tv Incoming Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer Discusses His Career CSPAN December 23, 2016 4:26am-5:32am EST
announcer: next, a profile of the next senate democratic leader charles schumer of new york. congressional correspondence paul kane of the washington post and jenna first time in our of the new york times discussed senator schumer's rise in the democratic leadership and his relationships with senator mcconnell and president-elect trump. this hour-long program includes video of his house and senate career. sen. schumer: we had a great meeting, went very smoothly and i'm humbled, truly humbled and honored to receive the support of my colleagues to be the next leader of the senate democratic aucus.
>> that is the november 16 news conference where new york senator charles schumer announced he was elected as the next's senate democratic leader. over... >> when he started out his career in congress, he really rubbed a lot of people the wrong way because he was aggressive, sort of street fighter style... of doing business. he's very candid, blunt, informal. and he's very new york. so it's just a little different than people from the the rest
of the country. i think his style has evolved over the years and he's become more of a traditional legislator but i don't think he's lost>> what do you see in the brooklyn. revolution of his style? -- evolution of his style? >> what is interesting is the last few centimeters between mitch mcconnell, harry reid, they were not really huge personalities. harry reid can say some things off the cuff that make a good to second clip on c-span, "washington journal, but schumer is a big, careless personality that -- garrulous personality that fills a room. he has tried to go from being viewed as a sharp edge partisan to someone that is sort of a we alert dealer -- wheeler dealer that can talk to john mccain about the russian
investigation, but the personality is still very much there, that full forced new york, that very brooklyn view. >> in general, does the personality fit in a bipartisan way? does it rub some people in the wrong way? >> mayor,, rudy giuliani, there are different modes, mike bloomberg, he fits into a regional tradition that i think makes him nationally recognized which can be helpful and also hurt him around the country. we saw that with nancy pelosi. i can see chuck schumer evolving that way. as paul said, his evolution has been the most helpful to him, his ability to learn from others, especially his mentor how to operate within the senate. >> let's move forward in his
career. he was first elected to the house in 1980. go forward to 1993, a debate on the house floor, november of 1993 then house number of chuck schumer debating in favor of the handgun bill. here is a look. sen. schumer: mr. chairman, today is the day for this chamber to join the american people and say, we have had enough. today is the day to stand up and say, enough to the boundless fever for handguns, enough to the senseless killing
in every community. they after day, night after night we see the bloody madness, children killing children, mothers die trying to protect their families. parents buried children. children very parents. you and i and everyone of us in this chamber know that our neighbors, the american people, are sick and tired of this insanity. my neighbors in queens and brooklyn are scared. we are all frightened for our children. we are disgusted by the or jeep of handgun slaughter. --orgy of handgun slaughter. all over america, your neighbors are like my neighbors. they want to killing two and and they wanted now to end and they are watching what we do here today. it is said by my opponents, the opponents of this bill, guns do not kill people do. people have that instinct and then, but without guns, those instincts often do not result in killing. with guns those instincts all too often do. the people of america know there are no magic pills to end the violence, but they also have the good common sense to know that waiting periods work and they want the simple, common sense restraint of the brady bill. >> what did you hear there from
the 1993 clip in terms of his leadership on an issue like gun control and obviously his developing oratory style? >> that is the chuck schumer, the man of the house and back then, he was really pretty policy specific. he served on the house judiciary committee and the crime was rampant in new york throughout the 80's and early 1990's. he took on these issues and was willing to take on the nra on the brady bill. what you saw there was the chuck schumer of the house of a congressional district in which gun control is an issue that he could very much take the lead on. as he became a senator and started taking over the campaign operation in 2006, 2 thousand eight, he was recruiting candidates with very different views that his own in erms of gun control. it is
just interesting to see a sort of issue that he has grabbed at times. he did in 2013 after the connecticut shooting but there are times when he kind of pulls back and sees the political headwind. >> do you see a change, jennifer? >> the chuck schumer we saw speaking on the floor, we still hear the voice, cadence, the emotions when he chooses to speak on the senate floor, and i do not think his views, paul is right, he had kind of a holistic view as guns as they pertain to different regions of the country. it is really interesting that when you jump forward to 2014, senator schumer was very involved in trying to get that whole thing started and try to get tom coleman on board. it is interesting that when you go further south, he stepped out
of the process and forecasting the next big fight which was the immigration fight. >> we will get there with one of the upcoming clips. let me ask you about the house leadership possibilities. why did he -- where was he in terms of leadership in the house and was there ever a path for him to be a leader? >> he was part of the sort of brass pack of --brat pack of he young and upcoming leaders. dick durbin lived there, leon panetta lived there until he went into the clinton administration and they were sort of these young turks trying to challenge the eadership at the time, first the speaker foley and then speaker wright, wanting to push he envelope. what happened was
1994, the midterm losses and they lost the majority in cuba to you, chuck schumer will tell and he will tell you that he's been in the minority in the senate and the majority in the senate and a majority in the house and the minority in the house. only one of those four situations did he hate and that was being in the house minority. that's when he made this internal catalysts of, all right, i'm going to run statewide appeared -- statewide. >> first elected to the senate in 1998, only a couple of years later, 2000 on, 9/11 happens, then following march 2002, senator schumer urging george w. bush to sign legislation urging to pass rescue money for new york city. i want to look at a news onference.
