Democrats have taken the gloves off in their own trade war. In Washington and on the campaign trail, the public sniping over whether Congress should give the White House power to clinch the biggest free-trade deal in history has reached new heights.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Wednesday escalated her war of words with President Barack Obama, saying in a blog post that he’s the one who is wrong on trade.


Later Wednesday, the Senate Finance Committee voted to give Obama “fast track” trade promotion authority, setting the stage for a vote on the Senate floor.

The Massachusetts Democrat said it’s unfair for the White House to show corporations the contents of a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, but ask Congress to sign off on it, sight unseen.

“When giant corporations get to see the details and the American people don’t, we all lose. Let’s level the playing field: No vote on fast-tracking trade until the public can read the TPP deal,” Warren wrote in a post titled “You can’t read this” on her campaign website.

The attack came after Obama on Tuesday said that he loves Warren, “but she’s wrong on this.”

Warren reiterated her points Wednesday evening, telling MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that she was dubious of the deal because it was being engineered largely by corporate executives and lobbyists. She called it “Basic Democracy 101” in analyzing its flaws.

“My view is: When the process is rigged, then the outcome is likely to be rigged,” Warren told Maddow, adding later: “I just think it’s time to say no.”

Warren’s verbal assault is part of the simmering fight between Obama and his fellow Democrats over a 12-country trade pact that would cover more than 40 percent of global GDP. A number of progressive Democrats fear the deal could undercut U.S. wages and ship jobs overseas.

The fight has also ensnared Hillary Clinton. She is in an awkward position — she has ties to the TPP deal, dating to her time as secretary of state, and she risks having to attack her former boss. But she also risks alienating the left wing of her party.

For the time being, Clinton has threaded the needle, laying out conditions for what she would deem a successful trade deal, but not commenting directly on what is before Congress.

Sensing Clinton’s vulnerability, fellow Democratic presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley has gone on the attack against the front-runner.

“American workers whose jobs could be on the line right now are owed more than lip service. They deserve to know where leaders stand,” O’Malley said in an email sent Wednesday to supporters.

O’Malley also took to Twitter. Shortly after Clinton spoke in Concord, N.H., on Tuesday, he tweeted a short video titled “Bad Trade Deals” and wrote, “When US jobs are on the line, it’s not a hard choice – it’s common sense.”

And it’s not just the relatively thin Democratic presidential field attacking Clinton. Republican Jeb Bush on Wednesday accused her of a “politically motivated flip-flop” in a Medium post.

He zeroed in on one of the more specific elements of her to-date vague statements — that currency manipulation should be considered in the deal. The White House is opposed to including currency rules, for fear it could cause other countries to balk.

“These new reservations are conveniently timed. Sec. Clinton wavered on support for trade the last time she ran for President as well,” Bush said in his post. “It sends a terrible signal this late in the negotiations for Sec. Clinton to pull the rug out from under our allies for a short-term political gain.”

Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is considering his own presidential bid, last week issued a statement calling on all the candidates — but singling out Clinton — to oppose the “job-killing” trade deal.

The stakes are high around the still-forming trade pact, with Obama wanting to secure a major free trade deal as part of his legacy.

Trade promotion authority legislation would give the president the power to complete trade deals with only up-or-down votes from Congress. It is seen as integral to both reaching a bilateral agreement with Japan, the linchpin of the TPP. But an indication that the fast-track bill doesn’t have enough votes could deal a blow to the negotiations.

With the lofty ambitions have come low blows.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, talking to reporters this week, said about Obama’s proposal: “I’m not only no. I’m hell no.”

According to an AP report, New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, who is expected to replace Reid when he retires, said on Tuesday, “I’m disappointed in the efforts by President Obama.”

Obama is not backing down. On Thursday, he plans to make a pitch to his own political arm, Organizing for Action, on the need for this trade deal.

“The president will say to his loyal supporters that this staple of his campaign stump speech is the reason that he’s pursuing the kind of trade deal that will open up new opportunities for the next generation of middle class workers,” a White House official said Wednesday, previewing the speech.

It’s not clear to what extent Obama will use the speech to push for the audience to urge their members of Congress to back him.

Gabriel Debenedetti and Edward-Isaac Dovere contributed to this report.