Charles Schumer

Charles Schumer

: Photo from Wikimedia Commons / Author of Photo: U.S. Senate Photographic Studio/Jeff McEvoy


* Served three terms in the New York State Assembly from 1974-80
* Was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1980
* Was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1998


Charles Schumer was born into a Jewish family on November 23, 1950 in Brooklyn, New York, where he was raised. He campaigned for Democratic presidential candidate Eugene McCarthy in 1968, and went on to earn an AB from Harvard University in 1971 and a JD from Harvard Law School in 1974. He passed the New York State Bar Exam in 1975 but never practiced law, pursuing instead a career in politics.

After serving three terms in the New York State Assembly from 1974-80, Schumer was elected in 1980 to represent New York’s 16th congressional district, defeating three-term Republican incumbent Alfonse D’Amato. During Schumer’s tenure (1981-99) in the U.S. House of Representatives, his district was renumbered twice—as the 10th in 1983, and the 9th in 1993.

Creating the Diversity Visa Lottery Program

In 1990, Schumer co-sponsored a diversity visa program that offered green cards to 50,000 applicants annually via a lottery system. As reports: “Lottery winners undergo a State Department interview and health check, and can then bring their spouses and minor children to the United States and get them on a five-year track to citizenship. Once a winner and a spouse become citizens, they can import their parents, their in-laws and their children, plus the parents of their in-laws, such as the winner’s spouse’s sister’s husband’s parents. In turn, the relatives can later become citizens and import their relatives. The chain-migration process does not set any skill tests for admission…. Schumer’s diversity visa plan was included in the House-approved ‘Family Unity and Employment Opportunity Immigration Act of 1990‘ when it was combined with a proposal by a Democra[t] from Boston. The resulting ‘Schumer visa’ measure was included in the completed Immigration Act of 1990, which also raised the annual inflow of legal immigrants up from 500,000 up to 700,000.”

  • One noteworthy winner of this lottery program in 2010 was Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, a Muslim immigrant and ISIS supporter from Uzbekistan. Seven years later — on October 31, 2017 — Saipov used a rental truck to mow down and kill eight people (and injure at least twelve others) in a busy New York City bike path as an act of jihad.

Federal Assault Weapons Ban

In 1994 Schumer and California Senator Dianne Feinstein authored the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act—commonly known as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban—a ten-year statute that outlawed semi-automatic rifles, shotguns, and handguns possessing certain features.

Co-Sponsor of Infrastructure Restoration Act

In 1997 Schumer co-sponsored Congressman Matthew Martinez’s Job Creation and Infrastructure Restoration Act, which proposed to use $250 billion in federal funds for the establishment of union-wage jobs rebuilding infrastructure (e.g., schools, hospitals, libraries, public transportation, highways, and parks). Martinez had previously introduced this bill in 1995 at the the request of the Los Angeles Labor Coalition for Public Works Jobs, whose leaders were all supporters or members of the Communist Party USA.

Elected to the U.S. Senate with Help from Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism

In 1998 Schumer was elected to the U.S. Senate. His candidacy was backed by the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, a Communist Party USA splinter group.

Support from the Working Families Party

In subsequent years, Schumer also received support from the Working Families Party (WFP). On March 26, 2000, Schumer attended WFP’s national convention. In 2004, WFP attracted some 150,000 votes on its line for Senator Schumer.

Same-Sex Marriage

In 2004, Schumer, while advocating civil unions for homosexual couples, opposed a same-sex-marriage amendment and stated that marriage should be defined only as a union between one man and one woman. But his views on this issue evolved dramatically over the next few years, and in March 2009 the senator announced his support for gay marriage, saying: “It’s time. Equality is something that has always been a hallmark of America and no group should be deprived of it.” In December 2009 he aggressively lobbied members of the New York State Senate who were undecided in their position on legislation designed to legalize gay marriage. And in 2013 he praised a Supreme Court ruling that struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act. “The march to equality in America is unstoppable,” said Schumer.

Appeasing Russia for Help in Preventing a Nuclear Iran

In June 2008, Schumer wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal wherein he stated that the most effective way of preventing Iran from continuing to develop a nuclear weapons program, would be for the U.S. to work through the United Nations to impose “stronger economic sanctions” on the regime in Tehran. However, he noted, Russia had previously blocked the implementation of such sanctions for three reasons: “First, Moscow has a longstanding, close relationship with Tehran and regards itself as Iran’s protector. Second, the Russian economy benefits from its relationship with Iran by several billion dollars a year. Third and most important is leverage. Putin is an old-fashioned nationalist who seeks to regain the power and greatness that the country had before the fall of the Soviet Union.”

By Schumer’s calculus, “To bring Moscow on board we must make it an offer it cannot refuse.” A key component of such an offer, he said, would be for the U.S. to abandon the Bush administration’s plan — a plan that greatly displeased Russia — to build a missile defense system in Eastern Europe. Wrote Schumer:

“Two years ago, under NATO auspices, Poland, the Czech Republic and Romania agreed to build an anti-missile defense site to thwart the threat of a nuclear missile attack by Iran. The threat is hypothetical and remote, and the Bush administration’s emphasis on pursuing the anti-missile system, without Russia’s cooperation, still baffles many national security experts. It also drives Putin to apoplexy. The anti-missile system strengthens the relationship between Eastern Europe and NATO, with real troops and equipment on the ground. It mocks Putin’s dream of eventually restoring Russian hegemony over Eastern Europe. Dismantling the anti-missile site, economic incentives and creation of a diplomatic partnership in the region — in exchange for joining an economic boycott of Iran — is an offer Putin would find hard to refuse. It is our best hope to avoid a nuclear Iran, because a successful economic boycott would certainly force the Iranian regime to heed Western demands more than anything attempted so far.”

In 2009 the new U.S. President, Barack Obama, decided to adopt Schumer’s plan. As the Guardian reported on September 17 of that year:

“Barack Obama has abandoned the controversial Pentagon plan to build a missile defence system in Europe that had long soured relations with Russia. In one of the sharpest breaks yet with the policies of the Bush administration, Obama said the new approach would offer ‘stronger, swifter and smarter’ defence for the U.S. and its allies. He said it would focus on the threat posed by Iran’s short- and medium-range missiles, rather than its intercontinental nuclear capabilities. Obama … phoned the leaders of Poland and the Czech Republic last night to tell them he had dropped plans to site missile interceptors and a radar station in their respective countries. Russia had furiously opposed the project, claiming it targeted Moscow’s nuclear arsenal.”

Supporting the “Fairness Doctrine”

Schumer has long supported the enactment of the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a federal regulation (abandoned by the Reagan administration in 1987) requiring equal time for the expression of different political views on the public airwaves. “The very same people who don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] to limit pornography on the air,” Schumer told Fox News in November 2008. “I am for that. I think pornography should be limited. But you can’t say, ‘government hands off in one area’ to a commercial enterprise, but you’re allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.”

Speaking Against Illegal Immigration in 2009

In 2009 Schumer addressed the 6th Annual Immigration Law and Policy Conference at Georgetown University, where he emphasized the importance of border security to combat illegal immigration — a position he would reverse withing a few years. Among his remarks in 2009 were the following:

“[I]llegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple. When we use phrases like ‘undocumented workers,’ we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration, which the American people overwhelmingly oppose. People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who entered the United States legally. Any immigration solution must recognize that we must do as much as we can to gain operational control of our borders as soon as possible.”