senator schumer: thank you very much, mr. president. i can't tell you what a thrill it is to stand here with the president and all my colleagues of the delegation and the governor and the mayor on such a great day for new york. really six month ago, mr. president, i sat in the oval office and i asked you for $20 billion to help new york. today, you have fulfilled that commitment. mr. president, new york thank you. - new york thanks you. he calls me ellis. that's good, i think. today, it is. next we, who knows. our city and our country had been brutally attacked and we display need the president help you sitting with senator clinton and the senators from virginia, i made the pitch and, honestly, mr. president, i expected you to offer us $5 billion or that you would get back to us or offer a memo. instead, you looked at us right
in the eye and you said new york needs help? and i said, yes, mr. president. and without hesitation, and without even flinching, he said, you've got it. today, the president is making good on that pledge in full and then some. >> chuck schumer in front of the new york delegation. how do see the rapport with george w. bush and presumably a lot of that delegation not friendly with george w. bush on a lot of issues. jenifer: it was almost seems like history, that news conference. it wasn't that long ago. i think about the partisan argument over aid. at that time, obviously, that was seen as a national problem that required the broad federal solution.
it is difficult to find that kind of bipartisanship now. i find it interesting to see hillary clinton in that frame. they were pretty much rivals. i think it was that process of securing the money that helped cement their relationship, which has continued to grow ver the years. >> that relationship come in terms of chuck schumer as a somewhat senior new york senator hillary clinton -- senior to new york senator hillary clinton. paul: the first two years were eally tough. "the new york post" assigned there congressional correspondent do something they called hill watch. everything will day, he wrote a hillary clinton item. which meant he was not writing a chuck schumer item. their staffs also fought over credit for things.
if money was going to a bridge somewhere, they would battle over it. yeah, after 9/11, when they had to work together on that issue, they really did start to bond. and later, years later, they would be the two biggest air markers -- earmarkers in the senate. they would take credit for buffalo getting money or they tried to get money to a woodstock museum together. jenifer: paul: that ended poorly and got voted out of the senate. >> did he hold grudges out -- did he hold grudges over other senators? paul: depends on when he wins. he can be in a battle with somebody. if he beats you, he doesn't have a grudge. he said terrible things about me in that debate, but we won and you can let that go.
but if he loses, if you lose is that debate, if you lose is that vote, he is sitting there thinking i'm going to get him. i'm going to get him. it might be six years from now, but i'm going to figure this out and i'm going to win. >> how do you think that's going to work out in the 115th? jenifer: that's an interest in question. who is he must set up to oppose? obviously, donald j. trump. an interesting part of that is trump-schumer relationship is probably the most interesting and important ones to emerge in the congress. of course, he cannot hold grudges against mitch mcconnell, particularly when both sides of the aisle are vying for a relationship between the majority and minority leader. to have a positive, fashioning relationship as much as possible is going to be
important. the schumer-trump thing is a thing to watch. >> we are going to see a clip of the 2006 election. senator schumer was picked as the head of the democratic senatorial campaign committee. why was he chosen? paul: tom daschle was the democratic leader. he had just lost his race. harry reid was elevated to minority leader. schumer had just won reelection at that point. and honestly, if -- he always held under utilized by daschle's team. read kind of picked up on that and said, i'll tell you what, you are great, you are a strategist, run the senatorial committee. and he ran it with a brutal efficiency. they won six seats that year. almost all of them were
defeating incumbent senators. in 2008, they picked up eight more seats. they basically set up the possibility of getting the barack obama agenda through congress because they had such a big super majority. it was ruthless. it was tough. he came after you on every issue possible. him and mitch mcconnell had a lingering bitterness since 2008, after they helped negotiate this tarp bailout for wall street. there were people running ads against mitch mcconnell and israel election over that issue. mcconnell felt that that was in an up or -- in his reelection over that issue. mcconnell felt at that was inappropriate. >> let's go to that november 2 thousand six, after that election, the victory celebration, the news conference from 2006 in november. >> i want to thank my
colleagues for electing me now vice-chairman of the caucus, number three in the leadership. i want to thank harry reid in particular for the great job that he has done for us. majority leader harry reid sounds really good to us. and over the next two years, it is going to sound great to the american people when harry and his team show what we can do. let me just say our challenge has just begun. the american public has rejected the policies of george bush and they are waiting to see what we can do. and we are going to show them that we will never lucite of them. -- of them, in terms of making their lives better and creating a better america for the average person and for all americans.
