Was Schumer right to agree with Kushner that the Russians didn’t cause Hillary’s loss?

Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and US Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, both agreed on Monday that the Russians didn’t cost Hillary Clinton the election.

Now, Kushner was saying this to protect Donald Trump’s fragile ego — Trump lives in terror of the notion that his presidency is illegitimate.

But why would Schumer say such a thing?

Because Schumer is thinking about the future, and the need for Democrats to come up with a coherent message and forward-looking proposals that go beyond being anti-Trump.

In this video blog, I discuss Kushner’s and Schumer’s comments, and more generally, the need for Democrats to come up with a positive message for 2018.

If you like the video, please share it on social media, “like” it on Facebook and YouTube, and all the rest.  And subscribe to my YouTube channel — I’ll be doing a lot of these videos from now on. Thanks!

red-donateWith the election of Donald Trump, AMERICAblog’s independent journalism and activism is more needed than ever.

Please support our work with a $25 donation. (If you prefer PayPal, use this link.) We don’t make much on advertising, we need your support to continue our work. Thanks.

And buy a t-shirt and support our work:

nevertheless she persisted

All the proceeds go to supporting our independent journalism at AMERICAblog.

Follow me on Twitter & Facebook:

Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

26 Responses to “Was Schumer right to agree with Kushner that the Russians didn’t cause Hillary’s loss?”

  1. JustJeff says:

    Let it be known, Samantha Field is a pig.

  2. Alex Horton says:

    If a candidate, especially a Presidential one, looses or wins an election, it was because it was planned that way far in advance.

  3. Martha Bartha says:

    The Russian influence was the Russian interference. The weak minded believed all the lies.

  4. TheAngryFag says:

    Hillary Clinton lost because of herself. Going into election she had three HUGE strikes against her before any game playing by the Russians.

    1) She was a failed primary candidate in a previous election. The US hasn’t elected a president that lost a previous primary since Reagan in 1980. Bob Dole, Mitt Romney, John McCain have all lost previous primaries, went on to win later only to lose in the general (the Elder George Bush doesn’t count as he dropped out of the 1980 primary and became Reagan’s running mate). She might have thought she was immune because she’s a Democrat and that has only been Republicans. But no Democrat, to my recollection, has attempted to run again after losing in a primary. If she wasn’t good enough in 2008, why was she suddenly so good in 2016?

    2) We got a taste of dynastic presidencies with the Bush family. We all saw what happened. It turned off a lot of people off.

    3) No matter who got the Republican nomination, they would have been able to keep her on the defensive. There was no effective way for her to make the campaign about the issues and not about her. The Whiny Little Bitch just happened to be better than the rest of the incestuous clown car that is the Republican Primary. Election 2016 was more a referendum on Hillary Clinton than it was selecting the president.

    And, as an added bonus, people had some fundamental trust issues with her. An NBC-WSJ Poll cited by the Washington Post last year found 62% of respondents felt she was untrustworthy. That’s pretty significant.

  5. Eloisebterry says:

    Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !pa270d:
    On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash270TopWinGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!pa270l..,.

  6. Dover Bill says:

    I’ll pass on that cuz we both know he has more important things to attend to?

  7. Moderator4 says:

    Tell you what. Email John with any objections. It’s his blog, not ours, and we just follow his suggestions and requests.

  8. Dover Bill says:

    So… he has squatter privileges?

  9. mgiltz says:

    I thought Schumer’s speech was a very mild, positive first step. HIs saying Dems stand for the little guy and not for Big Business and Wall Street would have been a lot more powerful if he and the Dems also pledged to take no campaign contributions from Big Business and Wall Street and lobbyists a la Bernie. Put your wallet where your mouth is and I’ll start to believe you. Imagine if the Dems turned away all that money. Small donations would pour in and they pound on the Republicans every day.

  10. Stanley_Krute says:

    Schumer is useless on so many levels. The Dems have no in-office leader who can speak wisely and strongly to the American people.

  11. jdblog325 says:

    IMHO, Hilary Clinton lost the election on her own “demerit”. Too much bad history, too many personal scandals. A highly flawed and egomaniacal candidate in her own right, married to a serial whore-monger. I voted for her as the least worst choice in the last election. Hopefully, a Democratic candidate as inspirational as Barack Obama will make him/herself known within the next four years.

  12. Demosthenes says:

    I get your policy. This guy, however, is a classic troll who seeks to disrupt commentary. I’ll recommit to ignoring his stupid posts. Have a nice day.

  13. Moderator4 says:

    Also, we don’t like to delete and ban everyone who disagrees with the prevailing sentiment. (As long as they are not being racist or homophobic or anti-Semitic or mysogynistic, etc, or engaged in ad hominem attacks.)
    Otherwise, the blog simply becomes an echo chamber.