“The American people need to know that, because of our efforts in Congress, our border is far more secure today than it was when we began debating comprehensive immigration reform in 2005. Between 2005 and 2009, a vast amount of progress has been made on our borders and ports of entry. This progress includes … construction of 630 miles of border fence that create a significant barrier to illegal immigration on our southern land border.

Also during that same general time period, Schumer referred to illegal aliens as “criminals” and said: “One of the most effective things we do on the border is turn people back … they get up to the border and we find them and say, ‘go home!’”

Supporting Obamacare

In 2009-10, Schumer was a key supporter of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—i.e., Obamacare—calling it a “historic” bill that not only would “help over 30 million Americans … gain access to affordable health insurance,” but would also “cu[t] the federal deficit by $143 billion over 10 years and up to $1.3 trillion in the second decade.”

When the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in February 2014 projected that some 3 million people ultimately would stop working in order to lower their household incomes so they could qualify for Obamacare’s taxpayer-funded subsidies, Schumer countered by explaining that “many American workers” would now “have freedom … to do things that they couldn’t [previously] do.” “The single mom who’s raising three kids [and] has to keep a job because of healthcare,” he elaborated, “can now spend some time raising those kids. That’s a family value.”

Encouraging the IRS to Scrutinize Conservative Organizations

On March 12, 2012, Schumer joined Al FrankenTom Udall, and five other Democrat senators in writing a letter to IRS officials, urging the agency to give extra scrutiny to the activities of conservative “social welfare organizations” that were applying for tax-exempt status. The letter warned of “abuse of the tax code by political groups focused on federal election activities.” Fourteen months later, news broke that the IRS had been engaged in a massive scandal whereby it had delayed and derailed tax-exemption applications filed by hundreds of organizations with conservative indicators like “Tea Party,” “Patriots,” or “9/12” in their names. In a January 2014 speech to the Center for American Progress, Schumer, unfazed by the controversy over the IRS’s illegal abuse of power, said candidly: “There are many things that can be done administratively by the IRS and other government agencies” to thwart the political efforts of conservative groups.

Opposing Arizona Law That Targeted Illegal Aliens

In April 2012, Schumer introduced a bill designed to eliminate laws like SB 1070, an Arizona statute deputizing state police to check with federal authorities on the immigration status of criminal suspects. The senator charged that such laws would inevitably result in “untrained officers … arresting anyone and everyone who might fit the preconceived profile of an illegal immigrant.”

Supporting a Massive Amnesty, and Blaming White Racism for the Bill’s Failure

In 2013 Schumer led the so-called “Gang of Eight”—four Democrat and four Republican U.S. senators—in the push to pass a sweeping, 844-page immigration-reform bill aimed at giving provisional legal status to at least 11 million illegal immigrants and placing them on a path-to-citizenship. The other Democrats on the panel were Michael Bennet, Richard Durbin, and Robert Menendez. A analysis noted that their proposal, if passed, “would transform the nation’s political landscape” by “pumping as many as 11 million new Hispanic voters into the electorate a decade from now in ways that … would produce an electoral bonanza for Democrats and cripple Republican prospects in many states they now win easily.”

When Republicans in Congress failed to support the Gang of Eight’s proposal in sufficient numbers to pass it, Schumer blamed that failure on the racism of “Tea Party elites” who, he said, opposed amnesty because they did not want want America to become “less white.” “Yes, things have changed,” Schumer elaborated. “White Anglo-Saxon men are not exclusively running the country anymore…. In a pre-Tea Party world, the Senate immigration bill would have been welcomed by House Republicans,. However, the Tea Party rank-and-file know it’s a different America. It looks different; it prays different; it works different. This is unsettling and angering to some.”

In February 2014, Schumer said that Congress should make amnesty available to all immigrants who had come to the U.S. illegally as recently as December 31, 2013. When some Republican lawmakers expressed reluctance to pass an immigration bill because they simply did not trust that President Obama would enforce it, Schumer said: “There’s a simple solution. Let’s enact the law this year, but simply not let it actually start until 2017, after President Obama’s term is over.”

Supporting Cuts in Federal Benefits for Retired Military Veterans

In December 2013 Schumer said that federal benefits for retired military veterans should be reduced, just as benefits for “civilian federal employees have been cut, cut, cut.” By contrast, Schumer opposed suggestions that Members of Congress should take a pay cut, lamenting that their salaries had not been raised “in a long time,” and that they were generally paying more for healthcare insurance than in years past.

Promoting the “Paycheck Fairness Act”

In April 2014, Schumer, citing the need for “pay equity” for women, was the Senate Democrats’ chief political strategist in rallying support for the Paycheck Fairness Act, rooted in the false premise that female employees were being paid less than equally qualified, equally experienced male workers.

Advocating That President Obama Take Executive Action on Immigration

In the immediate aftermath of the November 2014 midterm elections in which Republicans had increased their majority in the House and regained control of the Senate, Schumer said: “The president has no choice but to take executive action where he can, wherever it’s legally allowed, to help reform the immigration system. We cannot put up with this constant obstruction. We need to fix our broken immigration system.”

Spending Massive Sums of Taxpayer Dollars on Private Plane Flights

In July 2014, the Washington Examiner reported that during the three-year period ending in March of that year, Schumer had spent almost a million taxpayer dollars to have a private plane fly him from Washington, D.C. to his Brooklyn, New York home on 119 separate occasions. Only two other senators spent more than Schumer on trips to their homes during that period.

Reversing His Former Position on Supreme Court Appointments in a Presidential Election Year

When some Republicans, in the wake of the February 2016 death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, suggested that they would block the confirmation of any replacement whom Barack Obama might nominate during the remaining 11 months of his presidency, Schumer condemned their “obstructionist” position: “We’re not going to go forward to leave the Supreme Court vacant [for] 300 days in a divided time,’” said the senator, adding: “When you go right off the bat and say, ‘I don’t care who he nominates, I am going to oppose him,’ that’s not going to fly.” But nine years earlier, in July 2007, Schumer himself had stated that no George W. Bush nominee to the Supreme Court should be approved during the remaining 18 months of his presidency, “except in extraordinary circumstances.” “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” said Schumer at that time. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.” During the same speech, Schumer lamented that he had not succeeded in blocking President Bush’s prior Supreme Court nominations (Roberts and Alito).

Condemning ICE Immigration Raids

During the second week of February 2017, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested more than 680 illegal-alien criminals in Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta, San Antonio, and the New York City area. Of the 41 people arrested in New York, 38 had previous criminal convictions. According to a New York Daily News report, those arrestees included: “a citizen of El Salvador with a criminal conviction for assault with a dangerous weapon in aid of racketeering and self-admitted MS-13 gang member; a citizen of Jamaica with a criminal conviction for first degree sexual assault of a victim under the age of 11; [and] a citizen of Mexico with a criminal convicted for first degree sexual assault of a victim under the age of 11.” Complaining about a lack of transparency in the recent arrests generally, Schumer said: “Targeting law-abiding innocent immigrant families whose only wrongdoing was crossing the border to give their children a better life, instead of focusing on removing those who have been convicted of violent crimes, is a waste of limited resources and undermines law enforcement in communities across the country. ICE must come clean.”