so i am so gratified to be part of this leadership team. i want to thank harry, patty, byron for their support. i just want to promise my colleagues, all new yorkers, and all americans, i will continue to work as hard as i can to make this country even a etter place. >> so there he is elevated to the caucus vice chair, in addition to being the head of the campaign committee. what does the vice chair do? what does that role bring to chuck schumer? jenifer: that's basically about bringing the caucus together. getting the agenda together, getting people on the same page, getting people an opportunity to vote on bills when they need to, and to help the legislative agenda of the party go through. paul: messaging was the key facet of that job.
it really was just -- in a way, they created the position to give him more power, more authority -- >> did they or did harry reid create that? paul: harry reid. jenifer: as i understand it, senator schumer went to harry reid and said i want this spate -- space. i helped create this. i want more authority to do hings. that guy will ask anybody for money at any time, day or night. he will connect from buffalo to washington. he works really hard for democrats. that is a big part for why he was rewarded. paul: and he was taken things that he had done, lessons he learned in new york, and teaching other senators his technique.
>> did you ever cover one of his sunday press offices in new york? paul: almost every sunday, he would do this press conference because he knew that all the local reporters aren't really doing much on a sunday afternoon. and he would get headlines away. his role early on in that leadership was, like, i'm going to teach these guys. >> so he takes on this role and continues to be the chair in 2008. talk about the revolving rivalries. what does the landscape look like in the leadership than? paul: at that point, dick durbin is number two behind harry reid. butreid -- but reid is also becoming close to schumer and carving out these new roles and you power. it was really like schumer was leader 2a and durban was number 2.
it became clear that reid trusted schumer more and would go to him for advice and durbin -- you know, they were roommates for two years, schumer and durbin, living in that townhouse. their relationship state ok, but it became clear over the years -- when is reid going to lose? when is he going to retire? and who is going to lead, durbin or schumer? but if you look closely, you could tell who one here -- you harry reid wanted to be his successor. jenifer: i think he would admit now that he felt the slings of rivalry. he had some very specific issues, including this issue of reamers and the immigrant kids
were brought as a young age became a signature issue. he is passionate about it. he is associated with that. he's on the policy front. >> six years after the bailout for new york city, after 9/11, they follow 2008, not only the elections, but the financial markets about to collapse, the financial crisis and congressional response to it. what were his efforts like in getting the financial crisis addressed by congress? paul: he was tireless. he was a lower ranking member in the senate finance committee's at the time. the role was the fcc chairman running the campaigns. but he was probably the most trusted person for wall street executives, most trusted person at least in the senate, if not
the entire capital. so he worked very closely in this ad hoc committee that was a bunch of house members, house minority leader, boehner, house speaker pelosi, chris dodd was the banking committee. they basically sat around nancy pelosi's office an entire weekend, coming up with the legislation, the $700 billion bailout. i won't point, in a show of diplomacy, the democrats were sitting in weiner's office and schumer and rahm emanuel were sitting and pelosi's office, back and forth command and hank paulson was the treasury secretary at the time. he almost collapsed in the middle of the meeting because it was so exhausting. >> september 2008, chuck schumer's comments on the senate floor, addressing the republican nominee at that time, senator john mccain.
here's what that looked like. >> this cannot pass without book -- strong bipartisan support. there will be some in both parties who will not vote for any plan. so neither party has the majority. new the democrats, the majority party in this chamber by a small margin. nor the republicans who are close to a majority. but we need broad bipartisan support, as many on each side of the aisle will just not go for a plan and that is their prerogative. nd so we need the president to get the republican house in order. even if we were will -- if we were to want to pat -- even if we were to want to pass with just up -- democratic votes, we could not. e don't have enough. we began yesterday under chairman dodds and chairman frank's leadership in this chamber, in this building.
