Schumer Threatens USSC Justices Gorsuch & Kavanaugh: 'You Will Pay Price - Won't Know What Hit You!

[Ame®icano]

"Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) threatened two conservative Supreme Court justices as he spoke at a pro-choice rally in front of the Supreme Court Wednesday as the Court heard a Louisiana case on restricting abortion, June Medical Services v. Russo, described by ScotusBlog, “Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s decision upholding Louisiana’s law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital conflicts with the Supreme Court’s binding precedent in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.”

Schumer turned and pointed at the Supreme Court building behind him and menacingly screamed as he shook his fist:

“I want to tell you Gorsuch! And 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…”

Seeing as how Senate Minority Leader Schumer can not do anything to Judicial Branch USSC Justices via Congress, this sure sounds like a physical threat to me...

( I see Democrats have learned nothing since their violent rhetoric triggered a dangerous liberal extremist snowflake into gunning down R-Scalise)



Schumer Threatens Supreme Court Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, "You Will Pay the Price! You Won't Know What Hit You!" (Video)"

Schummer should be jailed for this.

 

[iceberg]

Zippy, he apologized for the ambiguous wording he used.

Ambiguous wording?!?!?
The sorry assed bloated sack of shit turned around and shook his fist at the USSC...
There was absolutely NOTHING "Ambiguous" about what he said nor did.
Nor does anything in his statement afterwards even come close to an apology to those he threatened by name. He "regrets" his choice of wording?!?!?! I bet he does, as it leaves him open to censure, which should be the very least of what should happen.
You trying to spin this is laughable....not in a humorous way either.

Damn right ambiguous. Using ambiguous terms like that is precisely what the propagandists need to twist your words and generate a few hours of Fauxrage for the machine. He did a disservice to all Democrats by giving cheap propagandists like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity openings like that. He should have looked before he leaped.

oh you're just dickbent no one is falling for your bullshit wordsmithing.

 

[Zorro!]

Last I heard it was against the law to try to influence the decisions of a judge with physical threats or political extortion. It's clear that the threats weren't just some random generic political rhetoric because Schumer named the Supreme Court Justices. Even in the most liberal assessment of Schumer's conduct would indicate that he tried to extort a favorable decision from the highest court by using physical or political threats.

Schumer is an unindicted felon. He was clearly trying to bully Supreme Court Justices by name in order obtain the judicial decision he wanted.

Citing Rising Political Violence, Hawley Moves to Censure Schumer Over Threats to Gorsuch, Kavanaugh.

Time for Schumer to resign.

On Thursday, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced a resolution to censure Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) over his threat against Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. Fourteen other senators cosponsored his resolution, which warns about the uptick in political violence and condemns Schumer "in the strongest possible terms."

On Wednesday, Schumer threatened Gorsuch and Kavanaugh by name in an attempt to bully them into a pro-abortion ruling in a case currently before the Supreme Court.

"I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh: You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price," Schumer told a crowd of abortion activists in front of the Supreme Court. "You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."​

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts immediately made a rare public statement condemning Contemptible Schumer's remarks.

"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," he wrote. "All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter."​

"[T]he statements of Senator Schumer could be read to suggest a threat or call for physical violence against 2 Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States," the resolution states. "[A]ccording to the Institute for Economics and Peace, political violence in the United States has increased over the last decade."

Hawley's resolution noted that the U.S. Marshals Service investigated "4,542 threats and inappropriate communications against the judiciary" in 2018 alone and that four federal judges have been targeted and murdered since 1979.

"Senator Schumer has acknowledged that threatening statements can increase the dangers of violence against government officials when he stated on June 15, 2017, following the attempted murder of several elected Members of Congress, 'We would all be wise to reflect on the importance of civility in our [N]ation’s politics' and that 'the level of nastiness, vitriol, and hate that has seeped into our politics must be excised.'"​

Therefore, the Senate

"(1) censures and condemns in the strongest possible terms the Senator from New York, Mr. Schumer, for his threatening statements against Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch and Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh; and
(2) calls on all members of the Senate to respect the independence of the Federal judiciary."​

In addition to Hawley, Sens. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), David Perdue (R-Ga.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), and Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) are all original cosponsors of the resolution.

