without evidence it's all cool?

You know something we don't? If so, please share.

What a weird comment.

I'm sure the administration has bundles of evidence that they are holding close to their vests as is their wont.

Really, Schumer could speak up, and maybe should, but there is a ton of other things he should speak up against too or first.

The case against Comey will almost certainly fail, absent appearance of some smoking unicorn. It's overreach and that can be used as a prime example people can understand. They could only convince 58% of 24 person Grand Jury to indict the ham sandwich, even without any defence present. How are they going to convince 100% of a trial jury when Comey mounts a defence. The lawyer running this high profile case has never prosecuted and was an insurance lawyer. The lawyer already fucked up the very first hearing.

Many of these cases are launched for two reasons that operate even when bogus cases fail: 1) Keep the base donating, 2) Cause pain and financial loss to the victim.

I'm with Chuck ..

of prejudicing the jury pool. I don't see a lot of upside for us to comment. Comey is a very accomplished lawyer in his own right, and has among the most prominent attorneys anywhere. We can't improve that. And do we need to in a weak case like this?

I’m sure they’ve weighed the pros and cons.

No. She's not the elected leader of the Senate.

is off for the weekend

and I can relate. But no response this long after the fact?

Let's stop creating purity tests.

Enough of the Dem bashing.

and could be with his family observing the sabbath.
Plus what would happen if he had issued a statement. Would Trump and republicans suddenly see the error of their ways and drop the charges against Comey? Would it inspire thousands of people to suddenly come to Washington to protest? Doubtful on both. It’s just score keeping and an excuse to bash a democrat.

As bad as it is, indicting Comey is also a distraction from THE EPSTEIN FILES and the budget/ healthcare issue.

Too bad some feel the need to create purity tests for democrats.

of a Democratic leader is valid.

I don't think this is a valid criticism.

Dump is desperate to discredit Comey before files with Dump’s name in them are released. This was a deliberate effort to undermine the credibility of the investigators. The Comey Indictment IS part of the Epstein story. Not sure most understand that. I think Dump is afraid and flailing.

Democrats strongly criticized the recent indictment of former FBI James Comey, calling it an "abuse of power" by the Trump administration.

That being said, in 3 days there is a strong possibility the government will shut down because the rethugs don’t care if people lose their health insurance.

That's why I didn't mention any of those Dems in my OP. In fact, I just heard Hakeem Jeffries call the Comey indictment a "malicious prosecution" live on a few minutes ago on MSNBC. That's why Schumer's silence stands out. And that's why I called him on it. Yes, there are other things to talk about. But a statement takes seconds, not hours. I don't think a simple statement is too much to ask of the leader of the Senate.

I looked and couldn't find one. And I do agree that most Dems have been pretty good on this issue, especially Jeffries.

about trump using the DOJ as an instrument going after his perceived political enemies a few days before the actual indictment, but referenced in a general statement on September 21, 2025.

"Driving the news: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) argued on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday that Trump is turning the DOJ "into an instrument that goes after his enemies, whether they're guilty or not" and "that helps his friends."

Schumer in the same interview warned, "This is the path to a dictatorship."

https://www.axios.com/2025/09/21/trump-bondi-schumer-murphy

But nothing specifically on Comey when he was indicted on September 25, 2025.

Thanks.

Thank you, my friend.

to pretend I am not

Thanks

Could be the imminent government shutdown just might be a bit more urgent.

Jeffries came along, though.

and wasn't afraid to call this prosecution out in no uncertain terms, so it makes Schumer's silence stand out even more. They should be on the same page.

Because, apparently, what Schumer says or doesn't say is the problem, not Trump and Republicans.

but please don't put words in my mouth.

You created a silly purity test for him.

Thanks for proving my point.

You created an excuse to criticize Schumer and now you don't like that people are calling you out for it.

hint: it was you. That is literally putting words in my mouth. Chuck Schumer is a big boy in a very powerful position. If he can't take some mild criticism from a nobody like me we are big trouble. Have a good day, my friend.

I’m calling out your purity test for what it is. It would be better to spend our time criticizing for real reasons that matter, not made up ones, or better yet criticizing republicans.

What are the real reasons that matter? What is the purported purity test testing? If you think we are on some sort of Democratic intramural teams, your time would be better spent either disproving or justifying Schumer’s silence rather than relying on jingoistic, dismissive terms and false dichotomies.

Finding reasons to complain about democrats is a purity test whether you admit it or not. And if you don’t know what what real issues matter, you need to read some more news.

It’s no very clear that OP was finding a reason to complain. It was just an observation that was also probably a criticism. In your analysis, are all criticisms merely finding reasons to complain. I don’t know what we are doing here if not to be critical of the issues in US politics. It’s also as if you think any criticism of Democratic leader messaging constitutes ignorance of other issues. Weaponization of the Justice Department is a serious issue that matters. It’s okay to question silence. There may be a tactical reason for Schumer’s silence or maybe OP is mistaken and Schumer has spoken out about that. If you made either of those points, they would be salient, but instead you chose to discount it with a term I rarely hear outside of attempts to silence other democratic voices. “Purity test” is a loved term because some believe its utterance is itself an argument and others use it as signal to the like minded.

