Two Unions Representing 700,000 Members Back Van Hollen Over Schumer

Two unions with a collective 700,000 members have endorsed Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen for Senate majority leader. Both also explicitly called for Senator Chuck Schumer not to run.On Friday the more than 90,000-member Office and Professional Employees International Union, or OPEIU, and the 600,000-member International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union, or IAM, both made their support for Van Hollen known in separate press statements.“The overwhelming support for congressional Democrats at this time in history cannot be squandered. After careful deliberation in consultation with the OPIEU Executive Board, consisting of union leaders from coast to coast, we are respectfully asking you to decline to seek to become the next Senate Majority Leader,” the OPEIU wrote in its letter addressed directly to Schumer. “The American people are desperate for change, and for a new generation of political leaders to deliver that change. We are grateful for the decades of support you’ve shown for organized labor throughout your career, but we must empower the next generation of political leaders at this pivotal time in our nation’s history.”“The IAM Union proudly supports Senator Chris Van Hollen for Senate Majority Leader. He’s a proven champion of working people who will fight to unrig an economy stacked against working families,” the union wrote in a press release.“Senator Van Hollen understands this is a fight of Workers vs. Billionaires and has the courage to deliver the change voters demanded. Workers did their part on election night. Now it’s Senate Democrats’ turn. Senator Van Hollen is the right choice.”Protest against Schumer’s leadership, which was once considered an inevitability, has grown substantially. The longtime New York senator has been criticized by the left wing of the Democratic Party for his beholdenness to Israel, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, crypto, artificial intelligence, and corporations in general, as well as a lack of progressive vision on issues of affordability and health care. He has also been criticized for failing to adequately support the campaign of Florida Senate candidate Angie Nixon and backing moderates who failed to win Democratic primaries in Michigan and Maine. On Friday, Mississippi Senator-elect Scott Colom pushed back on Schumer’s claim that he “recruited” him.At least 10 senators or senators-elect—from Bernie Sanders to Elissa Slotkin—have refused to endorse Schumer’s leadership. That animus has also trickled down to Representative Hakeem Jeffries’s candidacy for speaker of the House, and for nearly identical reasons.Schumer still thinks he has an excellent chance at winning the leadership position.“I welcome any discussion about the future of our caucus and the important work ahead,” Schumer wrote Thursday night. “I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished together—55 seats and counting is an amazing result—and I have the votes to continue serving as Democratic Leader.”That statement was not well received, getting ratioed badly on X. Most of the comments called for him to step down.This story has been updated.Former Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem’s relationship with senior adviser and rumored boyfriend Corey Lewandowski crossed both professional and personal lines.Leaked emails and Signal messages reveal that Lewandowski was directly involved in responsibilities beyond that of an unpaid “special government employee,” as the Trump administration classified him, directly planning third-country deportations and weighing in on the high-profile deportation of Kilmar Ábrego García to El Salvador.The messages were obtained from the Department of Homeland Security by the nonprofit American Oversight through a Freedom of Information Act request, before they were shared with Politico. Many of them were redacted, but from what was visible, it was clear that Noem’s DHS treated Lewandowski as a high-ranking official, equal to Noem herself, rather than as a special adviser.Deputy Homeland Security Secretary Troy Edgar once sent an email to his top aide with a list of items to report to “S1 and Corey,” where “S1” referred to Noem. Lewandowski also received many of the same briefings as Noem and Edgar, including ones about deportation cases and operations in Djibouti.In some high-level email and Signal chat exchanges, Lewandowski was taking full charge with Noem absent. He wrote to other high-ranking officials such as DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin, Immigration and Customs Enforcement deputy director Madison Sheahan, and DHS senior official Joseph Mazzara, who gave him updates on department projects.Lewandowski took particular delight in news of deportations. “Praise Jesus,” he wrote in one message after an immigrant was deported to South Sudan, despite having no ties to the country. “I love deportations,” he wrote in another message a week later.Lewandowski’s tenure in DHS was marked with rampant corruption, and now there is further proof he was practically running the department along with Noem, whom he was more than likely in a relationship with despite both of them being married. Months ago, Democrats sought to preserve all of the department records related to Lewandowski. Now that they have recaptured Congress, Lewandowski, and Noem will have a lot more to worry about thanks to these new revelations. Billionaire Senator Jim Justice broke the law by failing to file his annual financial disclosure report on time. Now he’s facing a reckoning on Capitol Hill.The Senate Select Committee on Ethics issued a letter of admonition to the West Virginia Republican this week, slamming him for effectively hiding his finances from the public.