In this time of political violence, where representatives have been shot at on the baseball field, it is important for both Republicans and Democrats to condemn threats like this.

Good points here. Suppose this was a lawyer for an accused mobster, someone like Bruce Cutler, calling out the jurists by name outside the courtroom making the same kind of threats?

It's a felony. Should an unindicted felon be the minority leader of the US Senate?

 

[Nostra]

That really the best defense you have for Schumer threatening / inciting violence against 2 USSC Justices...then lying about it when he was called on it? Pathetic....

I’m not defending Schumer. What he did was wrong and he was right to be called out by Roberts and he owed an apology/explanation for his inappropriate actions. I was laughing at your hypersensitive reaction

Of course he apologized. Something the Banana Republicans would never do.

If he didn't threaten them, why did he "apologize"?

"Now, I should not have used the words I used yesterday. They didn't come out the way I intended to," Schumer said Thursday morning. "My point was that there would be political consequences, political consequences for President (Donald) Trump and Senate Republicans if the Supreme Court, with the newly confirmed justices, stripped away a woman's right to choose."
Schumer did not appear to directly apologize, and instead accused Republicans of "gross distortion" and "manufacturing outrage."

Chuck Schumer says he used the wrong words following Supreme Court backlash - CNNPolitics


"Of course I didn't intend to suggest anything other than political and public opinion consequences for the Supreme Court, and it is a gross distortion to imply otherwise. I'm from Brooklyn. We speak in strong language. I shouldn't have used the words I did, but in no way was I making a threat. I never, never would do such a thing. And Leader McConnell knows that. And Republicans who are busy manufacturing outrage over these comments know that, too."

What a crappy apology..................Sounds like a spoiled rotten brat apologizing to someone after he got the dang belt.............sniffing.............I'M SORRY......

Needs the belt again.

He said "I'm sorry" without saying "I'm sorry". No apology.

 

[DamnDude]

Zippy, he apologized for the ambiguous wording he used.

Ambiguous wording?!?!?
The sorry assed bloated sack of shit turned around and shook his fist at the USSC...
There was absolutely NOTHING "Ambiguous" about what he said nor did.
Nor does anything in his statement afterwards even come close to an apology to those he threatened by name. He "regrets" his choice of wording?!?!?! I bet he does, as it leaves him open to censure, which should be the very least of what should happen.
You trying to spin this is laughable....not in a humorous way either.

Damn right ambiguous. Using ambiguous terms like that is precisely what the propagandists need to twist your words and generate a few hours of Fauxrage for the machine. He did a disservice to all Democrats by giving cheap propagandists like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity openings like that. He should have looked before he leaped.

You stick with ambiguous, yet here is the definition of ambiguous;

am·big·u·ous
/amˈbiɡyo͞oəs/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
adjective: ambiguous

1. (of language) open to more than one interpretation; having a double meaning.
   "ambiguous phrases"
   • unclear or inexact because a choice between alternatives has not been made.
     "the election result was ambiguous"

His words "should have" consequences.
His actions "should have" consequences.
Together, there is no, absolutely NO ambiguity.
Come on Boo, spin it up.

English is not your first language?

"you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you"

The price is $3.50. The price is your life. MUH_haha

I think it was a bat that hit me. Yep, an old blind bat was flying around and hit me right in the head.

Pretty much my only language...
Yet here you go with your spin, right into what you want it to mean and then force your ignorance and stupidity on others. He communicated a threat in verbalization, no matter how generic or "ambiguous" you want everyone to believe, and in his body language by turning around and shaking a fist. That action alone takes any and all ambiguity out of it.
Your turn

 

[Slade3200]

I’m not a big Gov guy but when it comes to human rights I fall on the women’s side of this issue and since the issue has been settled in the Supreme Court I don’t think a state should have the right to infringe it through loophole laws like this

The court is not a legislative body, they can't just pull rights out of a unicorns ass. Also States have every right to regulate medical professionals they license.

.

Agreed. I’m not claiming they are doing anything with unicorn buttholes. The court interprets laws. And through their interpretations and rulings they set precedent which in this case applies to a woman’s right to decide to have an abortion under legal constraints.

The right was invented by the court, it never existed the first 190 years this country existed. And what constraints are you talking about when the commies are demanding care be withheld after a child is born alive?

.