and really crafted out a really good compromise that was the basis to take to secretary paulson. it did far more for taxpayers, for homeowners, for oversight than the existing bill. unfortunately, however, we needed a four-legged stool and one leg just vanished, the house republicans. in a way that none of us still understand. in addition, senator mccain a posture guest desire, even though he hadn't been involved in this legislation at all, to fly in, put another fly in the ointment and created more trouble. senator mccain, i haven't heard him go for one constructive or martyred we don't know what he supports. does he support the houseplant? does he support the president's plan? does he have his own plan? he hardly spoke at the meeting,
which is his opportunity to try and do something. he spoke at the end and didn't say what his views were, as to whether he supported each plan. and so we really need two things, mr. president, on the republican side. we need president bush to take leadership. we need president bush first and foremost to get the republican house members to support his plan or modify it in some way to bring them on board yet keep the democratic house members, the republican members of the senate and the democratic members of the senate on board. and second, we need the president to respectfully tell senator mccain to get out of town. he is not helping. >> this is 15 years after that original house clip we saw. what do you hear in terms of not only his style, but in terms of adjusting the president, senator mccain calling them out from the
campaign trail? jenifer: with that clear, it's in -- it in some ways underscores that chuck schumer is intensely partisan. i would not call him intensely liberal. he works a lot on target is on policies that are bipartisan -- he works on a lot of policies that are bipartisan. he's calling there for omething that is bipartisan, necessary, but he is framing it n a very partisan context. paul: his line, john mccain, get out of town, he is doing growth where he is offering sort of the olive branch saying, if all four caucuses are on board here, we are going to get something done. but at the same time, making
clear, if this falls apart, it's on your shoulders. it's not our fault your we are going to blame you. that is so to what he does in a way far more effectively than most people. >> this is also before the election. he is doing his job as the sec chair. he is calling out the republican candidate for president. paul: yeah. the day before, mccain had flown in, suspended his campaign friday or two, and was marching around the capital try to figure out where the negotiations were. he ended up in john boehner's office, in the minority leaders office, with a very young paul ryan, who actually had these ideas about how to do things differently. and they went down to the white house. that just sort of blew up everything. that's what he meant about mccain, get out of town. because that meeting ended so badly that the republican treasury secretary, hank paulson, got down on one knee,
held nancy pelosi's hand and said, please, don't give up. don't give up. and she replied, are you proposing to me? >> let me ask you about chuck schumer's relationship with a -- you talked about paul ryan and the meeting in nancy pelosi's office. how were relationships with the republicans on the house side? paul:paul: back then, they viewed him as a partisan pitbull. they have yet to do any real work with him. that would come later years. back then, the house guys just looked at him like, oh, he just once to win senate seats. jenifer: particularly in that context, he was delegitimizing john mccain as an important player in something that was so crucial for the nation. >> one of his big bipartisan efforts was the gang of eight, the 2013 gang of eight and tell us what that was. paul: that was right after the
2012 election and a huge margin for democrats among hispanic voters. a bunch of republicans basically said we have to do something, create some sort of legislation to try and deal with the problem of 11 million or 12 million undocumented immigrants here in the country, but also that can help politically. and john mccain took the lead on that and, working with schumer, the two of them put together a bipartisan group of eight, four republicans and for democrats. >> senator mccain didn't hold a grudge for calling him out in 2008? jenifer: senator mccain seems to have tipped the balance is of greenwich with barack obama. that is where the real bitterness surfaces. it stuck around for quite a while. i did not actually ever
witnessed him attacking schumer in the context too often. paul: yeah, i can't remember. >> what did chuck schumer bring to this gang of eight? what were his goals? jenifer: i will let paul speak to that more because he covered it more than i did. but i will say that that is where you see emergent chuck schumer as someone who has something the on the fellow perspective, if you will, the new york city perspective, understanding immigration in the context of border states, of farm states, the center of the country where they have different views of this. and he becomes a more holistic politician that way. paul: absolutely. he understood that this was something that was both good policy, that he felt was good policy at least, and again, that there would be applicable pay off. on the political side, i think he sought as, if the majority senate democrats and the