Intervention on Behalf of a Child Abuser

On March 2, 2017, the Daily Mail reported that Tanveer Hussain, a 24-year-old snowshoe racer from India whom Schumer had recently helped to gain admittance to the United States, had sexually abused a young girl during his stay in America. Said the report: “The U.S. embassy in New Delhi initially rejected Hussain’s visa application to come to the U.S. to compete in the World Snowshoe Championship, but Schumer and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand contacted the New Delhi embassy, which allowed the racer to reapply and he was granted a visa.”

Deriding “Corporate Interests” and “Vulture Capitalism”

During a July 24, 2017 speech in Berryville, Virginia, Schumer unveiled the Democratic Party’s new slogan, “A Better Deal,” in which the senator pledged: “[Democrats will] increase people’s pay … we’re gonna reduce their everyday expenses … we’re gonna provide workers the tools they need for the 21st century economy. Simply put — what do Democrats stand for? A better deal for working people, higher wages, lower costs, and the tools for a 21st century economy.” Throughout his speech, Schumer derided “corporate interests,” “the super wealthy,” “elites,” “special interests,” and “the powerful,” while he extolled the virtues of “working people.” He also described Democrats as “the party on the side of working people,” while claiming that “the Republican Party seemingly exists to work on behalf of the wealthy and the corporate interests.” In addition, Schumer said that “old-fashioned capitalism has broken down,” and that “Adam Smith has lost his way amid these big corporations.” Those remarks echoed what Schumer had recently told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos in a television interview that had aired the day before: “Old fashioned capitalism has broken down…. The old Adam Smith idea of competition, it’s gone.” Schumer had further told Stephanopoulos that “vulture capitalism” was now domiating the American economic system.

Falsely Tying Trump to Neo-Nazis, and Demanding an End to Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity

Schumer was incensed by President Donald Trump’s response to the events of August 12, 2017, when a group of white nationalists and neo-Nazis held a rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, ostensibly to protest the proposed removal of a statue of the Confederate General Robert E. Lee from a local park. Those demonstrators clashed with a leftist group of counter-demonstrators, many of whom represented the Marxist/anarchist movement known as Antifa, and one woman was killed when a young white nationalist rammed his car into a crowd of counter-protesters. Shortly after the mayhem, President Trump condemned “the egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides” in Charlottesville. In response, the left rose up like a chorus condemning the president for failing to specifically call out the instigators as “white supremacists,” and for choosing to assign blame not only to the supremacists but also to the Marxists and anarchists. Two days after that, on August 14, Trump specifically named “the KKK,” “neo-Nazis,” and “white supremacists” as objects of ridicule. But by then, it was too late to mollify Schumer and other leftists. Linking “the president’s shocking response to this national tragedy” with “the methodical and pernicious way in which his administration is … undermining the universal right of every American to vote,” Schumer said: “The Ku Klux Klan and its sympathizers at all levels of government denied black Americans the right to vote for decades. Today, voting rights are once again under assault.”

Schumer proceeded to call on Trump to close down his Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, which was investigating how to best deal with voter fraud. “[W]hat troubles so many Americans every bit as much as the president’s shocking response to this national tragedy is the methodical and pernicious way in which his administration is promoting discrimination, both subtle and not so subtle, in its policies and actions — especially when it comes to undermining the universal right of every American to vote,” Schumer said in a post on “Many of us found the Election Integrity Commission distasteful when it was first created,” he added. “The president’s recent failure to unequivocally condemn bigotry makes its rescission imperative…. Many of us found the Election Integrity Commission distasteful when it was first created. The president’s recent failure to unequivocally condemn bigotry makes its rescission imperative.”

Schumer Announces That, for Specifically Racial Reasons, He Will Not Vote for a White Trump Judicial Nominee

In February 2018, Schumer stated that he would not vote for Trump judicial nominee Marvin Quattlebaum, because of the color of Quattlebaum’s skin. Said Schumer: “The nomination of Marvin Quattlebaum speaks to the overall lack of diversity in President Trump’s selections for the federal judiciary. Quattlebaum replaces not one, but two scuttled Obama nominees who were African American. As of February 14th, 83 percent of the President Trump’s confirmed nominees were male, 92 percent were white. That represents the lowest share of non-white candidates in three decades. It’s long past time that the judiciary starts looking a lot more like the America it represents. Having a diversity of views and experiences on the federal bench is necessary for the equal administration of justice.”

Obstructing the Confirmation of Trump Administration Nominees

In March 2018, President Donald Trump’s Director of Legislative Affairs, Marc Short, denounced “the historic obstruction that we have faced by Sen. [Chuck] Schumer and Senate Democrats in confirming our nominees to enable us to fill out our White House” — a reference to the fact that the Democrats, in unprecedented fashion, had required a full 30 hours of debate over dozens of Trump administration nominees. “Sen. Schumer is essentially weaponizing a Senate procedure in demanding cloture votes on our nominees that he even eventually supports,” said Short. “Eleven of the President’s nominees have been confirmed without a single dissenting vote, yet still forced to go through 30 hours of debate to essentially slow down the Senate calendar, simply for the purpose of obstruction…. At this rate, the United States Senate would take eleven and a half years to confirm our nominees.”

Schumer Threatens Conservative Supreme Court Justices vis-a-vis Abortion Case

In early 2020, Schumer was highly outspoken regarding June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, an active Supreme Court case centered around a 2014 Louisiana law that required abortion doctors in that state to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital in case a patient were to experience any complications during or after a procedure. Supporters of the law claimed that it properly regulated — and ensured the competence of — abortion providers in a manner similar to how other medical providers were regulated by the state. Opponents, by contrast, cited Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt — a 2016 case in which the Supreme Court had invalidated a very similar law in Texas, claiming that the law would substantially reduce the number of available abortion facilities in the state and thus would place an undue burden on women seeking abortions.

But because the Whole Women’s Health ruling had been issued before President Trump’s appointments of Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, Schumer worried that the Court might now issue a contrary decision in June Medical Services. Thus, at a pro-choice rally which the Center for Reproductive Rights held in front of the Supreme Court building on March 4, 2020, Schumer accused Republican state legislatures of “waging a war on women” and placing reproductive rights “under attack in a way we haven’t seen in modern history.” Then, singling out and threatening President Trump’s two Supreme Court picks specifically, the senator said: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” In addition, Schumer stated: “We will tell President Trump and Senate Republicans who have stacked the court with right-wing ideologues that you’re gonna be gone in November, and you will never be able to do what you’re trying to do now ever, ever again!”

Shortly after Schumer had issued his threats, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts rebuked him in a written statement: “This morning, Senator Schumer spoke at a rally in front of the Supreme Court while a case was being argued inside. Senator Schumer referred to two Members of the Court by name and said he wanted to tell them that ‘You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You will not know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.’  Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.”

Blaming President Trump for Coronavirus Pandemic

In May 2020, when the U.S. was battling the coronavirus/COVID-19 pandemic that originated in a Chinese virology laboratory in late 2019, Schumer blamed President Trump for having allowed it to spread in the United States: Said Schumer at a May 5 news conference: “He [Trump] spends half his time on blaming other people or other issues. You know, he’s now blaming China. Well, guess what, Mr. President, it doesn’t — even if it came from China, and even if it came from China only, why didn’t you do something about it?”