I never said a word about or defended nor would I defend a post birth abortion. You don’t need to lie to win an argument. Just stick to the things I say

No you brought up constraints, the commies refuse to even consider a constraint that would address infanticide. To them there should be no constraints. This is what you get when courts invent rights, the commies keep pushing the boundaries till living breathing humans have no rights at all.

.

I really don’t give a shit what your strawmen think. Anybody can find a group of whackos that believe in anything, who cares. Stick to the things I say if you want to debate me because I don’t claim to speak for anybody else.

 

[basquebromance]

its hard to remain sane during insane times like these, my friends!

its hard to navigate all of this horrific shit without losing your very soul!

 

[OKTexas]

The court is not a legislative body, they can't just pull rights out of a unicorns ass. Also States have every right to regulate medical professionals they license.

.

Agreed. I’m not claiming they are doing anything with unicorn buttholes. The court interprets laws. And through their interpretations and rulings they set precedent which in this case applies to a woman’s right to decide to have an abortion under legal constraints.

The right was invented by the court, it never existed the first 190 years this country existed. And what constraints are you talking about when the commies are demanding care be withheld after a child is born alive?

.

I never said a word about or defended nor would I defend a post birth abortion. You don’t need to lie to win an argument. Just stick to the things I say

No you brought up constraints, the commies refuse to even consider a constraint that would address infanticide. To them there should be no constraints. This is what you get when courts invent rights, the commies keep pushing the boundaries till living breathing humans have no rights at all.

.

I really don’t give a shit what your strawmen think. Anybody can find a group of whackos that believe in anything, who cares. Stick to the things I say if you want to debate me because I don’t claim to speak for anybody else.

Perhaps you shouldn't bring up constraints unless you want to discuss them. If you don't just say so and stop whining.

.

 

[HenryBHough]

The only effective response to liberal threats of violence is actual violence against liberals.

 

[WEATHER53]

It’s the ole I’m sorry I got caught “apology”

 

[basquebromance]

if a Republican said what Cryin Chuck did, they'd be in jail right now, my friends!

 

[iceberg]

The court is not a legislative body, they can't just pull rights out of a unicorns ass. Also States have every right to regulate medical professionals they license.

.

Agreed. I’m not claiming they are doing anything with unicorn buttholes. The court interprets laws. And through their interpretations and rulings they set precedent which in this case applies to a woman’s right to decide to have an abortion under legal constraints.

The right was invented by the court, it never existed the first 190 years this country existed. And what constraints are you talking about when the commies are demanding care be withheld after a child is born alive?

.

I never said a word about or defended nor would I defend a post birth abortion. You don’t need to lie to win an argument. Just stick to the things I say

No you brought up constraints, the commies refuse to even consider a constraint that would address infanticide. To them there should be no constraints. This is what you get when courts invent rights, the commies keep pushing the boundaries till living breathing humans have no rights at all.

.

I really don’t give a shit what your strawmen think. Anybody can find a group of whackos that believe in anything, who cares. Stick to the things I say if you want to debate me because I don’t claim to speak for anybody else.

man, if only you'd do that for others.

you don't debate, you whine.

 

[iceberg]

Agreed. I’m not claiming they are doing anything with unicorn buttholes. The court interprets laws. And through their interpretations and rulings they set precedent which in this case applies to a woman’s right to decide to have an abortion under legal constraints.

The right was invented by the court, it never existed the first 190 years this country existed. And what constraints are you talking about when the commies are demanding care be withheld after a child is born alive?

.

I never said a word about or defended nor would I defend a post birth abortion. You don’t need to lie to win an argument. Just stick to the things I say

No you brought up constraints, the commies refuse to even consider a constraint that would address infanticide. To them there should be no constraints. This is what you get when courts invent rights, the commies keep pushing the boundaries till living breathing humans have no rights at all.

.

I really don’t give a shit what your strawmen think. Anybody can find a group of whackos that believe in anything, who cares. Stick to the things I say if you want to debate me because I don’t claim to speak for anybody else.

Perhaps you should bring up constraints unless you want to discuss them. If you don't just say so and stop whining.

.

when he starts getting his ass whipped, you are suddenly not playing fair or honest.

strange how that works for people who are never wrong.