democratic president get this done, they might get a political advantage with the hispanic vote in ways that lbj did for democrats with the african-american vote and civil rights legislation. >> let's look at the 2013 news conference where they ntroduced legislation. >> if you are wondering why we are confident we can be successful at passing immigration reform this time around, look right behind me. these folks here. an unprecedented coalition has formed in favor of immigration reform, growers and farmworkers, high-tech is this leaders, the faith community, some of the most well-known conservative activists in washington, and some of the most progressive. powerful outside forces have helped defeat certain other initiatives in washington. but on immigration, the offered -- the opposite is proving true. i am convinced this issue will
not fall victim to the usual partisan gridlock. and we are mindful that we approach our task at a moment when the public has never been more fed up with congress, but in a week when disillusionment with politics is being acutely felt, this bipartisan breakthrough offers a degree of ope. despite strong personalities and even stronger disagreements on many issues, we met in the middle for the common good. the bill is proof the art of political compromise is not dead. so in conclusion, today is just the beginning of our voyage. it will be long and arduous. there will be perils we can't even anticipate. but we start off with optimism because this bipartisan agreement gives us a sturdy ship to ride out the stormy seas ahead. lastly, i'd like to mention someone who couldn't be here,
but is on the minds of all of us today, the late ted kennedy. he's a hero to many of us on both sides of the aisle and specially on this issue. in many ways, our work picks up where he left off. >> what was the end result of that gang of eight immigration legislation? paul: it had a great result in the senate. they got 68 or 69 votes, about a third of the republican conference supported it, almost every democrat supported it. it seemed to be -- to have some real momentum. that across the capital, among the house republicans, there was a completely political dynamic at work. they weren't looking at the national exit polling for mitt romney and thinking we have to get right with hispanic voters.
they were looking at their own primaries and they were scared to death of getting primary down the right. that's when chuck schumer and paul ryan really certain working together, really sort of behind the scenes. schumer would go to ryan, even though he was in speaker yet. he knew how much respect people had for ryan. they kept thinking they were getting close to having a house bill. then something bad would happen. i would get a little bit close and then something bad would happen. and eric cantor his primary in june 2014 to a far right candidate, david bratt, who ran basically on one issue, saying eric cantor supported amnesty. for a lot of reasons, cantor lost, but at that moment, they all said, nope, i'm out. >> towards the end of that news conference, he mentions ted kennedy. you mentioned earlier that he viewed ted kennedy as a mentor and he cracks up at the end of that news conference. jenifer: yes, i think ted kennedy, among others,
understanding -- shared senator schumer's understanding of washington and of power. many in the house felt this guy was a guy from brooklyn and would never be respected and never fit in. kennedy was a mentor to him, really growing into to his own self-respect in washington. >> that was also the year where we saw a very partisan discussion over changing of filibuster rules regarding their appointment of judicial nominees and other nominees. what brought all that about? paul: there's just been this confirmation wars that come in some ways, goes all the way back to the 1980's and fights over bork and clarence thomas. but what happened by the time obama is sort of getting into the end of his first term and
early in the second term is republicans were filibustering nominees, both to the d c circuit, which is the second-highest, second-most important federal court in the land. they were filibustering them on the grounds that they shouldn't have more judges. there was no real reason to be blocking those nominees other than they just didn't want to put more democratic appointees on that court. they were also doing that with the consumer financial protection board, the relations board. they were shutting down those boards through filibuster by not letting them get even a forum. and it built to a point where they used, for the first time ever, a wholly partisan vote to change the precedent of the senate that could say that any of these nominees -- that anything except the supreme
court, now just need a simple majority. it had never been done before on that level to really change a big, important rule of the senate. >> let's take a look to a news conference after that vote with chuck schumer, harry reid and others. >> republicans are grinding the senate to a near standstill. and they are using rules that were intended to bring people together to terrace apart. the age old rules of the senate are being used to paralyze us. and the public is asking, is begging us to act. with 9% approval, because the rules given advantage to those who want to prevent the senate from achieving anything. mitch mcconnell says we've tried to change the subject. i beg to differ. he doesn't want to address the filibusters.