Schumer Calls for Investigation of the Use of U.S. Military to Clear Protesters Away from Church Where Trump Posed for Photo

In the aftermath of the May 25, 2020 death of George Floyd — a black man who had died after being abused by a white police officer in Minneapolis — a number of U.S. cities were overrun by violent riots. Shortly before 7 p.m. on Monday, June 1, President Trump, holding a bible, posed for a photo in front of Washington, D.C.’s St. John’s Church, which had been damaged in a fire set during riots the night before. Schumer subsequently said he was outraged by reports that police, so as to allow the president to walk to the church, had used rubber bullets and tear gas to disperse from the area many people who were merely exercising their right to peacefully protest. Said the senator:

“Secretary [of Defense Mark] Esper, General [Mark] Milley should not allow the U.S. military to come within a country mile of these ugly stunts. The administration is using the military as a tool to intimidate American citizens, and the Department of Defense IG must immediately launch an investigation into how the U.S military was used and whether it was consistent with the laws of our nation…. There’s no one home at the White House and the lights are off. I fear for the future of our country, that in this time of immense difficulty, our president is only capable of contributing more division, more fear, more chaos.”

But Schumer’s account of the protesters and the manner in which they had been dispersed, was false. Tear gas had not been used, and many of the protesters were not peaceful. As the New York Post reports:

“The US Park Police on Tuesday said they cleared protesters from in front of the White House on Monday because they were attacked while attempting to install a new fence…. Park Police acting Chief Gregory Monahan … specifically denied a widespread claim that Park Police or another agency, such as Secret Service or the National Guard, deployed tear gas against demonstrators protesting the killing of George Floyd by Minnesota police, as was widely reported and alleged, including by Trump’s presumed Democratic opponent Joe Biden.

“Officers did however use smoke canisters and pepper balls, which induce a stinging effect similar to pepper spray, he said. Moments later on 16th St directly north of the White House, there were loud bangs that appeared to be from police flash-bang grenades….

“The Park Police chief, whose beleaguered force was pelted with bricks and water bottles throughout Saturday and Sunday night, said that on Monday, officers advanced around 6:33 pm and ‘violent protestors on H Street NW began throwing projectiles including bricks, frozen water bottles and caustic liquids.’

“’The protestors also climbed onto a historic building at the north end of Lafayette Park that was destroyed by arson days prior,’ Monahan said.’“Intelligence had revealed calls for violence against the police, and officers found caches of glass bottles, baseball bats and metal poles hidden along the street. To curtail the violence that was underway, the USPP, following established policy, issued three warnings over a loudspeaker to alert demonstrators on H Street to evacuate the area. Horse mounted patrol, Civil Disturbance Units and additional personnel were used to clear the area.’

“Monahan continued, ‘As many of the protestors became more combative, continued to throw projectiles, and attempted to grab officers’ weapons, officers then employed the use of smoke canisters and pepper balls. No tear gas was used by USPP officers or other assisting law enforcement partners to close the area at Lafayette Park. Subsequently, the fence was installed.’”

“Everything Is on the Table,” Including Statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico

In a September 30, 2020 interview with MSNBC’s Joy Reid, Schumer stated that “everything is on the table” if Democrats were to win a majority in the U.S. Senate, including making Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C., states. “I’m not busting my chops to become majority leader to do very little or nothing,” he said. “We are going to get a whole lot done. And as I’ve said, everything, everything is on the table.” “I would — believe me, on D.C. and Puerto Rico, particularly if Puerto Rico votes for it, D.C. already has voted for it and wants it. I’d love to make them states,” Schumer elaborated. He also said that Senate Democrats were “using all the tactics we can” to slow down or block the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee.

Schumer Vows to “Change the World” and “Change America”

On the afternoon of November 7, 2020 — shortly after America’s largest media networks had announced that Joe Biden had won the Electoral College vote in the disputed 2020 presidential election — Schumer, raising a clenched left fist for emphasis, told a jubilant crowd of supporters in Brooklyn: “Now we take Georgia, and then we change the world! Now we take Georgia, and then we change America!” (This was a reference to the two upcoming Senate runoff elections slated for January 5, 2021 in Georgia; if the Democrats could win both, they would gain control of the U.S. Senate.)

Accusing Republicans of Attempted “Coup”

On January 4, 2021, Schumer went to the Senate floor and claimed that Republicans’ objection to the certification of the 2020 presidential election amounted to an attempted “coup” and an “insurrection”:

“It’s a very sad comment on our times that merely accepting the results of an election is considered an act of political courage. Sadder and more dangerous still is the fact an element of the Republican Party believes their political viability hinges on the endorsement of an attempted coup. That anyone, much less an elected official would be willing to tarnish our democracy to varnish to their personal political fortunes. This insurrection was fortunately discouraged by the leadership [Senator Mitch McConnell] of the majority party. But it was not quelled. It is a very sad commentary on our times that merely accepting the results of an election is considered an act of political courage.”

In reference to Republican objectors like Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley, Schumer said: “They will embarrass themselves. They will embarrass their party. And worst of all, they will embarrass their country.”

“Donald Trump Should Not Hold Office One Day Longer”

In a January 12, 2021 press conference, Schumer insisted that “Donald Trump should not hold office one day longer,” blaming the President’s rhetoric for a January 6 incident where several hundred people claiming to be Trump supporters had temporarily occupied the Capitol building in Washington to protest what they viewed as a stolen presidential election. “[Trump] blamed the violence that he helped cause on others,” Schumer claimed. “He blamed the divisiveness that he regularly causes on others.” Asserting that Trump’s choice to “blame others for what he caused is a pathological technique used by the worst of dictators,” Schumer continued: “Trump causes the anger, he causes the divisiveness, he foments the violence, and blames others for it. That is despicable.” “As I’ve said,” the senator declared, “if he won’t resign and Vice President Pence and the cabinet won’t invoke the 25th Amendment, he will be impeached by the House, and as the law requires, tried by the Senate.”

Schumer Calls for Packing of District and Circuit Courts Nationwide

During a January 25, 2021 interview on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show, Schumer said that Democrats could make up for the large number of judges that had been confirmed by the Senate Republican majority during the Trump Administration, by adding seats at the district and circuit court levels. Maddow asked: “For decades, there will be — essentially, the judiciary will be stacked with conservatives. How do you try to make up some of that ground?” Schumer initially responded by noting that Democrats could fill judicial vacancies with 51 votes — 50 Democrat senators plus the tie-breaking vote by Vice President Kamala Harris — and then added: “Second, traditionally, we have increased the number in the lower and circuit courts. I have in the city of Buffalo a huge — they don’t have enough judges. There’s this long line before you can get to court. Because they don’t have enough. So, we could expand those, relative –”

We Will Get “Big, Bold Change” in America, No Matter What

In a January 30, 2021 interview with Al Sharpton on MSNBC’s Politics Nation, Senate Majority Leader Schumer re-emphasized his commitment to enacting transformational change to the United States:

“Well, Rev., we have one goal: big, bold change in America. We would like the Republicans to join us in some of those things at least, and maybe they will. But we are going to get that change no matter what. We cannot — there is such a demand, three huge issues we have to do: climate, huge issue facing the country, racial and economic inequality, which has gotten worse, not better, which demands change and justice in a big, bold way, and improving our democracy. Making D.C. a state, automatic voter registration, getting rid of Citizens United, all the things embodied in H.R. 1, which the House passed and McConnell would block up, but we’re going to fight to pass it in the Senate. That’s why we’ve made it S 1. So, climate, racial inequality, economic inequality, and democracy, improving our democracy, letting people vote much more easily, dealing with D.C. and Puerto Rican statehood, dealing with bad money that flows in. The John Lewis Act, undoing the horrible decisions the court made, which defanged the Voting Rights Act, and that’s why Republicans have gotten away with taking people’s right away to vote for the last four years.”