“The public must feel confident that Members never place personal financial interests ahead of the best interests of the United States,” committee Chair James Lankford and Vice Chair Chris Coons wrote in the letter. “Your actions failed to uphold that standard, resulting in harm to the public trust and confidence in the United States Senate and a violation of federal law.”The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 stipulates that all federal officials—including lawmakers, senior executive branch officials, and candidates for national office—disclose their annual finances. The law was drafted after Richard Nixon’s Watergate scandal, and was intended to combat corruption and restore faith in Washington.By law, officials must submit their financial reports by May 15. Justice asked for and received two extensions, pushing the deadline to August 13, but he didn’t heed that deadline either. His filing assistant acknowledged the deadline in six separate communications, according to the letter. A week and a half after the latest deadline passed, the committee ordered Justice to submit his report by August 28, a date he also ignored before ultimately filing on September 8.Justice is unique in his noncompliance. The letter noted that “in the 47 years since the governing statute was enacted, the Committee has no record of any other Member failing to file a timely annual financial disclosure report.”The committee acknowledged Justice’s rationale for the delay—which was apparently affected by his filing assistant’s “significant family hardship”—but nonetheless argued that “this does not abrogate your personal responsibility as a U.S. Senator to comply with governing federal law.”The letter is an unprecedented wrist slap for a misbehaving lawmaker, but it is not actually tantamount to a formal punishment. Whether or not the Senate takes the issue a step further remains to be seen.Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent placed blame for the Trump administration’s inaction regarding Megaspeed, the Chinese firm at the center of the Nvidia spying scandal, solely on Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.“There’ve been reports that there was some tension between you and Secretary Lutnick about why Megaspeed was not placed on the Entity List,” Bessent was asked on Friday morning on CNBC. “Could Treasury have done that? Was it only Lutnick that could’ve done that?”“I can tell you there was coordination. It was Treasury, War, [the U.S. trade representative], and State. They were in favor of putting Megaspeed on the entity list for months. But Commerce has the pen,” Bessent replied. “You will have to ask [Lutnick] about their internal process.”WOW -- Bessent throws Lutnick under the bus: "Treasury, War, USTR, and State were in favor of putting Megaspeed on the entity list for months, but Commerce has the pen. You will have to ask them about their internal processes." https://t.co/vJEegPggTa— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 13, 2026 Questions are swirling about Lutnick’s close relationship with former Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, who recently stepped down over reports of his affair with Megaspeed executive (and suspected Chinese intelligence asset) Alice Huang. The Commerce Department did not list Megaspeed on its Entity List, which restricts U.S. technology from foreign businesses believed to pose a national security risk. In fact, the department has added no businesses to the list since October 2025, despite Megaspeed long being under investigation.The Trump administration was aware for at least a year that Alice Huang was likely working on behalf of the Chinese government. And yet, according to Bessent and multiple other sources, Lutnick actually spent the year going out of his way not to target Megaspeed and stop it from sending Nvidia chips to China. Lutnick has finally agreed to testify in Congress about the scandal. “The obvious question is why did [Lutnick] choose to sell advanced chips?” Republican Senator John Kennedy told Politico Wednesday. “Secretary Lutnick needs to answer that in front of God and country. If I were he, I’d call a press conference this afternoon and explain what happened and why he agreed to sell them chips, and I would stop doing it.”Attorney General Todd Blanche has admitted that there was absolutely nothing illegal about Democratic Senator Elissa Slotkin’s supposedly “extortionist” remark about working for Donald Trump. During an interview on SiriusXM’s The Dan Abrams Show Thursday, Abrams cornered Blanche about Trump’s demand that Slotkin be investigated by the Department of Justice over comments she made at the University of Chicago last week. Slotkin said at the time that she wanted to send a message of “deterrence” to young people who might consider working for the Trump administration.“I want them to be like, ‘Lord, that might be buying myself a ton of problems that I don’t want. And so let me avoid participating in that,’” she said. In a post on Truth Social shortly after, Trump claimed that Slotkin was “saying that she is going to go after all young people that believe in Republican Values, and that give even the slightest inclination to be a Republican.” “The imprisonment should be against these EXTORTIONISTS, and Republicans should get smart, fast!” Trump wrote, adding: “By copy of this statement, I am ordering the Department of Justice to look into this criminal act, immediately!”But in the radio interview Thursday, Blanche couldn’t explain what crime Slotkin had supposedly committed. “Whether that’s a smart thing to say or not a smart thing to say, how is that even potentially criminal?” Abrams asked. Initially, Blanche was extremely defensive, but eventually admitted: “Of course what the senator said in and of itself is absolutely not a crime.”“However, if leadership in the Senate are working together to try to stop young people from going to work in the administration by basically threatening them, saying you should be worried that you’re going to be open to investigations,” Blanche said, “that is totally wrong, and again, there’s no evidence that people are threatening young people, right? And again, maybe not criminal, but we should be worried if that’s happening.”“Right, but there’s no evidence that people are threatening young people,” Abrams said. “She’s talking about trying to have accountability, and it serving as a deterrent. I don’t even see, when the president is referring to her as an extortionist, and you’ve cited it as well, it just doesn’t seem to me to even be in the ballpark for crime.”“The difference between something being OK and being criminal is huge, right?” Abrams added. Blanche nodded silently. Abrams then pressed Blanche on whether Slotkin had actually committed extortion, as the president had claimed. “Her comments alone are absolutely not a crime. There is no criminal investigation here, and I’ve never said that there is,” Blanche eventually admitted. Let’s hope this lesson sticks. Earlier this week, Blanche claimed that it was his role to defend the Trump administration from the “vile rhetoric” of Democratic lawmakers. Following sweeping Democratic victories in the midterms, lawmakers have warned the Trump administration to “lawyer up,” and clearly, its lawyer has responded by threatening free speech.