  14. Demosthenes says:

    Okay. I get it. I try to ignore his idiocy. It’s hard.

  15. Moderator4 says:

    Bill is a very long-time commenter, and most readers of this blog recognize him for what he is.
    He is given a certain amount of leeway because of the length of time he has been around. Every once in awhile, he crosses the line and is put on time out for awhile.

  16. Bill_Perdue says:

    Not a chance. Now try to say something political.“

    The BLS monthly jobs report –always chock full of useful information about the state of the working class—was released last Friday as the election campaign enters the final month. It was kind of lost in the shuffle between Hurricane Matthew and new outrage about the misogynist Republican nominee. That was just fine with his Democrat opponent

    BLS says, “The unemployment rate, at 5.0 percent, and the number of unemployed persons, at 7.9 million, changed little in September. Both measures have shown little movement, on net, since August of last year.”

    That’s the “official” unemployment stat. But also reported, there are an additional 1.8 million long-term jobless now designated as only “marginally attached to the workforce” and another 5.9 million are listed as “involuntary part-time”—both numbers essentially unchanged. Combined as the “real” unemployment, these three measures show a job creation that has become stalled—hardly keeping up with new first-time job seekers–while leaving behind 15.6 million who want full-time jobs but can’t find one.

    Most job growth, both in September and year to date, was in business services-ytd 582,000; health care-ytd 445,000; eating and drinking establishments-ytd 300,000; and retail sales added 317,000 jobs so far in 2016. To be sure, these industries have some well compensated professionals and technicians–but the majority of these new jobs are low wage, many part-time.

    A lot more could be expected—especially after a record year of auto sales and a rebound in housing. The old vaunted “Middle Class” still exists on a much smaller scale but the dream of younger generations to join it—or middle aged workers to rejoin after being pushed out–is still elusive after seven + years of “recovery.”

    In the last WIR, I wrote about how the Middle Class has been in a long decline through automation and cybermation. During the Great Recession, bosses also successfully reduced labor costs through outsourcing, job combinations, and big concessions in union contracts. While this enhanced profits in production, at the same time it reduced the purchasing power of many workers. Readers outside the USA may be shocked by some numbers associated with this contraction.

    Disturbing Math
    The average work hours per week for private sector “nonsupervisory and production employees”—that includes the majority of the working class—was only 33.5. The average hourly wage for the same category rose 5 cents to 21.68. That works out to an average annual wage of 37,766.

    From KC Labor http://kclabor.org/wordpress/

  17. Demosthenes says:

    I’m surprised John lets the faux leftist troll continue to post here.

  18. Demosthenes says:

    Go away, troll.

  19. brel1 says:

    beware of troll below

  20. Bill_Perdue says:

    Not a chance. Now try to say something political.

    “For a president with historically low poll numbers, Donald Trump can at least find solace in this: Hillary Clinton is doing worse.”

    “Trump’s 2016 Democratic rival is viewed favorably by just 39 percent of Americans in the latest Bloomberg National Poll, two points lower than the president. It’s the second-lowest score for Clinton since the poll started tracking her in September 2009.” Teagan Goddard’s Political Wire 07 18 2017

  21. Demosthenes says:

    Hillary Clinton lost the electoral college for many reasons, and not just Russia. Comey’s intervention, implementation of voter suppression measures in key states, apathy among the electorate and, let’s be honest, her weaknesses as a retail candidate.

  22. Demosthenes says:

    Oh, shut up.

  23. Bill_Perdue says:

    Clinton was defeated because she’s a right wing racsit, warmonger, homophobic bigot and union buster and people know it. That was also the reason that Democrats lost the House and Senate.


  24. Quilla says:

    Schumer needs to zip it. Nobody should listen to him anymore.

  25. brel1 says:

    Opinion of Schumer just hit rock bottom. Why do Democrats have to eat their own?

  26. keirmeister says:

    I don’t understand American political discourse. It’s as if everything has to be an either-or. Russian involvement didn’t cause HRC to lose the election, but it played a part in it. Has Schumer forgotten about the misinformation campaigns?

    The world doesn’t always work in such a way that ONE thing leads to another. Often…usually, crap happens as a result of MULTIPLE things all falling into place. It’s pretty basic, really, and seems to explain why Democrats keep getting caught flat-footed. Republicans pay attention to the little threads that eventually all come together to achieve an end goal. Democrats seem to only worry about one thing at a time, then move onto the next. This is ridiculous.

    Here’s an idea: if some Republicans like to hand out copies of Ayn Rand books, someone needs to send Democrats copies of “Dune”, “The Art of War”, and “The Prince.”

© 2020 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS