Jeffries likely shot himself in the foot with his Kushner meeting. He might not be elected speaker after this. Someone like Jamie Raskin would be a better choice.
The corporate Democrats are terrified of losing their cash stream - so terrified that that Jeffries took that meeting with Kushner on the 'down low' and QT... But it is becoming increasingly apparent that huge ad campaigns by PACs are being picked up by the voters and ignored. Outreach to voters with actual ideas for change and the right amount of Righteous Indignation seems to be the formula for this age.
Here is a posing I made on Gloria J. Maloney's Substack.
Jeffries meets with Kushner and all of a sudden Jeffries pulls his support for universal healthcare. Suspicious.
First question that needs to be asked is who called for the meeting? The second question is why? Let me give Jeffries the benefit of a doubt initially. Let’s say he wanted to understand how best to communicate with the Trump administration to make the lawmaking process go more smoothly. My obvious question is, “Why Kushner?”. He’s not a cabinet member and is only a defacto member of Trump’s administration. Therefore, the information he was likely to gleam from this meeting would be suspect, at best. If Jeffries wanted to speak to a senior cabinet official, why was he shunted off to Kushner, and why then would Jeffries agree to meeting with an underling with no authority to commit to any plan they may have discussed. This all would make Jeffries look weak.What if Kushner called the meeting, saying that he was directed by the Secretary of State to brief Jeffries on some of the nuances of Iran negotiations and of discussions with other leaders in the region. If this were the case, then disclosing this would be of benefit to Jeffries and to the Trump Administration, showing cooperation so if Jeffries became Speaker, he would more clearly understand what the situation on the ground in Iran actually was. All of this makes too much sense, like the Trump administration was interested in any kind of cooperation. So, I toss this out as not conforming to the character of the Trump and his administration. This leaves me with only one conclusion. Kushner called the meeting to threaten Jeffries and Trump used Kushner to give him credible deniability should Jeffries leak the true intention of the meeting.
The threats were likely both physical and financial. My guess, Jeffries agreed to Kushner’s terms and to demonstrate his acquiescence to Kushner’s, i.e. Trump’s terms. Kusher told him he had to eliminate his backing for universal health care or suffer the consequences. This would benefit many of Trump’s donors like pharmaceutical companies and for-profit hospitals and health insurance companies, all of which would stand to lose significant money if a universal healthcare plan were adopted. On Jeffries’ side, he raised $650,000 from healthcare related groups which make up roughly 4% of the money he raised in 2024. So, his campaign financial impact would be minimal and could be made up with cash on hand. Jeffries could also claim that putting together a universal healthcare program would not be feasible with the current congressional makeup and even after the mid-terms, he would not have adequate number to override a Trump veto, so he was shifting his focus to other areas.
One of these or none may be the case, and we won’t know until Jeffries shows some transparency – something politicians of all parties are reticent to do. If he is asked by the press, he will simply claim national security issues and not answer. We’ll see!
I can see Kushner being the delivery boy for tRump threats, but it has the appearance and stench of something corrupt. I see it as a losing situation for Jeffries and Democrats. We need to vote in November in numbers on the order of the recent numbers in Hungary. tRump has already said he will pardon 'everybody who got within 200' of the Oval Office'. I would like to hear Jen and some other legal scholars on whether there is any path at all to negate a Presidential Pardon?
A losing situation for Jeffries but a winning situation for Democrats because this will force the issue of who will become House speaker. Jeffries is clearly not up to the job. Please, everyone, write to your Dem representatives and urge them to elect a strong, Progressive speaker. Some names come to mind, for example: Raskin, Dean, Ansari, Lieu, Khanna, Neguse, Castro, Casar. . . any of these would be good.
Threats to "national security" are being used as an all-purpose cudgel and scare tactic. In the name of truth and transparency, we need to know exactly how it's being threatened instead of throwing the term around indiscriminately. As it is, the term is losing its punch due to over-use.
Jamie Raskin would be 1000% better as Speaker of the House than Hakeem Jeffries. Time and time again, I felt Jeffries had disqualified himself for Speaker before thus latest blunder. The meeting with Kushner was his Waterloo. Thank you for laying out all the reasons in your article, Jen. Thank you for continuing your writing as you heal your throat. (We do miss seeing you on Substack Live).
