>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Rodriguez-Ciampoli added, “He followed every rule and every filing requirement laid out by the State of Illinois. At a moment like this, he hopes his colleagues, especially those who speak about family values, can show the same compassion and respect that any family would want during a health crisis.”
In a move that raised eyebrows, Chuy García endorsed his chief of staff, Patty García—no relation—as his replacement. According to The Hill, Chuy said she “knows the issues, knows the players in Washington, and has the talent and heart to deliver real results for working families.”
The timing, however, has drawn criticism. Chuy García’s withdrawal came just hours before the filing deadline for the 2026 primary, leaving Patty García as the only candidate on the ballot. Her candidacy was already prepared, making it seem as if the replacement had been prearranged. Skeptics argue that this left other potential candidates with no chance to compete.
Democratic Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington recognized the apparent manipulation and introduced a resolution condemning Rep. García for effectively rigging the succession process. Unsurprisingly, the Democrats reacted as one—against her.
Illinois Democrat Rep. Delia Ramirez attacked Gluesenkamp Perez, claiming she was “[g]oing after a strong progressive Latino leader.” Meanwhile, Rep. Jan Schakowsky delivered an impassioned floor speech, wagging her finger at those seeking accountability, shouting “shame!” in what many saw as a grandstand performance.
Even House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries defended García, telling reporters, “I do not support this so-called resolution of disapproval. And I strongly support Congressman Chuy García. He’s been a progressive champion in disenfranchised communities for decades — including during his time in Congress — and he’s made life better for the American people.”
Despite these defenses, the House voted 211-206 not to table the resolution. Only two Democrats—Gluesenkamp Perez and retiring Maine Rep. Jared Golden—voted against tabling it.
On CNN, Gluesenkamp Perez explained the difficulty of her stance. “It’s not fun to call out a member of your own party. But I think it’s important that we’re consistent and … we’re loyal to the soil, we’re loyal to our constituents, and say, like, election subversion is always wrong. That’s not how we run things in this country, and that’s not the party that I want to be a part of,” she told Jake Tapper.
The Democrats, unsurprisingly, remained unmoved. For them, party loyalty trumps principle. Election subversion? Overlooked. Accountability? Ignored. Epstein? Absolutely exploited.
In the end, the only person who faces real consequences is Gluesenkamp Perez. Democrats have made it crystal clear: protecting their own comes first, and consistent values come last.
