What is the taste of Senate Republicans for another Bove-style cover-up to ram a MAGA nominee through committee while a federal court investigation is pending, without awaiting its results? Time will tell, but the Bove precedent is an ominous one.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Rhode Island
Sheldon Whitehouse
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes33%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align95%
Cross-party5%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Sheldon Whitehouse
U.S. SenatorDemocratRhode Island
SoupScore
Sheldon's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 96 sponsored · 259 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
The Blanche “fraud on the court” complaint arose out of what I call the Trump “cop-beaters slush fund,” which even Republicans hate (or are afraid of), so the “fraud on the court” investigation could exhume buried bodies of that rotten scheme.
“Fraud on the court” is deadly serious, and can lead to sanctions in the case, referrals to the bar for attorney misconduct, and referral even for criminal investigation of possible fraud, perjury and obstruction.
Where Bove had a pending contempt of court investigation, Blanche has a pending “fraud on the court” investigation. In both cases, federal judges saw evident misbehavior and began the process of investigation.
The Judiciary Committee deliberately blinded itself to potential contempt of court by a MAGA judicial nominee, and rushed forward in the stay window. Will that “fixeroo” be repeated for Todd Blanche in his confirmation hearings?
The Committee could have said that we needed the contempt findings in order to determine the nominee’s fitness for high judicial office, so we will hold off on confirmation until after the contempt hearing produces a factual record. The Committee did not.
The “administrative stay,” customarily a very short-term intervention, in this case lasted four months. In those four months, Emil Bove was rammed through the Judiciary Committee and into a Third Circuit judgeship.
When the judge scheduled a hearing to look into whether contempt of court had been committed by the MAGA DOJ, two Trump judges on the DC Circuit court suddenly stayed those contempt proceedings. (The dissent is worth reading.)
When Trump thug lawyer Emil Bove joined the MAGA Justice Department, he quickly became involved in three instances of likely prosecutorial misconduct.
One of them caught the attention of a federal judge as potential contempt of court.
🧵
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
Our President started a war with Iran and openly admits he doesn’t care about the financial concerns of Americans—but Americans are paying a steep price.
The President was elected to address the affordability crisis, but he’s only made it worse.
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
Pres Trump saying ‘I love the inflation’ is proof he’s wicked out of touch. His chaos makes prices higher & causes American families to suffer the very real financial pain of Trump’s tariffs. Maybe it's bc his pals are billionaires?
This is the pickle a stubborn, erratic and corrupt president creates for Republicans.
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
Trump: "My preference has always been to take Kharg Island. I don't know that America has the stomach for it, to be honest with it. You'd make a fortune."
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
Anti-choice extremists have said for years that their goal was to make abortion access a “states’ rights” issue. But their actions show that couldn’t be further from the truth.
Climate change used to be a bipartisan issue. There’s some Rhode Island history here.
I’m headed to the Senate floor to give my 308th Time to Wake Up speech.
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
Last week, Republicans chose Trump’s mass deportation agenda over working families.
How does this bill help Americans afford gas? A family hit with higher health care premiums? A small business owner squeezed by Trump’s tariffs?
It doesn’t.
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
Republicans have already taken $1 trillion out of our healthcare system. They won’t stop until they dismantle it even further and take social security down with it.
Americans pay for these programs. They should NEVER be cut just to line the pockets of Trump and the ultra-wealthy.
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
Q: Are you concerned about the latest inflation numbers that came out this morning?
TRUMP: No, I love it. I love the inflation. You know why? Because as soon as this war is over -- do you know we've been taking out millions of barrels of oil? You know who doesn't know? Iran until right now.
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
This is what happens when you kill renewable energy projects and start a reckless war with Iran that drives up prices.
Hormuz problem predicted by U.S. intelligence for years; but POTUS evidently did not have the intelligence to process the intelligence. Says a lot also about his circle of suck-ups ignoring the intel to please the boss.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History890 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
890 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-07-28 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-07-28 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-39) |
| 2025-07-28 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-07-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2025-07-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-07-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-07-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-41) |
| 2025-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (61-35) |
| 2025-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-07-22 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (91-7, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-07-22 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2025-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-47) |
| 2025-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-47) |
| 2025-07-21 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (44-43) |
| 2025-07-17 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (46-36) |
| 2025-07-17 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-34) |
| 2025-07-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-31) |
| 2025-07-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-40) |
| 2025-07-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-43) |
| 2025-07-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (51-48) |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Recommit Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Recommit Rejected (47-50) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Recommit Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Recommit Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Recommit Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Recommit Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Recommit Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-16 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-07-15 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-07-15 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Motion to Discharge H.R. 4 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.