Chuck Schumer Admits He Will Vote ‘No’ On Trump’s Judicial Nominee Because of His Skin Color (VIDEO)
Finally… Chuck Schumer has come out of the closet. On Wednesday, Schumer has actually come out and attacked one of President Donald Trump’s judicial nominees because the nominee is not a racial minority.
According to Schumer, since Trump’s other picks have been mostly white and male, he will not vote for Marvin Quattlebaum because it will add to the “lack of diversity” to the judiciary.
“The nomination of Marvin Quattlebaum speaks to the overall lack of diversity in President Trump’s selections for the federal judiciary,” Schumer said. “Mr. Quattlebaum replaces not one, but two scuttled Obama nominees who were African American.”
He continued:
“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.”
“I’ll be voting no on the Quattlebaum nomination,” he concluded.
Schumer’s comments were heavily criticized by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a former prosecutor: According to Schumer, since Trump’s other picks have been mostly white and male, he will not vote for Marvin Quattlebaum because it will add to the “lack of diversity” to the judiciary.
“The nomination of Marvin Quattlebaum speaks to the overall lack of diversity in President Trump’s selections for the federal judiciary,” Schumer said. “Mr. Quattlebaum replaces not one, but two scuttled Obama nominees who were African American.”
He continued:
“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.”
“I’ll be voting no on the Quattlebaum nomination,” he concluded.
Schumer’s comments were heavily criticized by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a former prosecutor:
I hate to interrupt Senator Schumer with facts. But one nominee was withdrawn because of a significant bond issue, while the other became the Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court.https://t.co/Hoj9e1xWhs
— Trey Gowdy (@TGowdySC) March 1, 2018
Marvin Quattlebaum is uniquely well qualified for the bench and universally respected by all in South Carolina. Hopefully Senator Schumer can find a way to look at really unusual factors (like qualifications) in the future.
— Trey Gowdy (@TGowdySC) March 1, 2018
I’d have a little more respect for Chuck if he just told the truth – I’m voting no because I hate Trump and want to obstruct his agenda just out of spite and petty partisan politics.
But, this has nothing to do with diversity. Is about control of the 4th Circuit.
This appointment would be for the 4th Circuit Court which is currently 9 Democrats and 8 Republicans but would be 9/9 with the appointment of Marvin Quattlebaum and 10/9 shortly thereafter when Trump fills the other empty slot thus making it more difficult for Democrats to throw a wrench in Trump’s plans.
The 4th Circuit as it stands has fought Trump on both the Travel Ban & DACA!
Democrats currently control only the 2nd, 4th, & 9th Circuit Courts!
Every time you hear about a court fighting Trump on the travel ban, DACA, the LGBT agenda, etc. It is always one of these 3 courts!
What do you think? Scroll down to leave a comment below!
H/T IJR
Natalie Dagenhardt is an American conservative writer who writes for Right Journalism! Natalie has described herself as a polemicist who likes to “stir up the pot,” and does not “pretend to be impartial or balanced, as broadcasters do,” drawing criticism from the left, and sometimes from the right. As a passionate journalist, she works relentlessly to uncover the corruption happening in Washington. She is a “constitutional conservative”.