I run across a lot of transplanted New Yorkers in my neck of the woods in California. They don't like HakeemJeffries either. For whatever reason, Jeffries garnered Nancy Pelosi's early support. Now that Pelosi is retiring, I think Jeffries will find his support for Speakership waning after the Midterms.
What was Nancy Pelosi thinking? Jeffries has always been a limp wrist. And now we know he’s an idiot and worse. He and Schumer must go! Love the Jamie Raskin nod.
There are probably others, but Raskin seems to be a no nonsense guy. He will also go after Trump's illegal and unconstitutional activities like a pit bull smelling a good steak.
I get Raskin’s ‘s quarterly newsletter to his constituents even though I’m in Virginia and not one. He’s always thinking of the little guy and giving information on healthcare concerns, etc. So refreshing. Then there is his brave pit bull aspect that was so admirable during the January 6 hearings. I’m a fan.
Does Kushner even have security clearance? That’s maybe a separate issue than the Jeffries meeting, but the point is Kushner has no official role and he is not bound by any ethical standard (as stated by Jen). This meeting was a major red flag for me. And yes. As a constitutional scholar, Jamie Raskin is who we need as we fix this unbelievable mess. So much to fix and restore and strengthen so this can never happen again.
I felt like Charlie Brown and said, "Good grief" when I read about Jeffries' meeting with Kushner. Both Jeffries and Schumer should lose their leadership positions after the midterm elections. Can anyone imagine Nancy Pelosi exhibiting such poor judgment? The Democrats need competent leadership in these perilous times. We can do better.
Hmmm. 🤔 Makes me wonder about Pelosi. She is serving out her final term in the House and still rules behind the scenes as “Speaker Emerita.” Nancy has always been Hakeem’s mentor. Did she approve of this meeting with the devil?
There should be NO "common ground" with anyone in the Trump regime. Too many Democrats are still trying to pretend this is just "normal politics". These are not normal times; the Trump regime is not a normal administration; their actions are willfully unconstitutional, AND their intent is to retain power at all costs. That means the end of democracy as we know it. Failure to fight "fire with fire" will cost us the country. Wake the Hell up.
Amen!! This interaction between Jeffries/kushner is inexcusable and down right stupid on Jeffries part! We the People, are sick and tired of the scammers in the government lining their pockets w/money as they pretend to represent us!!
Who is kushner other than the son of the most corrupt, disgraceful, pedophile & man-child hanging out in the WH??!! Come on…this would be laughable if it wasn’t so inappropriate. Does Jeffries even understand where we are in run up to the midterms??!!
In too many ways, actions based on the belief of 'normal politics' is appeasment. This is a tactic that just plain does not work. It's seen as weakness, and is further exploited to get more concessions. It's past time to realize this. No more appeasement.
Thanks to Jen and to all. Jeffries must be replaced. The old way of dealing with Republicans is over. We need either a respected figure like constitutional scholar Jamie Raskin or a young and capable Representative like Joe Neguse of Colorado. Time to turn the page.
Right on, Carol! I would love to see a progressive female Speaker of the House, like AOC, Jasmine Crockett or Melanie Stansbury, but I doubt the corporate-owned faction of the Democratic Caucus would allow it.
Behavior like that is exactly why the young, Democratic Left is surging! The Democratic leadership (Schumer, Jeffries, Durbin) are just getting too comfortable in their jobs. They've become tired and lazy. Long past time for the Democrats to be lead by people who have the stomach for a fight.
Or as Michael Corleone said to consigliere Tom Hagen:
Things could get rough and you're not a war-time consigliere.
"If they gain the majority, Democrats’ mandate will not be to find “common ground” with a decrepit autocrat bent on destroying congressional power. It will be to halt him in his tracks, reverse disastrous policies, and exercise exacting oversight".
Well said, Ms. Rubin.
Even google agrees:
"The phrase "there is no negotiating with evil" is a common political and moral idiom used to reject compromise with an opponent or regime deemed fundamentally corrupt, dangerous, or malevolent."
Jeffries should have thought….What would Nancy do? I’m sure Ms Pelosi would have said something like, “Are you kidding me? Meet with Kushner? Over my dead body.”