he doesn't want to address the rules changes. so three quarters of the speech are dedicated to obamacare. we are not changing the subject today. he is. he doesn't want to discuss the dysfunction and the way republicans have used the rules to tie this place in one big knot. if you have two sides, one who is fraction and one who is opposed, the senate rules give the opposition a head start. and republicans have abused the advantage for years now, refusing to confirm qualified judges, preventing executive agencies from having the leaders they deserve. it's a new world. people defend action. the old rules need to be modified. and that's a we have done today. we haven't ripped them up very we modified them in ways that can make things work. who in america doesn't think
that a president, democrat or republican, deserves his or her picks for who should run the agency? nobody. but there is a long list, cabinet and subcabinet level positions that have been opposed. so we wish it had not come to this. but the american people deserve a functioning government, not gridlock. and if our government continues to be gridlocked, people are going to lose total faith in government and it will be a different america. it is an imperative to change the rules to help break the gridlock and that is what we have done today. >> do you think chuck schumer has any regrets over those changes now he is coming in as? jenifer: leader not that he will admit to. -- coming in as leader? jenifer: not that he will admit to. with president-elect trump ominating some of the most
onservative cabinet in the ation, to be fair, it's not as if any party would be inclined to filibuster all caps on nominees. that would not be done. however, they've lost every leverage to take even one that they really want to to block. has >> chuck schumer shown his hand? jenifer: he has spoken negatively on almost all of them. i think democrats will pick their shots, especially in a rare instance where they may be able to align with the republicans. republicans have been excited about donald trump's nominations. paul: he has said -- he said ecently to another media outlet of that, at the time, he
kind of wanted to just only make it apply to judges, not cabinet agency nominations. he did not say that at the time. i think you see his focus -- their focus will be on tillerson for secretary of tate and sort of exploring both his views, the nominee's views and the president-elect's views on russia. they will focus a lot on jeff essions. i think they will focusing -- they will end up focusing a lot more on immigration than sessions's own past. they will probably try to focus it more policy. >> we have looked a lot at how senator schumer has worked with his caucus, worked with the opposition. how about his relations with president obama? jenifer: his relationship with the democrats in congress and with obama, especially when
they went into the minority, was pretty obligated. i think senator reid, senator schumer and others really wanted more from the white house and they -- than they got sometimes. we all know that president obama ran cool and they wanted him to run more hot, to have their back, if you will, in some of their fights. they didn't feel he and his staff engaged enough. paul: the president's staff was lways particularly touchy. two years ago, after they lost the in 2014 midterms, schumer delivered a speech, kind of threw together almost, and went to the national press club and set out loud what he had been safer a long time. he wasn't sure that pushing for the afford book air act in 2009 and early 2010 was the right time to have done that. and he came across as
critical. and, boy, the entire of obama will alumni network sprung into action and just attacked chumer for days on end after that. >> as the president's term is winding down, he recently butted heads with the president on this bill. paul: the political power of /11 is still very much alive and real. it overcame a lot of forces that were try to shut it down. basically, it was a bill that would allow people who lost loved ones, family members, in the 9/11 attacks to try to sue the saudi government further alleged role in having people financially supporting terrorists. it was a bill that the obama
administration thought was going to roll their carefully layered negotiators in the middle east and they cannot stop it. and schumer, being the new yorker, this is one time -- and i will defer to jennifer on this -- but that was his -- jenifer: we said that twice, in the iran bill, too. that really enraged the white house. that is where we see the chuck schumer who cares a whole lot about his voters and his interest in new york. that may be one of the things we may be watching him balance as leader of his party and how much he can still be doing things for the state of new york. >> hard to do that as leader of your party in the stash and the senate? -- how to do that as leader of your party and the senate? jenifer: probably not so much in the time he can devote. >> was it easier to do that because the president was a
lame duck president? paul: probably. the iran bill was a tougher problem because the democratic base by large across the country was supportive of it. and he was going against a president who was still popular with liberal voters. just a -- it became so olitically bad, toxic, to be on the other side of that argument that it passed by unanimous consent in both the house and senate. jenifer: there was basically no debate. paul: that became an easier fight for him. >> the speech we are going to show you next is senator schumer talking about overwriting the president's veto. this is from september this year. >> i rise today, to speak on behalf of my bill, the justice
against sponsors of terrorism acts. soon, we will vote on whether or not to override the president's veto of this bill. this is a decision i do not take lightly. but, as one of the authors of this legislation and a firm believer in its purpose, i believe the senate should confidently vote to override and i will lay out the reasons why as clearly as i can. the bill is near and dear to my heart as a new yorker, because it would allow the victims of 9/11 to pursue some small measure of justice, finally giving them the legal avenue to pursue the foreign sponsors of a terrorist attack that took the lives of their loved ones. the courts in new york have dismissed the claims against foreign entities alleged of having health of the 9/11 attacks. these courts are filing what i believe is a fundamentally
