanks JohnSJ Apr 2022 #57
Meh. Feinstein is from a deep blue state. They probably wouldn't have done this otherwise. JoanofArgh Apr 2022 #19
Saboteurs of the Dem Party do this only in safe blue districts/States. Budi Apr 2022 #26
I am going to say: SF Chronicle is lying. Tetrachloride Apr 2022 #25
Whoever they are they did the right thing. Someone with dementia should not be in government. nt Autumn Apr 2022 #31
You mean reporting it as an UNNAMED source is the "right thing to do"? That speaks JohnSJ Apr 2022 #32
I never fucking claimed to be a doctor. As one who has had a family member Autumn Apr 2022 #33
I was being sarcastic, but you are saying Feinstein has "dementia". That is about as valid as Frist JohnSJ Apr 2022 #34
It was mentioned a few months back that she has dementia. I started paying attention. If people who Autumn Apr 2022 #35
unamed people. bull JohnSJ Apr 2022 #37
There have always been unnamed sources in governemnet. Chuck Schumer had conversations with her Autumn Apr 2022 #38
link? sheshe2 Apr 2022 #39
An easy google search. It was discussed here back in 2020. Autumn Apr 2022 #40
Welp sheshe2 Apr 2022 #41
Also, still unnamed people. I remember them trying to play this toward Biden, when the jackass JohnSJ Apr 2022 #42
You can't read the one about Schumer's talk with her either? Here you go. got his name and all. Autumn Apr 2022 #44
Welp. The first one I read and I'm not a member, how odd that is the one with Schumer. Autumn Apr 2022 #43
The Daily Mail is not "like any other newspaper". It is a right-wing rag and a questionable source. lapucelle Apr 2022 #46
I just posted similar to you. sheshe2 Apr 2022 #49
I saw that. I can't imagine ever normalizing the Daily Mail. lapucelle Apr 2022 #50
There are other sources. Try google. Done here. Autumn Apr 2022 #53
The Daily Mail is not a newspaper it is a tabloid. sheshe2 Apr 2022 #47
Interesting. sheshe2 Apr 2022 #51
Yet you still ignore the issue, there are other links about Schumer's talks with her. You don't have Autumn Apr 2022 #52
Night night sheshe2 Apr 2022 #54
You have to give this poster a lot of credit for being determined, though Hekate Apr 2022 #59
I do! sheshe2 Apr 2022 #60
I have to laugh at the contempt for the use of "unnamed sources". Exactly what kind of news do Midwestern Democrat Apr 2022 #61
so these pols with an axe to grind should be seen as credible? bigtree Apr 2022 #64
You do know that reporters will agree to not release names, which is why they are called unnamed Autumn Apr 2022 #80
anyone can get snipped and ridiculed as she's been bigtree Apr 2022 #81
That suits people who only want to hear what they want to hear perfectly. Mustn't spoil their Autumn Apr 2022 #79
this is worst of the comebacks bigtree Apr 2022 #82
Yet you ignore what had Schumer concerned so much that he talked to her about it. We won't agree on Autumn Apr 2022 #83
it was political bigtree Apr 2022 #84
Of course it's political. It's politics, she's a politician. Autumn Apr 2022 #85
but it's a canard bigtree Apr 2022 #86
No. It's not a canard. It's just not playing out in the media out of respect for her. That's why Autumn Apr 2022 #87
they are her political opponents. No one is dumb enough to believe they did this to help her bigtree Apr 2022 #88
Schumer is her political opponent? Sure. Autumn Apr 2022 #89
there are no direct quotes from Schumer about her mental state bigtree Apr 2022 #90
that's how the conversation was described in papers like Daily Mail and NYPost bigtree Apr 2022 #63
Nobody seems to complain when folks here label her a "corporate Dem"... brooklynite Apr 2022 #45
Who do you think are those unnamed Democrats are? JohnSJ Apr 2022 #58
Feinstein needs to retire budkin Apr 2022 #67
I agree with the OP LetMyPeopleVote Apr 2022 #71
She needs to retire. Diablo del sol Apr 2022 #76
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Whoever those so-called u...»Reply #63