Truly a disappointment from Jeffries even before elections are concluded. I am so disturbed. Anyone who thinks Kushner is a good person or trustworthy should pause and reflect on the optics and the meaning of this request from this beforehand. It’s a shame to have to read this today
The fact that it took backlash for Jeffries to understand how problematic his meeting with Kushner was is proof positive that Dems need new leadership. Kushner is poster boy for Trump plunder, oligarchal
dealings, & the untrustworthiness of anyone connected with this so-called admin. I feel that keeping the money spigots open was the general purpose of this meeting for both Jeffries & Kushner. Just another sign that establishment Dems do not think outside the beltway, as much as they may talk about “affordability.” I will do all I can to demand new leadership; Raskin would be a good choice as others note. Business as usual Jeffries & Schumer both must be replaced.
Jefferies, under the tutelage of Schumer, is still using old school tactics with this administration. Compromise, finding common ground, extending open communication are not applicable anymore. When the Democrats take the House again in November, we will need a new leader from the progressive side of the party.
Jen your explanation of what the democrats must do if they regain majority in congress is spot on and deserved the bold print. But, you were too kind to Jeffries. To meet with Kushner in secret and privately is like trump meeting with putin secret and privately. That kind of corrupt looking behavior has just permanently tainted Jeffries. After mid term elections Jeffries should be replaced as leadership because Jeffries has given the republican-fascist party an opening to undermine his credibility (Kushner played him).
Jeffries is disqualified to lead congress. Sneaking around to secret meetings with Kushner does not inspire confidence. We don’t need to wonder about his transparency. We have enough to worry about for our country. There is more talent in the in the party to select from
Add a wonder about ethics and judgement as well as transparency. This meeting was an incredibly bad move and should disqualify Jeffries from leadership.
Jeffries likely shot himself in the foot with his Kushner meeting. He might not be elected speaker after this. Someone like Jamie Raskin would be a better choice.
The corporate Democrats are terrified of losing their cash stream - so terrified that that Jeffries took that meeting with Kushner on the 'down low' and QT... But it is becoming increasingly apparent that huge ad campaigns by PACs are being picked up by the voters and ignored. Outreach to voters with actual ideas for change and the right amount of Righteous Indignation seems to be the formula for this age.
Here is a posing I made on Gloria J. Maloney's Substack.
Jeffries meets with Kushner and all of a sudden Jeffries pulls his support for universal healthcare. Suspicious.
First question that needs to be asked is who called for the meeting? The second question is why? Let me give Jeffries the benefit of a doubt initially. Let’s say he wanted to understand how best to communicate with the Trump administration to make the lawmaking process go more smoothly. My obvious question is, “Why Kushner?”. He’s not a cabinet member and is only a defacto member of Trump’s administration. Therefore, the information he was likely to gleam from this meeting would be suspect, at best. If Jeffries wanted to speak to a senior cabinet official, why was he shunted off to Kushner, and why then would Jeffries agree to meeting with an underling with no authority to commit to any plan they may have discussed. This all would make Jeffries look weak.What if Kushner called the meeting, saying that he was directed by the Secretary of State to brief Jeffries on some of the nuances of Iran negotiations and of discussions with other leaders in the region. If this were the case, then disclosing this would be of benefit to Jeffries and to the Trump Administration, showing cooperation so if Jeffries became Speaker, he would more clearly understand what the situation on the ground in Iran actually was. All of this makes too much sense, like the Trump administration was interested in any kind of cooperation. So, I toss this out as not conforming to the character of the Trump and his administration. This leaves me with only one conclusion. Kushner called the meeting to threaten Jeffries and Trump used Kushner to give him credible deniability should Jeffries leak the true intention of the meeting.
The threats were likely both physical and financial. My guess, Jeffries agreed to Kushner’s terms and to demonstrate his acquiescence to Kushner’s, i.e. Trump’s terms. Kusher told him he had to eliminate his backing for universal health care or suffer the consequences. This would benefit many of Trump’s donors like pharmaceutical companies and for-profit hospitals and health insurance companies, all of which would stand to lose significant money if a universal healthcare plan were adopted. On Jeffries’ side, he raised $650,000 from healthcare related groups which make up roughly 4% of the money he raised in 2024. So, his campaign financial impact would be minimal and could be made up with cash on hand. Jeffries could also claim that putting together a universal healthcare program would not be feasible with the current congressional makeup and even after the mid-terms, he would not have adequate number to override a Trump veto, so he was shifting his focus to other areas.
One of these or none may be the case, and we won’t know until Jeffries shows some transparency – something politicians of all parties are reticent to do. If he is asked by the press, he will simply claim national security issues and not answer. We’ll see!