Sharpton then asked, “What about [ending] the [Senate] filibuster?” Schumer replied, “Well, as I’ve said, we will find a way to do big, bold change. And our caucus will sit down and figure it out, but failure is not an option. We must create change.”

Schumer Discusses the Prospect of Ending or Circumventing the Senate Filibuster

At a March 16, 2021 press conference, Schumer spoke in part about the prospect of Democrats either dispensing with the Senate filibuster rule, or circumventing it by means of the budget reconciliation process (by which bills can pass by a simple majority and do not require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster). Among his remarks were the following: “[W]e Democrats, all of us believe we need big, bold change. As I’ve said before, we hope our Republican colleagues will work with us to produce that change. We will try to get them to work with us. But if not, we will put our heads together and figure out how to go. And everything is on the table…. [W]e’re going to try to work with Republicans wherever we can…. But we must get bold change. And if our Republican friends block it, we’re going to put our heads together and figure out the best way to go. Everything’s on the table. It’s plain and simple.”

Schumer Demonizes Trump Supporters Who Voted for a “Despicable,” “Racist,” and “Vile” Man

At a July 2021 event with Roosevelt Island and Upper East Side community leaders in New York, Schumer said: “How could 74 million people vote for such a despicable human being as Donald Trump? I don’t care if you’re a liberal or a conservative, Democrat or Republican, he is a vile man. He is dishonest, divisive. That’s what he loves to do. Just divide and have people fighting with each other. He’s a racist. And he always appeals to the dark side of human nature, which he’s very good at, unfortunately. How did they vote for him?”

Schumer Blames Climate Change for Hurricane Ida

On September 2, 2021, Schumer blamed climate change for Hurricane Ida, which in recent days had cut a path of devastation from New Orleans to New York. “Woe is us if we don’t recognize these changes are due to climate change. Woe is us if we don’t do something about it quickly,” the senator said at a press conference where he claimed that climate-change provisions included in the Democrats’ so-called “infrastructure” legislation could “stop the global warming or at least reduce its awful effects on this country.” “When you get two record rainfalls in a week, it’s not just coincidence,” he elaborated. “Global warming is upon us and it’s going to get worse and worse and worse unless we do something about it, and that’s why it’s so important to pass… the infrastructure bill and the budget reconciliation bill.”

Schumer Says Republicans Should “Get Out of the Way”

On October 4, 2021, President Biden – citing the October 18 deadline by which time the Democrat-controlled Congress sought to raise the federal debt limit above the existing $28.4 trillion level in order to allow for more government borrowing – accused Senate Republicans of harming the nation by using the filibuster to block the debt limit’s suspension. “They need to stop playing Russian roulette with the U.S. economy,” Biden said at the White House. “Republicans just have to let us do our job. Just get out of the way. If you don’t want to help save the country, get out of the way so you don’t destroy it.” On October 5, Biden said there was a “real possibility” that Democrats might use their razor-thin majority to suspend the Senate’s filibuster rule so they could forcibly raise the debt ceiling with no Republican support.

In a similar vein, Senator Schumer said on October 4: “We only ask that they get out of the way, let Democrats pass it on our own …”

Schumer Parties Indoors Without a Mask

On November 11, 2021, Schumer was maskless when he made a surprise appearance at an indoor reelection fundraiser for a fellow Democrat in New York. Virtually all of the dozens of others in attendance were likewise maskless, even though New York State continued to demand that children as young as age two be required to wear masks in day-care settings — ostensibly to protect them against contracting coronavirus. At the event, Schumer posed for photos with a number of the maskless people.

Schumer’s Financial Ties to Vladimir Putin & Russia

During Donald Trump’s presidency, Schumer had repeatedly accused Trump of maintaining secret, illicit ties to Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin. For example, in a January 2018 press conference, Schumer had said that delaying the imposition of U.S. sanctions against Russia “is an extreme dereliction of duty by President Trump, who seems more intent of undermining the rule of law of this country than standing up to Putin.” “Instead of spending all of his time attempting to undermine the credibility of the FBI and waging an all-out assault on American institutions,” added Schumer, “the president should train his fire on the foreign adversary, Russia, that attacked us.”

And in July 2018, Schumer had posted tweets like the following:

  • For the president of the United States to side with President Putin against American law enforcement, American defense officials, and American intelligence agencies is thoughtless, dangerous, and weak. The president is putting himself over our country.
  • A single, ominous question now hangs over the White House: what could possibly cause @realDonaldTrump to put the interests of Russia over those of the United States[?]
  • Millions of Americans will continue to wonder if the only possible explanation for this dangerous behavior is the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump.

But in fact, it was Schumer himself who was cultivating financial ties to Putin and Russia, as investigative journalist Daniel Greenfield wrote in Front Page Magazine on December 13, 2021:

“Why is Schumer putting Russia’s interests ahead of those of the United States by blocking Nord Stream 2 sanctions on Putin’s pet pipeline into Europe?

“Schumer, along with a number of other top Democrats, is a beneficiary of campaign contributions from top Democrat fundraiser Vincent Roberti whose lobbying firm was paid over $8.5 million by Nord Stream 2 which is owned by Putin’s state-run Gazprom energy monopoly.

“Roberti, a former Dem politician, has maxed out his donations to Schumer and to Rep. Eric Swalwell, who may have been cheating on Fang Fang with Vladimir, and threw in a generous $171,000 to the DCCC, as part of the over $545,000 donated to the Democrat political machine. The top Dem bundler is reportedly lobbying on ‘issues related to the U.S. position toward the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, including potential financial sanctions affecting the project.’

“Suddenly, Schumer, who was accusing the GOP and Trump of being in bed with Putin, and demanding that they vote on sanctions, was refusing to hold a floor vote on Russia sanctions.”

Schumer Threatens to Dispose of Senate Filibuster in Order to Pass Radical Voting Legislation

On January 3, 2022, Schumer cited the infamous January 6, 2021 protest at the U.S. Capitol as a justification for Democrats to dispense with the Senate filibuster rule, a move that would empower them to forcibly advance “systemic reforms” in the form of far-left voting bills designed to “repair our democracy” without a single Republican vote in agreement. Those bills were “The Freedom to Vote Act” and the “John Lewis Voting Rights Act.” “Let me be clear: January 6th was a symptom of a broader illness, an effort to delegitimize our election process, and the Senate must advance systemic reforms to repair our democracy or else the events of that day will not be an aberration—they will be the new norm,” said Schumer. Added the senator: “Much like the violent insurrectionists who stormed the US Capitol nearly one year ago, Republican officials in states across the country have seized on the former president’s Big Lie about widespread voter fraud to enact anti-democratic legislation and seize control of typically non-partisan election administrative functions. We must ask ourselves: if the right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, then how can we in good conscience allow for a situation in which the Republican Party can debate and pass voter suppression laws at the State level with only a simple majority vote, but not allow the United States Senate to do the same? We hope our Republican colleagues an change course and work with us. But if they do not, the Senate will debate and consider changes to Senate rules on or before January 17, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, to protect the foundation of our democracy: free and fair elections.”

