Hakeem Jeffries Praises Trump's Pardon of 'Beloved' Democrat: 'Exactly the Right Outcome'
Source: Mediaite
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) found a rare point of agreement with President Donald Trump on Wednesday, backing the presidents pardon of beloved Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX).
One of the clearest examples of this was when Crooked Joe used the FBI and DOJ to take out a member of his own Party after Highly Respected Congressman Henry Cuellar bravely spoke out against Open Borders, and the Biden Border Catastrophe,' Trump wrote.
Cuellar was indicted in March 2024 for allegedly accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in foreign bribes. Cuellars wife was also indicted at the time.
Congressman Cuellar is a beloved member of the House of Representatives, loved in his community, particularly in Laredo. Ive had the opportunity to spend time with him down in Laredo in South Texas, Jeffries said on Wednesday. I look forward to that moving forward. Listen, the reality is this indictment was very thin to begin with, in my view. The charges were eventually going to be dismissed, if not at the trial court level then by the Supreme Court, as theyve repeatedly done in instances just like this.
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/hakeem-jeffries-praises-trump-pardon-171507006.html
IronLionZion
(50,539 posts)MAGA loves people who can be bought with bribes. Corruption and grift are encouraged.
choie
(6,488 posts)mdbl
(7,944 posts)Buzz cook
(2,824 posts)Henry Cuellar is a crook. The democrats had a chance to replace him and they punted.
I though we were agreed that democratic crooks should get the same treatment as republican crooks.
Fiendish Thingy
(21,724 posts)Intractable
(1,450 posts)choie
(6,488 posts)Hakeem Jeffries praising the pardon of a corrupt public official, in essence rubber stamping trump's claim that the case against Cuellar was politically motivated.
Buddyzbuddy
(1,983 posts)but as soon as this guy in Texas is Pardoned by the Felon, free to commit future crimes if he so chooses, Jeffries has his back, just like that.
I'll leave it there.
I wonder what will happen when the list of Epstein predators that may include friends or donors comes out. When people talk about ending establishment politics and politicians, this is what they're talking about.
LuvLoogie
(8,429 posts)performative propaganda pap
Prairie Gates
(6,964 posts)Grins
(9,177 posts)And Im an atheist.
Jeffries was relatively unknown when he moved up to #2 after to Pelosi. I was OK with him. Now I have doubts.
MustLoveBeagles
(14,219 posts)So much squandered potential.
berniesandersmittens
(12,890 posts)Marie Marie
(10,798 posts)Bluetus
(2,064 posts)And they simply cannot understand the party has to stand for the right things if we are ever going to return to a real governing majority. Even with the wildest sweep imaginable in 2026, we would be nowhere near a governing majority.
The most optimistic number I have seen are something like 235-200 in the House and maybe 51-49 in the Senate.
That might give some governing ability in the House. it certainly would allow committees to provide some meaningful checks and balances. But that 235 probably would include 50 who would be very difficult to get with any progressive legislation.
And a 51-49 majority in the Senate just means that we would still be 15 votes away from killing the filibuster, and we would constantly be dealing with people like Fetterman and Gillibrand who would soak that thin margin for all it is worth.
Boosting Cuellar is the last thing Democrats should be doing if they want to build a governing majority over the next generation.
Response to Polybius (Original post)
Post removed
AZJonnie
(2,483 posts)His mini‑crusade before Biden
He was pressing hard on border security at least as far back as the 2014 child‑migrant surge, warning of a crisis and criticizing inaction under Obama.
During Trumps presidency he opposed the wall and some rhetoric, but still framed the border as a serious security issue and pushed for more resources and structured enforcement, so he was already somewhat off‑message from many national Democrats.
After Bidens inauguration (2021early 2022)
In that first Biden yeari.e., before the January 2022 FBI raidCuellar became one of the most quoted Democratic critics on the border:
Spring 2021: He publicly contradicted Bidens claim that the border was under control, telling national outlets that it was not and warning about overcrowded facilities and mixed messages drawing migrants north.
2021: He did repeated TV hits and interviews (CNN, NBC, local Texas media) urging tougher consequences, faster removals, and more visible enforcement, and warning Democrats that mishandling the border was a recipe for disaster politically.
Compared to earlier periods, that 2021 stretch featured:
* More national‑TV exposure.
* More direct, public contradiction of a Democratic presidents talking points.
* More framing of the situation as a crisis his own party was mishandling.
So relative to his already long record, yesCuellar was particularly loud and nationally visible on border policy between Bidens inauguration (Jan 2021) and the visible start of the federal investigation (the January 2022 raid), even though his underlying views on enforcement were consistent with what hed been saying since at least 2014
I mean, I also read the case was pretty strong against him, but even as a staunch defender of Biden, I have to admit, the timing was a little suss
And you know what? In this sense, Cuellar was right: "and warning Democrats that mishandling the border was a recipe for disaster politically.". Now we have Trump again. And I can pretty well guarantee you Biden's allowing so very many people into the country during his term was a tangible part of why Trump won again.
This all being said, Cuellar should have had to go to court, and been obliged to prove that he was not guilty of the charges. I cannot agree with Jeffries take here, even if I allow that it's not totally unreasonable to wonder whether or not he came into the DoJ's crosshairs due to his amped-up border rhetoric immediately before his house was raided. It doesn't change the question of whether or not the guy was guilty. That's only how things work in TRUMP'S mind. So Jeffries gave him exactly what he wanted. And that was a bullshit move.
Wonder Why
(6,444 posts)prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. And there are only two choices - proven guilty or not proven guilty.
AZJonnie
(2,483 posts)to your statement vs mine. However my main point is that he still should've had his day in court, he should have faced the prosecutors attempt to prove him guilty.