I can see Kushner being the delivery boy for tRump threats, but it has the appearance and stench of something corrupt. I see it as a losing situation for Jeffries and Democrats. We need to vote in November in numbers on the order of the recent numbers in Hungary. tRump has already said he will pardon 'everybody who got within 200' of the Oval Office'. I would like to hear Jen and some other legal scholars on whether there is any path at all to negate a Presidential Pardon?
A losing situation for Jeffries but a winning situation for Democrats because this will force the issue of who will become House speaker. Jeffries is clearly not up to the job. Please, everyone, write to your Dem representatives and urge them to elect a strong, Progressive speaker. Some names come to mind, for example: Raskin, Dean, Ansari, Lieu, Khanna, Neguse, Castro, Casar. . . any of these would be good.
Good question. Let me know if you get an answer.
Threats to "national security" are being used as an all-purpose cudgel and scare tactic. In the name of truth and transparency, we need to know exactly how it's being threatened instead of throwing the term around indiscriminately. As it is, the term is losing its punch due to over-use.
national security is threatened most by trump
I agree. Unfortunately i works during congressional testimony.
Jamie Raskin would be 1000% better as Speaker of the House than Hakeem Jeffries. Time and time again, I felt Jeffries had disqualified himself for Speaker before thus latest blunder. The meeting with Kushner was his Waterloo. Thank you for laying out all the reasons in your article, Jen. Thank you for continuing your writing as you heal your throat. (We do miss seeing you on Substack Live).
I agree with you. Personally, I never saw his appeal. But New York seems to like him so?
I run across a lot of transplanted New Yorkers in my neck of the woods in California. They don't like HakeemJeffries either. For whatever reason, Jeffries garnered Nancy Pelosi's early support. Now that Pelosi is retiring, I think Jeffries will find his support for Speakership waning after the Midterms.
Wouldn't it be interesting if Jeffries was not reelected this fall.
Agreed!
From your keyboard to The Lord's eyes!
What was Nancy Pelosi thinking? Jeffries has always been a limp wrist. And now we know he’s an idiot and worse. He and Schumer must go! Love the Jamie Raskin nod.
There are probably others, but Raskin seems to be a no nonsense guy. He will also go after Trump's illegal and unconstitutional activities like a pit bull smelling a good steak.
I get Raskin’s ‘s quarterly newsletter to his constituents even though I’m in Virginia and not one. He’s always thinking of the little guy and giving information on healthcare concerns, etc. So refreshing. Then there is his brave pit bull aspect that was so admirable during the January 6 hearings. I’m a fan.
You are SO right, Sir!
Does Kushner even have security clearance? That’s maybe a separate issue than the Jeffries meeting, but the point is Kushner has no official role and he is not bound by any ethical standard (as stated by Jen). This meeting was a major red flag for me. And yes. As a constitutional scholar, Jamie Raskin is who we need as we fix this unbelievable mess. So much to fix and restore and strengthen so this can never happen again.
I felt like Charlie Brown and said, "Good grief" when I read about Jeffries' meeting with Kushner. Both Jeffries and Schumer should lose their leadership positions after the midterm elections. Can anyone imagine Nancy Pelosi exhibiting such poor judgment? The Democrats need competent leadership in these perilous times. We can do better.
I felt like Charlie Brown when Jefferies did that, he was Lucy pulling the football away from the Dems when it looked like a win.!
Should Democrats win a majority in the Senate this fall, Sen. VanHollen would make a far better majority leader than Schumer.
Hmmm. 🤔 Makes me wonder about Pelosi. She is serving out her final term in the House and still rules behind the scenes as “Speaker Emerita.” Nancy has always been Hakeem’s mentor. Did she approve of this meeting with the devil?
There should be NO "common ground" with anyone in the Trump regime. Too many Democrats are still trying to pretend this is just "normal politics". These are not normal times; the Trump regime is not a normal administration; their actions are willfully unconstitutional, AND their intent is to retain power at all costs. That means the end of democracy as we know it. Failure to fight "fire with fire" will cost us the country. Wake the Hell up.
Amen!! This interaction between Jeffries/kushner is inexcusable and down right stupid on Jeffries part! We the People, are sick and tired of the scammers in the government lining their pockets w/money as they pretend to represent us!!