In a January 3, 2022 interview with MSNBC’s Joy Reid, Schumer said:

“What happened on January 6 is a direct continuation of the big lie, which Donald Trump perpetrated created January 6 and a continuation of what is happening around the country. Non-partisan election officials, just plain people doing their job to count votes, are being threatened in state after state with violence. A few of them have had to have police protection. So the idea that January 6 is totally a one-off is wrong. It’s being perpetrated by this attempt to take away voting rights of so many people, people of color, young people, people living in urban areas, handicapped people, elderly people. We have to fight against this. The new Republican Party under the leadership of Donald Trump is viciously against voting rights and trying to take those away. So if we can’t get Republicans, if we can’t get Republicans to join us, we’re exploring a variety of different rules changes. We are working and trying to get all 50 Democrats, including Senators Manchin and [Kyrsten] Sinema to go along because if we don’t change rules, the Republicans will block this and our democracy could be at risk and wither in real ways.”

This was a stark contrast to what Schumer had said about the prospect of ending the filibuster in 2005, when Republicans held a solid majority in the Senate. Said Schumer at that time:

“The ideologues in the Senate want to turn what the Founding Fathers called ‘the cooling saucer of democracy’ into the rubber stamp of dictatorship. We will not let them. They want – because they can’t get their way on every judge – to change the rules in midstream, to wash away 200 years of history. They want to make this country into a banana republic, where if you don’t get your way, you change the rules…. It would be a doomsday for democracy if we do.”

Schumer had similarly spoken out against ending the filibuster in April 2017, when he suggested, on NBC’s Meet the Press, that President Donald Trump should replace his Supreme Court nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, with “a mainstream nominee” who would be able to garner 60 votes in the Senate — rather than allowing Republicans, who held a majority in the Senate, to do away with the filibuster and confirm Gorsuch with a simple majority vote:

“Let me make a proposal here to maybe break this problem that we have, okay? It looks like Gorsuch will not reach the 60-vote margin. So instead of changing the rules, which is up to Mitch McConnell and the Republican majority, why doesn’t President Trump, Democrats, and Republicans in the Senate, sit down, and try to come up with a mainstream nominee? Look, when a nominee doesn’t get 60 votes, you shouldn’t change the rules, you should change the nominee.”

Outraged by Supreme Court Decision to Overturn Roe v. Wade

On May 2, 2022, Politico reported that an unidentified individual had leaked an initial draft majority opinion, written by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, in which the Court had decided to strike down the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. “No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending,” said Politico. Whereas Roe had guaranteed federal constitutional protections for abortion rights, the new ruling would return responsibility for those rights to each individual state. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito wrote in his opinion, adding: “We hold that Roe and Casey [a 1992 decision that largely reaffirmed the rights set forth in Roe] must be overruled. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.” In response to the Court’s decision, an outraged Schumer joined with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in issuing the following statement:

“If the report [in the leak] is accurate, the Supreme Court is poised to inflict the greatest restriction of rights in the past fifty years – not just on women but on all Americans.

“The Republican-appointed Justices’ reported votes to overturn Roe v. Wade would go down as an abomination, one of the worst and most damaging decisions in modern history.

“Several of these conservative Justices, who are in no way accountable to the American people, have lied to the U.S. Senate, ripped up the Constitution and defiled both precedent and the Supreme Court’s reputation – all at the expense of tens of millions of women who could soon be stripped of their bodily autonomy and the constitutional rights they’ve relied on for half a century.

“The party of Lincoln and Eisenhower has now completely devolved into the party of Trump.  Every Republican Senator who supported Senator McConnell and voted for Trump Justices pretending that this day would never come will now have to explain themselves to the American people.”

The Women’s Health Protection Act Is Defeated in the Senate

On May 11, 2022, Senate Majority Leader Schumer placed the Women’s Health Protection Act, which was was intended to legally enshrine the right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand at every stage of pregnancy from the moment of conception through the moment of delivery, up for a vote in the Senate, in order to get every senator on record vis-a-vis the issue of abortion rights. With 49 votes in support and 51 against, the bill fell 11 votes short of the 60 votes needed in order to be debated by the full 100-member Senate. One Democrat, Senator Joe Manchinll, joined all 50 Republicans in voting to block the bill.

The Reuters news agency reported: “Before the vote, more than two dozen House Democrats, mainly women, marched from the House of Representatives to the Senate chanting ‘My body, my decision.’ They then entered the Senate chamber and sat quietly along a back wall while senators debated abortion rights. Last September, the House voted 218-211 to pass an abortion rights bill nearly identical to the Senate bill.”

Schumer & Fellow Democrats Rage at Saudi Oil Cut & Vow to Block Weapons Sales

When Saudi Arabia announced in early October 2022 that it had decided — against the Biden administration’s pleas — to cut its oil production by 2 million barrels per day, Schumer and other leading Democrats: (a) vowed to block all future U.S. weapons sales to the Saudis, and (b) exhorted the administration to “immediately freeze all aspects” of American cooperation with the the Saudis. “What Saudi Arabia did to help Putin continue to wage his despicable, vicious war against Ukraine will long be remembered by Americans,” said Schumer. “We are looking at all the legislative tools to best deal with this appalling and deeply cynical action, including the NOPEC bill.” NOPEC, if passed, would enable the Department of Justice to sue the OPEC+ countries and their state-owned oil companies under U.S. antitrust laws.

Schumer Falsely Attributes Mass Shooting of Asians to Anti-Asian Hate

At 10:22 p.m. on January 21, 2023 in Monterey Park, California, a gunman walked into a ballroom dance studio where Chinese Lunar New Year celebrations were in progress, and he killed 10 people while injuring 10 others; all 20 of the victims were Asian. Even before police had released any information about the suspect’s identity, Schumer was quick to attribute the atrocity to an alleged scourge of white supremacy and anti-Asian hate. Tweeted the senator: “I’m heartbroken by the news of the shooting in Monterey Park amid Lunar New Year celebrations[.] I’m praying for the victims, their families, the 1st responders[.] We must stand up to bigotry and hate wherever they rear their ugly heads, and we must keep working to stop gun violence[.]”

The following day, it was reported that the perpetrator was Huu Can Tran, a 72-year-old Asian man whose motive was related to a domestic dispute.