incorrect reading of the foreign sovereign immunities act. do we really want it established in precedent that foreign countries directly responsible for financing terrorist acts on u.s. soil are beyond the reach of justice? i don't think so. i don't think that, in a nature where we have state sponsors of terrorism, i don't think what -- i don't think that is what the foreign service amenities act ever intended. so for the sake of these families, it should be made clear, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that every entity, including foreign states, will be held accountable if they are sponsors of heinous acts like 9/11. >> you said he has been a proponent overall all things -- over all things new york in his career. you have seen his style evolved in terms of his presentation on
the floor and his relationship with members on the floor. jenifer: paul earlier made a reference to his famous news conferences. though it's something cliché about chuck schumer that are a thing of the past. schumer is not running at the cameras were knocking over other members of congress to get front of the cameras. one of the greatest, most subtle evolution people have been following these years is that he has made the difficult move to become more for other people, helping people win, to raise money, to maintain power, to get legislation passed. he doesn't want to take credit for bills now. he will take a billing given to someone else for credit. >> let's talk about the relationship with the outgoing harry reid and mitch mcconnell. you said he was a protégé of reid, but had a better
relationship with mitch mcconnell. jenifer: harry reid and mitch mcconnell had a relationship that deteriorated significantly in recent years. in some sense, the relationship with mitch mcconnell and senator schumer were the cause -- was the cause of a lot of it. i think there was a sense that they both want that relationship to be there. so they will try to make it work. >> word is that relationship looking like with mitch mcconnell? paul: the relationship between reid and schumer reached an epic level. they became each other's unit and yang -- each other's yen and yang. i don't know how chuck schumer will function in the senate without harry reid. he is so used to having harry reid there for sort of a more intuitive feel in
decision-making. how does he get along with mcconnell? i think it will depend. it will depend on how partisan mcconnell is going to try to go with some of the legislation. it will depend -- a real big early flashpoint will be the supreme court nominee. we've had this vacancy now for nine or 10 months. trump is my to put up a nominee pretty quickly. and they still have the filibuster. are the democrats point to try to filibuster this nominee as sort of payback for the way merrick garland was never even given so much as a hearing? that could deteriorate the relationship he quickly if mcconnell accuses schumer of doing things that mcconnell himself might have done, but that will be a first key test. >> who is senator schumer is go to senator? who replaces chuck schumer?
paul: i don't know that anybody can replace chuck schumer. but i think patty murray of washington is his most trusted lieutenant. he and durbin still have this leftover friction. patty murray is getting an enhanced title and responsibilities in her job, moving up to the number three spot in the leadership. i think that will be a key relationship. and then there are some other people here and there. some of them are in lower-level leaderships, like debbie stabenow. some are out in the committee's, where you will see ranking members like jack reed of rhode island. >> there's quite a range in the new leadership that he has chosen. jenifer: it's true. there's also senators he helped get elected. they spent a lot of time together. there's a lot of mutual gratitude.
so he invested something personally in those men and women. paul: the 2018 class of the democrats coming up, a bunch of them were elected in 2006. sherri brown, jon tester. and those are the people he got elected. so he is really going to want to see those folks when because they are his closest friends. >> in terms of close, personal relationships, paul did an interview with senator shooter -- senator schumer. let's take a look. >> some people out there may not know this but you are a couple master. i saw you run into brian and katie fallon. one of your most esteemed couples, former workers who got married because they work for you. how many schumer couples are there right now? >> mike lynch, my chief of staff, he is a schumer marriage. a schumer marriage is, you did not know each other, you met on schumer staff, and got married.
do try to import in certain nstances in my characteristically delicate way. but sometimes on the last and no. >> is it because you are such a demanding boss that they have no life other than the office that they end up getting married together? >> a good spin on schumer marriages is, migrate chief of staff, the closest knit staff, they celebrate all the holidays together. we are a -- and they go out rinking a lot. we are the closest knit staff ould be the good spin. the bad spin would be yours, that they have to work so much that they don't meet anybody
else. >> any changes expected and his staff? paul: he will definitely expand his staff. essentially, you get dozens of positions that now come open. some of those will be holdovers and will stick around, people that have certain expertise in parliamentary procedure are really hard to find. so some of those will stick around. others -- one of a fallout that is beneficial in how bad things went for democrats is the stack of resumes for people applying for these jobs with senator schumer now is a lot different and a lot higher and a lot more fleet because -- more wheat because nobody's going into the west wing. hat means that he will get some high-caliber talent. >> changes for senator schumer in terms of staff or approach
the job? jenifer: in terms of staff, picking up on what paul said, it is not easy to work with paul schumer. he implies that there. we know he has these monday night murder boards, where he comes in from new york as late as he possibly can and he votes or does his thing and then his staff comes in, one by one, to brief him on the important items of the week, sometimes at 10:30 at night. so you need to know your stuff or you will not succeed in chuck schumer land. i'm sure he will be very picky. we will see if he can continue that monday night tradition, just how micromanaging he can remain on local issues and even broader policy issues if he is busy leading. >> let's talk about new yorker versus new yorker, donald trump and chuck schumer. donald trump tweeted shortly after the election i've always had a good relationship with chuck schumer.