Your argument is basically criticism of Democrats is a purity test regardless the form it takes, unless it’s criticism of other democrats who are critical of the party leaders. Criticism in itself is not a test. It’s often not evaluative of anything other than a specific thought or action. Criticism is generally given so someone can correct their understanding before a test. It’s also how represent Government works.

Also, I’m guessing you know that I, along with most on this board, probably read enough news to know some of the important issues of the day. If some of those are “real” and some are not according to your judgment, it might be good to enlighten us. Your response is unnecessarily dismissive and not much better than “if you don’t know, I’m not going to tell you.” I’m amazed how many argumentative comments are not backed by actual arguments.

You did that yourself. Anyone who thinks that this is an important issue of the day is missing a lot.

This IS a silly excuse to criticize a democrat. It’s the weekend, a lot of democrats haven’t commented about Comey. It no reason to criticize them. Plus Schumer is Jewish. He could be observing the sabbath. And even if he had, the DOJ is not going to suddenly drop the charges.

And criticizing any democrats because they didn’t do exactly what you what, in the way you wanted and as quickly as you wanted it, IS a purity even if you chose to deny that reality.

What’s with the weird protectionism about our Democratic Party leaders. I think the idea is to pressure what we can pressure. I keep reading the excuse that we don’t control any of the branches of government. That is true, but we can control our voices and urge those that represent us to do so also. This false dichotomy where criticizing a Democrat means ignoring or supporting Republicans is either disingenuous or a failure of reasoning.

for her to lead The People into battle. Their job Is Congress.

Schumer is Jewish and Saturday was his sabbath. So there is an element of anti-semitism in the criticism.
Also, Schumer was on Meet the Press yesterday and fully condemned the indictment. So those who trashed Schumer really owe him an apology. But I doubt any of them are mature, honest and have enough integrity to do so.

It's as if a segment of the Democratic party would gladly hand Trump an ax to cut him down

Weird thing is: That ax is poised for other Democrats ...

You're gonna go WITH Trump corruptly using the levers of government to imprison (or worse) against your perceived enemy James Comey?

Then you're going to fight him for the next Democrats he goes after?

That's not how it works ... That toothpaste will NOT be pushed back into the tube

Fascism is WORSE than our petty desires ... Choose accordingly

About as bad as I felt bad for Ernst Röhm when Hitler turned on him in 1934.

Time is a finite resource and I choose to spend mine on the many, many, many other victims of MAGA fascism. Comey is not entitled to my sympathy.

Even though Comey was one that helped usher in MAGA fascism, his indictment won't do one thing to bring about its end. So, no, I won't waste my time spending even one second feeling sorry for the guy.

or not ...

You do you

Spoiler alert: There's no shortage of examples of MAGA fascists going after Trump's """enemies.""

The only thing uniquely special about Comey is that Trump considers him an enemy even though he would have never stepped foot in the White House without his help.

The Grand Jury refused to indict on one indictment and only 14 of 23 jurors voted to indict on the other two charges.

Experienced prosecutors had refused to indict which is why Trump had to go to a political appointee with no courtroom experience to sign off of on the paperwork.

making or not making a statement about the Comey's indictment. What tsf is doing is wrong, however Comey is not at the top of my playbook for concern at this time. He cost us an election, FFS! He gave us trump.

Frankly Schumer and the rest of the Democrats are trying to avoid a f**king government shut down where millions may lose their healthcare, and tsf is calling for mass firings of Government employees! Schumer and Jeffries had a MEETING SCHEDUALED with tsf to try to avoid a shutdown and HE CANCELLED IT!


So, excuse me if I am not all that concerned about Schumer or any Democrat making statements about Comey at this time.

I also complimented those like Jeffries who have made a statement. I was calm and reasonable, I think. You may characterize it as "all this concern", but I think I made my point without going over the top. I never suggested that his response to this was the most important issue out there and should eclipse all other issues. I usually agree with you, but in this case, I think we should be able to "take" mild criticism of our Dems leaders without getting defensive. It's fine, by the way, if you don't agree.

these Sen Schumer threads.. but I saw your name and knew there would be some common Sense.

Mahalo for bringing up the Impending Shut Down. I am really worried about that.

Especially with the pending shutdown. I am worried too, Cha.

there are more important issues for Schumer to be worried about. This is just "he's didn't say anything about my pet issue of the day so I'm going to stamp my feet and call him a bad man". Ignoring the fact that it's a weekend and yesterday was Schumer's sabbath.

Maybe Schumer is too busy caring about actual victims of MAGA fascism rather than a shithead getting his face eaten by the leopards he let loose in the first place.

Maybe he’s with his family observing the sabbath.

... notice. I assume he thinks the Comey indictment is wrong. Maybe he feels it's not Senate business to comment on this story? I would look back and see if he normally comments on indictments. If he normally comments, it would seem odd, as this Comey indictment is an easy one to be against, publicly .

Trump sending troops to Portland instead of a republican, who torpedoed Hillary Clinton less than 2 weeks before the 16 election, getting indicted by the guy he helped put into office.