 

[Slade3200]

Agreed. I’m not claiming they are doing anything with unicorn buttholes. The court interprets laws. And through their interpretations and rulings they set precedent which in this case applies to a woman’s right to decide to have an abortion under legal constraints.

The right was invented by the court, it never existed the first 190 years this country existed. And what constraints are you talking about when the commies are demanding care be withheld after a child is born alive?

.

I never said a word about or defended nor would I defend a post birth abortion. You don’t need to lie to win an argument. Just stick to the things I say

No you brought up constraints, the commies refuse to even consider a constraint that would address infanticide. To them there should be no constraints. This is what you get when courts invent rights, the commies keep pushing the boundaries till living breathing humans have no rights at all.

.

I really don’t give a shit what your strawmen think. Anybody can find a group of whackos that believe in anything, who cares. Stick to the things I say if you want to debate me because I don’t claim to speak for anybody else.

Perhaps you should bring up constraints unless you want to discuss them. If you don't just say so and stop whining.

.

I honestly don’t know what you are talking about... sounds to me like youve twisted yourself into a knot

 

[iceberg]

The right was invented by the court, it never existed the first 190 years this country existed. And what constraints are you talking about when the commies are demanding care be withheld after a child is born alive?

.

I never said a word about or defended nor would I defend a post birth abortion. You don’t need to lie to win an argument. Just stick to the things I say

No you brought up constraints, the commies refuse to even consider a constraint that would address infanticide. To them there should be no constraints. This is what you get when courts invent rights, the commies keep pushing the boundaries till living breathing humans have no rights at all.

.

I really don’t give a shit what your strawmen think. Anybody can find a group of whackos that believe in anything, who cares. Stick to the things I say if you want to debate me because I don’t claim to speak for anybody else.

Perhaps you should bring up constraints unless you want to discuss them. If you don't just say so and stop whining.

.

I honestly don’t know what you are talking about... sounds to me like youve twisted yourself into a knot

and this ladies and gentlemen is how you define "DERP".

 

[OKTexas]

The right was invented by the court, it never existed the first 190 years this country existed. And what constraints are you talking about when the commies are demanding care be withheld after a child is born alive?

.

I never said a word about or defended nor would I defend a post birth abortion. You don’t need to lie to win an argument. Just stick to the things I say

No you brought up constraints, the commies refuse to even consider a constraint that would address infanticide. To them there should be no constraints. This is what you get when courts invent rights, the commies keep pushing the boundaries till living breathing humans have no rights at all.

.

I really don’t give a shit what your strawmen think. Anybody can find a group of whackos that believe in anything, who cares. Stick to the things I say if you want to debate me because I don’t claim to speak for anybody else.

Perhaps you should bring up constraints unless you want to discuss them. If you don't just say so and stop whining.

.

I honestly don’t know what you are talking about... sounds to me like youve twisted yourself into a knot

woman’s right to decide to have an abortion under legal constraints.

You brought up constraints, now you run like a little bitch when challenged on what that means. Carry on whiner, we're done.

.

 

[iceberg]

I never said a word about or defended nor would I defend a post birth abortion. You don’t need to lie to win an argument. Just stick to the things I say

No you brought up constraints, the commies refuse to even consider a constraint that would address infanticide. To them there should be no constraints. This is what you get when courts invent rights, the commies keep pushing the boundaries till living breathing humans have no rights at all.

.

I really don’t give a shit what your strawmen think. Anybody can find a group of whackos that believe in anything, who cares. Stick to the things I say if you want to debate me because I don’t claim to speak for anybody else.

Perhaps you should bring up constraints unless you want to discuss them. If you don't just say so and stop whining.

.

I honestly don’t know what you are talking about... sounds to me like youve twisted yourself into a knot

woman’s right to decide to have an abortion under legal constraints.

You brought up constraints, now you run like a little bitch when challenged on what that means. Carry on whiner, we're done.

.

That left a mark...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Barr's got Schumer covered. No harm, no foul.

Will be completely forgotten by next week

 

[LeftofLeft]

Schumer’s violent rhetoric is the shit left wing extremists live for. He was very cognizant of what he was doing and for him to blame Republicans on how it was received is even more irresponsible.

 

[S.J.]

Schumer is trying to incite violence against conservatives and so is everyone who defends his incendiary rhetoric.