Schumer’s Reponse to Hamas Terror Attack against Israel

At daybreak on Saturday, October 7, 2023 — which was the major Jewish holiday of Simchat Torah — the Islamic terror group Hamas carried out a massive, multi-front, surprise attack against Israel, firing thousands of rockets from Gaza into the Jewish state, while dozens of Hamas fighters infiltrated the Israeli border in a number of locations by air, land and sea. The attack had been planned in conjunction with officers from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, along with agents of three other Iran-sponsored terrorist groups. “In an assault of startling breadth,” reported CBS News, “Hamas gunmen rolled into as many as 22 locations outside the Gaza Strip, including towns and other communities as far as 15 miles from the Gaza border. In some places they gunned down civilians and soldiers as Israel’s military scrambled to muster a response.” By Sunday, October 8, at least 600 Israelis had been killed and 1,800 wounded, making it the deadliest day Israel had seen in decades. Moreover, Hamas took hundreds of Israelis hostage, including dozens who were American citizens, and moved them to the Gaza Strip. The terrorists also paraded Israelis’ mutilated bodies in Gaza, to cheering crowds of Palestinians. By October 19, the official casualty toll in Israel had reached more than 1,400 dead (including at least 32 American) and 4,500 injured.

After Israel initiated a powerful military response against Hamas forces in Gaza, Schumer denounced American protesters who were advocating that Israel agree to an immediate “ceasefire.” Instead, the senator pledged to do everything in his power to ensure that the Jewish state had “everything they need” in order to “totally eliminate” Hamas from the Gaza Strip. “If the threat of Hamas is not eliminated, they will do it again,” Schumer said.

Denouncing Netanyahu & Calling for Israel to Hold New Elections

But as the military conflict between Israel and Hamas continued during the ensuing weeks and months, Schumer’s support for Israel’s efforts diminished greatly. In a lengthy floor speech that he delivered in the U.S. Senate on March 14, 2024, Schumer denounced Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an “obstacle to peace,” and he exhorted the Jewish state to hold a new election to replace its Netanyahu-led government. Indeed the speech, which Schumer delivered at a point in time when the Israeli military was drawing ever closer to completely eradicating Hamas, was replete with criticisms and denunciations of the Jewish state and its leaders. Below are a number of key excerpts from the speech:

(1) “After five months of suffering on both sides of this conflict, our thinking must turn — urgently — to how we can achieve lasting peace, and ensure prosperity and security for both the Jewish people and the Palestinian people in the Middle East. I believe that to achieve that lasting peace — which we so long for — Israel must make some significant course corrections, which I will outline in this speech.”

(2) “I am working in every way I can to support the Biden Administration as negotiations continue to free every last one of the hostages. I urge every actor at the table — the Israelis, the Biden Administration, the Qataris, the Egyptians, and anybody else at the table — to continue doing everything possible to get to a deal. Hamas has been given a deal already. They should say yes. There is no time to waste.”

(3) “My heart also breaks at the loss of so many civilian lives in Gaza. I am anguished that the Israeli war campaign has killed so many innocent Palestinians. I know that my fellow Jewish Americans feel this same anguish when they see the images of dead and starving children and destroyed homes.

“Gaza is experiencing a humanitarian catastrophe — entire families wiped out, whole neighborhoods reduced to rubble, mass displacement, children suffering.

“We should not let the complexities of this conflict stop us from stating the plain truth: Palestinian civilians do not deserve to suffer for the sins of Hamas, and Israel has a moral obligation to do better. The United States has an obligation to do better. I believe the United States must provide robust humanitarian aid to Gaza, and pressure the Israelis to let more of it get through to the people who need it.

“Jewish people throughout the centuries have empathized with those who are suffering and who are oppressed because we have known so much of that ourselves. As the Torah teaches us, every human life is precious, and every single innocent life lost, whether Israeli or Palestinian, is a tragedy that as Scripture says, “destroys an entire world.”

“What horrifies so many Jews especially is our sense that Israel is falling short of upholding these distinctly Jewish values that we hold so dear. We must be better than our enemies, lest we become them.

“Israel has a fundamental right to defend itself, but as I have said from the beginning of this war — how it exercises that right matters. Israel must prioritize the protection of civilian casualties when identifying military targets. I have repeatedly called upon the Israeli government to do so.”

(4) “Given that Hamas launched their attack on October 7 to provoke Israel, given that Hamas sought the ensuing civilian toll in Gaza, given that Hamas wanted both Israelis and Arabs to be at each other’s throats… tensions on both sides have dramatically intensified. And now, as a result of these inflamed tensions in both the Israeli and Palestinian communities, people on all sides of this war are turning away from a two-state solution — including Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who in recent weeks has said out loud repeatedly what many have long suspected by outright rejecting the idea of Palestinian statehood and sovereignty.

“As the highest-ranking Jewish elected official in our government, and a staunch defender of Israel, I rise today to say unequivocally: This is a grave mistake. For Israel. For Palestinians. For the region and the world.

“The only real and sustainable solution to this decades-old conflict is a negotiated two-state solution — a demilitarized Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel in equal measures of peace, security, prosperity, dignity and mutual recognition.

“Both Jews and Palestinians have long historic claims to this land. Contrary to the unfounded, absurd and offensive claims by some that the Jewish people are “colonizers” in their ancestral homeland, Jewish people have lived in the Holy Land continuously for more than three millennia. For centuries, Jews have made aliyah and gone to the land of Israel to live and settle. For centuries, at Passover, Jews at every corner of the globe have prayed, “Next year in Jerusalem.”

(5) “A Jewish homeland in Israel is no twentieth-century contrivance. Israel is our historic home. A home for people oppressed for centuries.

“The Palestinians, too, have lived on the land for generations, and in past centuries, they have formed their own distinct culture, identity, cuisine and literature. The idea espoused by some that ‘There is no such thing as Palestinians’ today is inaccurate, offensive and unhelpful.

“The only just solution to this predicament is one in which each people can flourish in their own state side-by-side.

“But for a two-state solution to work over the long term, it has to include real and meaningful compromises by both sides.

“For example, too many Israelis who say they want a two-state solution don’t acknowledge how the amount and extent of expanding settlements render that a virtual impossibility.

“And too many Palestinians who say they want a two-state solution don’t acknowledge how their insistence on an unequivocal ‘right of return’ is a fatal impediment to progress.

“Both ways of thinking are impeding the peace process.”

(6) “They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. If Israel were to not only maintain the status quo, but go beyond that and tighten its control over Gaza and the West Bank, as some in the current Netanyahu administration have suggested — in effect creating a de facto single state — then what reasonable expectation can we have that Hamas and their allies will lay down their arms? It would mean constant war.

“On top of that, Israel moving closer to a single state entirely under its control would further rupture its relationship with the rest of the world, including the United States. Support for Israel has declined worldwide in the last few months, and this trend will only get worse if the Israeli government continues to follow its current path.”

(7) “We will never forget what happened on October 7. But even while we carry the anguish in our hearts, we have to think ahead to the future, the medium and long term, and how we can ensure that something like October 7 never happens again. We cannot let anger or trauma determine our actions and cloud our judgment.

“A two-state solution may feel daunting, especially now, but I believe it is the only realistic and sustainable solution — on the basis of security, on the basis of prosperity, on the basis of fundamental human rights and dignity. But in order to achieve a two-state solution, the reality is that things must change.

“Right now, there are four major obstacles standing in the way of two states, and until they are removed from the equation, there will never be peace in Israel and Gaza and the West Bank.”

(8) “The first major obstacle to peace is Hamas, and the Palestinians who support and tolerate their evil ways…. Jewish Americans and Israelis alike have been appalled and hurt at efforts to rebrand Hamas, which is designated by the United States as a terrorist organization, as noble resistance or freedom fighters. Attempts to excuse their horrific actions against both Israelis and Palestinians are morally repugnant.