Who is kushner other than the son of the most corrupt, disgraceful, pedophile & man-child hanging out in the WH??!! Come on…this would be laughable if it wasn’t so inappropriate. Does Jeffries even understand where we are in run up to the midterms??!!
If it smells like BS, it is BS!!!!!
In too many ways, actions based on the belief of 'normal politics' is appeasment. This is a tactic that just plain does not work. It's seen as weakness, and is further exploited to get more concessions. It's past time to realize this. No more appeasement.
Thanks to Jen and to all. Jeffries must be replaced. The old way of dealing with Republicans is over. We need either a respected figure like constitutional scholar Jamie Raskin or a young and capable Representative like Joe Neguse of Colorado. Time to turn the page.
Right on, Carol! I would love to see a progressive female Speaker of the House, like AOC, Jasmine Crockett or Melanie Stansbury, but I doubt the corporate-owned faction of the Democratic Caucus would allow it.
Great idea!! It would be great to have a progressive woman at the helm.
Yes, it’s time! 💙
Behavior like that is exactly why the young, Democratic Left is surging! The Democratic leadership (Schumer, Jeffries, Durbin) are just getting too comfortable in their jobs. They've become tired and lazy. Long past time for the Democrats to be lead by people who have the stomach for a fight.
Or as Michael Corleone said to consigliere Tom Hagen:
Things could get rough and you're not a war-time consigliere.
Jeffries lack of judgement disqualifies him from being elected Speaker if Dems win the House.
"If they gain the majority, Democrats’ mandate will not be to find “common ground” with a decrepit autocrat bent on destroying congressional power. It will be to halt him in his tracks, reverse disastrous policies, and exercise exacting oversight".
Well said, Ms. Rubin.
Even google agrees:
"The phrase "there is no negotiating with evil" is a common political and moral idiom used to reject compromise with an opponent or regime deemed fundamentally corrupt, dangerous, or malevolent."
Common ground with kushner?
Really?
With the guy who walked away with $2B blood money given to him by another guy who butchers journalists with bone saws?
Jeffries only proved he has no moral compass and no functioning brain.
Jeffries should have thought….What would Nancy do? I’m sure Ms Pelosi would have said something like, “Are you kidding me? Meet with Kushner? Over my dead body.”
Who knows. Nancy is still Hakeem's mentor. Perhaps she approved the meeting.
Shame on Jeffries. Time for him to go also along with Schumer.
Truly a disappointment from Jeffries even before elections are concluded. I am so disturbed. Anyone who thinks Kushner is a good person or trustworthy should pause and reflect on the optics and the meaning of this request from this beforehand. It’s a shame to have to read this today
If Trump was not president, it's clear that Kushner would have little to no support for anything that he is doing.
The fact that it took backlash for Jeffries to understand how problematic his meeting with Kushner was is proof positive that Dems need new leadership. Kushner is poster boy for Trump plunder, oligarchal
dealings, & the untrustworthiness of anyone connected with this so-called admin. I feel that keeping the money spigots open was the general purpose of this meeting for both Jeffries & Kushner. Just another sign that establishment Dems do not think outside the beltway, as much as they may talk about “affordability.” I will do all I can to demand new leadership; Raskin would be a good choice as others note. Business as usual Jeffries & Schumer both must be replaced.
Taking the meeting with Kushner was not smart. Probably cost him speaker of the house...
Jefferies, under the tutelage of Schumer, is still using old school tactics with this administration. Compromise, finding common ground, extending open communication are not applicable anymore. When the Democrats take the House again in November, we will need a new leader from the progressive side of the party.
Yes, Pamela! Agree 💯. Preferably a woman, like AOC.
Jen your explanation of what the democrats must do if they regain majority in congress is spot on and deserved the bold print. But, you were too kind to Jeffries. To meet with Kushner in secret and privately is like trump meeting with putin secret and privately. That kind of corrupt looking behavior has just permanently tainted Jeffries. After mid term elections Jeffries should be replaced as leadership because Jeffries has given the republican-fascist party an opening to undermine his credibility (Kushner played him).
Jeffries is disqualified to lead congress. Sneaking around to secret meetings with Kushner does not inspire confidence. We don’t need to wonder about his transparency. We have enough to worry about for our country. There is more talent in the in the party to select from
Add a wonder about ethics and judgement as well as transparency. This meeting was an incredibly bad move and should disqualify Jeffries from leadership.