he is far smarter than harry reid and has the ability to get things done. good news. here you have manhattan versus brooklyn. what are you looking for? paul:paul: i'm looking to see whether these two have a good relationship. schumer has been to mar-a-lago for a fundraiser, raised $250,000 at trump's venue. he is very stern and saying i don't have a good relationship with him. some of his rental places were in my district and i knew him a little bit when i was in the house. again, i want to come back to that supreme court pick herod that will also tell us a lot about -- pick. that will tell us a lot about chuck schumer and if he will try to marginalize him. jenifer: he is the only person in washington that donald trump actually knows.
he has laid eyes on paul ryan a half dozen times in nine months. he has no relationship with mitch mcconnell and it has no cultural connection to him whatsoever. he knows chuck schumer many years. he donated to his campaign. they are from the same state. they ran somewhere in the same circles in that they were both powerful new yorkers. so they know each other. they have some thing to work with. that is a mean that they will see i die on policy nominations. and i'm sure chuck schumer will be -- that does not mean that they will see eye to eye on policy nominations. and i'm sure chuck schumer will be -- >> a look ahead at the democratic leadership of senator charles schumer. hanks to both of you for joining us. paul: thank you. jenifer: thank you. the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
>> president-elect donald trump picked shawn spicer to be his white house press secretary yesterday. last week he sat down with politico to talk about the election and media coverage of he candidates. >> good evening, everybody. welcome to playbook cocktails. here with my playbook coauthor, we would like to thank you all for joining us here and those tuning in on c-span and our live stream for our very last playbook of the year. here we are. >> we're almost five months in. >> here we are. we're thrilled to host shawn spicer. you can adplaud. >> that's good. we're excited too.
he has a lot of thoughts about the white house and election. he's in the middle of all the big decision that is donald trump is making. before we get started with the program, i would like to send a special thank you to our partners at bank of america. >> absolutely. they have been a true partner in this series, making conversations like these and the booths in the back available for us to par take in. so we thank them for their ongoing support. without further delay, please welcome shawn spicer. [applause]
>> i want to make sure that you are appropriately -- that i gave you stuff that politico could use. so we're going to tart off, it's a republican bag. so that every day you're eminded of who is in charge. i wanted you and ana to have something to have your drink in. i like it. >> you can replace the politico nes for trump-pence.
another republican tie. >> a theme here. >> you can wear the tie. >> i don't really want to wear a tie right now. >> fair enough because this last gift you can wear and it's something very special. i wish i had brought an extra but i am sure i can get one. this i hope you enjoy and you can definitely -- you must wear it. it says make police cogreat again. -- politico great again. >> for the record, i believe politico is great again. but because shawn is here. i'll hold it up. >> all right. well, before we get started -- >> if you haven't noticed from the gifts anna why don't you take it away. >> as a reminder to our audience in the room and on line we would like this to be an interactive conversation.
if you want to ask a question or have a comment about how we're doing over these 45 minutes, please tweet us and we'll track them here on stage. so we will get started. with that opening. hard to follow. >> that is a tough act to follow. >> i think the elephant in the room is the worst-kept secret in the town. you've had some modest disagreements with politico, to say the least. so we wanted to clear the air at the beginning of the conversation. with a new administration we're about to embark on a new year. can't we all just get along? > i'm there. i hink in all seriousness, think -- and i speak on behalf of the president-elect when i say that we understand and respect the role that the press plays in a democrat sifment it
is healthy, it's important. but it's a two-way street. and i don't think everyone in the media is bad, i don't think that every reporter is bad. but i think that in the case -- nd i welcome kerry's elevation here at politico. i think she is working hard to try to right a lot of wrongs. i think time will tell. but i do have a problem with how politico has engaged in covering politics, especially our side. i think it is tweet-happy, it click-based and devoid of facts. and i think you look for example at just today -- >> the props aren't done. >> no. >> the final batch. >> this is every story that politico has done on the rnc and g.o.p. this year. just today this is the tweet. politico. in theory, 37 could flip against trump and deny him. that is like in theory this