“A permanent ceasefire, effective immediately, would only allow Hamas to regroup and launch further attacks on Israeli civilians. There can never be a two-state solution if Hamas has any significant power.

“However, a temporary ceasefire, such as President Biden has proposed, which would allow for the return of hostages and humanitarian relief for suffering Palestinians, is quite different, and is something I support. But any proposal that leaves Hamas with meaningful power is unacceptable to me and most all Israelis.

“It should go without saying that Hamas cannot have any role in a future Gaza if we are to achieve peace. The same goes for the minority of Palestinians who support Hamas and those who demonstrate other forms of extremism, even if they’re not card-carrying members.”

(9) “The second major obstacle to peace is radical right-wing Israelis in government and society. The worst examples of this radicalism are Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Ministry of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir.

“Minister Smotrich has in the past openly called for the subjugation or forced displacement of all Palestinians in the West Bank. In the current crisis, he has used inflammatory rhetoric and called for punitive restrictions on Palestinian farmers in the West Bank during the olive harvest. He has prevented the transfer of funds to the Palestinian Authority, and he has opposed the provision of any humanitarian assistance to Gaza, going so far as to stop agreed-upon shipments of flour.

“Minister Ben Gvir is no better. When he was a young man, he was barred from Israeli military service for his extremist views. Last year, in a move only intended to antagonize the Muslim population, he visited the Temple Mount with his supporters as a brazen show of force towards Palestinians. And during this current conflict, he has facilitated the mass distribution of guns to far-right settlers, exacerbating instability and fueling violence.

“There is a nastiness to what Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir believe and how they use their positions of authority and influence; an eagerness to inflame and provoke that is profoundly irresponsible and self-destructive.

“In my conversations with Israeli leaders, I have urged them to do more to clamp down on the unacceptable vigilante settler violence in the West Bank, and I have supported the Biden administration’s efforts to impose consequences for extremist settler violence. But the unfortunate reality is that this violence is openly supported by Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir, and as long as they hold their positions of power, no true progress will be made.

“While not equivalent, extremist Palestinians and extremist Israelis seek the same goal: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, they aim to push the other from the land.

“Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir may not say they want to kill all Palestinians outright, but they are clear in their desire to displace them from their homes and replace them with Israeli settlers.

“This is also abhorrent. As long as these two hold their positions of power, peace will be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve.”

(10) The third major obstacle to peace is the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, who is beholden to his narrow political interests, to the detriment of both the West Bank and Gaza.”

(11) “The fourth major obstacle to peace is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has all too frequently bowed to the demands of extremists like Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir, and the settlers in the West Bank.

“I have known Prime Minister Netanyahu for a long time. While we have vehemently disagreed on many occasions, I will always respect his extraordinary bravery for Israel on the battlefield as a younger man. I believe in his heart his highest priority is the security of Israel.

“However, I also believe Prime Minister Netanyahu has lost his way by allowing his political survival to take precedence over the best interests of Israel. He has put himself in coalition with far-right extremists like Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir, and as a result, he has been too willing to tolerate the civilian toll in Gaza, which is pushing support for Israel worldwide to historic lows. Israel cannot survive if it becomes a pariah.

“Prime Minister Netanyahu has also weakened Israel’s political and moral fabric through his attempts to co-opt the judiciary. And he has shown zero interest in doing the courageous and visionary work required to pave the way for peace, even before this present conflict.

“As a lifelong supporter of Israel, it has become clear to me:

“The Netanyahu coalition no longer fits the needs of Israel after October 7. The world has changed — radically — since then, and the Israeli people are being stifled right now by a governing vision that is stuck in the past.

“Nobody expects Prime Minister Netanyahu to do the things that must be done to break the cycle of violence, preserve Israel’s credibility on the world stage, and work towards a two-state solution.

“If he were to disavow Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir, and kick them out of his governing coalition, that would be a real meaningful step forward. But regrettably, there is no reason to believe Prime Minister Netanyahu would do that. He won’t disavow Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir and their calls for Israelis to drive Palestinians out of Gaza and the West Bank. He won’t commit to a military operation in Rafah that prioritizes protecting civilian life. He won’t engage responsibly in discussions about a “day-after” plan for Gaza, and a longer-term pathway to peace.”

(12) “Once Hamas is deprived of power, the Palestinians will be much freer to choose a government they want and deserve. With the prospect of a real two-state solution on the table, and for the first time, genuine statehood for the Palestinian people, I believe they will be far more likely to support more mainstream leaders committed to peace.

“I think the same is true of the Israeli people. Call me an optimist, but I believe that if the Israeli public is presented with a path to a two-state solution that offers a chance at lasting peace and coexistence, then most mainstream Israelis will moderate their views and support it. Part of that moderation must include rejecting right-wing zealots like Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir, and the extremist Israeli settlers in the West Bank. These people do not represent a majority of the Israeli public, yet under Prime Minister Netanyahu’s watch, they have had far too much influence.

“All sides must reject ‘From the river to the sea’ thinking — and I believe they will if the prospects for peace and a two-state solution are real.”

(13) “For our part, the United States — the world’s superpower — must work together with our allies to bring our immense diplomatic and financial power to bear on this situation. We can be a partner to a grand bargain in the Middle East by deepening our relationship with the Saudis and other Arab nations to induce them to make a deal — but only if they actively guide Palestinians toward a more peaceful future.

“On the Israeli side, the US government should demand that Israel conduct itself with a future two-state solution in mind. We should not be forced into a position of unequivocally supporting the actions of an Israeli government that includes bigots who reject the idea of a Palestinian state.”

(14) “Five months into this conflict, it is clear that Israelis need to take stock of the situation and ask: must we change course? At this critical juncture, I believe a new election is the only way to allow for a healthy and open decision-making process about the future of Israel, at a time when so many Israelis have lost their confidence in the vision and direction of their government.

“I also believe a majority of the Israeli public will recognize the need for change, and I believe that holding a new election once the war starts to wind down would give Israelis an opportunity to express their vision for the post-war future.

“Of course, the United States cannot dictate the outcome of an election, nor should we try. That is for the Israeli public to decide — a public that I believe understands better than anybody that Israel cannot hope to succeed as a pariah opposed by the rest of the world.

“As a democracy, Israel has the right to choose its own leaders, and we should let the chips fall where they may. But the important thing is that Israelis are given a choice. There needs to be a fresh debate about the future of Israel after October 7.

“In my opinion, that is best accomplished by holding an election.

“If Prime Minister Netanyahu’s current coalition remains in power after the war begins to wind down, and continues to pursue dangerous and inflammatory policies that test existing US standards for assistance, then the United States will have no choice but to play a more active role in shaping Israeli policy by using our leverage to change the present course.

“The United States’ bond with Israel is unbreakable, but if extremists continue to unduly influence Israeli policy, then the Administration should use the tools at its disposal to make sure our support for Israel is aligned with our broader goal of achieving long-term peace and stability in the region.”

Voting Record

For an overview of Charles Schumer’s voting record on key issues during his years as a legislator in the U.S. House and Senate, click here.

For additional information on Charles Schumer, click here.

Further Reading: “Charles Schumer” (,

Additional Resources:

Chuck Schumer’s Three Decades of Immigration Lies
By Daniel Horowitz
January 22, 2018

© Copyright 2024,