Mediaboss Marketing

House progressives rallied behind Rep. Ilhan OmarIlhan OmarProgressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Pelosi, leaders seek to squelch Omar controversy with rare joint statement Omar: I wasn't equating terrorist organizations with democratic countries MORE (D-Minn.) on Thursday as she sought to clarify that her discussion of alleged international human rights abuses wasnt drawing false equivalence between the U.S. and terrorist groups, with some arguing that she is being held to a racist double standard.

Omar and others accused the group of 12 Jewish House Democrats and vocal supporters of Israel who issued a statement asking her to clarify her comments of unfairly targeting her out of inherent anti-Muslim and racial bias.

The pushback from Omars allies laid bare the tensions in the highly diverse House Democratic caucus, where lawmakers of a wide array of ethnicities and religions have at times accused each other of being insensitive to historic injustices.

I am tired of colleagues (both D+R) demonizing @IlhanMN. Their obsession with policing her is sick. She has the courage to call out human rights abuses no matter who is responsible. That's better than colleagues who look away if it serves their politics, tweeted Rep. Rashida TlaibRashida Harbi TlaibProgressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Omar: I wasn't equating terrorist organizations with democratic countries Omar feuds with Jewish Democrats MORE (D-Mich.), who along with Omar is one of the first Muslim women elected to Congress.

And Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), who is Black, further accused fellow Democrats of engaging in racism against Omar, a Somali refugee.

I'm not surprised when Republicans attack Black women for standing up for human rights. But when its Democrats, its especially hurtful. Were your colleagues. Talk to us directly. Enough with the anti-Blackness and Islamophobia,Bush said.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezAlexandria Ocasio-CortezProgressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Omar: I wasn't equating terrorist organizations with democratic countries Ocasio-Cortez rips Democratic critics of Omar MORE (D-N.Y.) similarly argued that Omars questioning of Secretary of State Antony BlinkenAntony BlinkenTrump asks Biden to give Putin his 'warmest regards' Progressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias US sanctions network with ties to Houthis, Iran MORE at a House Foreign Affairs Committee this week was blown out of proportion.

Pretty sick & tired of the constant vilification, intentional mischaracterization, and public targeting of @IlhanMN coming from our caucus, Ocasio-Cortez wrote on Twitter.

Stop the bad faith attempts to take @IlhanMN's words out of context. She called a simple question, echoed Rep. Ayanna PressleyAyanna PressleyProgressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias House candidate in Chicago says gun violence prompted her to run Labor secretary faces questions from Democrats in police chief controversy MORE (D-Mass.).

Ocasio-Cortez further chastised her fellow Democrats for attacking Omar publicly instead of hashing out their differences privately, given the threats of violence that Omar faces on a regular basis.

They have no concept for the danger they put her in by skipping private conversations & leaping to fueling targeted news cycles around her, the New York Democrat said.

Rep. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalHouse Democrats push Garland for immigration court reforms Progressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Bipartisan talks sow division among Democrats MORE (D-Wash.), the Congressional Progressive Caucus leader, suggested that Democrats ire toward Omar was misplaced.

I think my colleagues should just instead of taking on Ilhan they should focus on justice and human rights here at home and around the world. I think its a big brouhaha over, frankly, not very much, Jayapal told The Hill.

Jayapal also issued a statement urging Democrats to stand together against cynical attempts to divide our caucus.

We cannot ignore a right-wing media echo chamber that has deliberately and routinely attacked a Black, Muslim woman in Congress, distorting her views and intentions, and resulting in threats against Rep. Omar and her staff. We urge our colleagues not to abet or amplify such divisive and bad-faith tactics, Jayapal said on behalf of the Progressive Caucus.

Omar clarified in a statement on Thursday that "I was in no way equating terrorist organizations with democratic countries with well-established judicial systems."

Omar explained that she was asking Blinken about ongoing International Criminal Court investigations regarding alleged crimes by the U.S. and the Taliban in Afghanistan, as well as Hamas and Israel in the Gaza conflict.

"To be clear: the conversation was about accountability for specific incidents regarding those ICC cases, not a moral comparison between Hamas and the Taliban and the U.S. and Israel, Omar said.

Omar drew ire from Republicans as well as some fellow Democrats for posting a tweet Monday with video from Mondays hearingand the caption: "We must have the same level of accountability and justice for all victims of crimes against humanity. We have seen unthinkable atrocities committed by the U.S., Hamas, Israel, Afghanistan, and the Taliban."

Republicans and the Democrats who took issue with that tweet expressed outrage that Omars wording appeared to be equating the U.S. and Israel with terrorist groups like the Taliban and Hamas.

Equating the United States and Israel to Hamas and the Taliban is as offensive as it is misguided. Ignoring the differences between democracies governed by the rule of law and contemptible organizations that engage in terrorism at best discredits ones intended argument and at worst reflects deep-seated prejudice, the 12 Jewish Democrats, led by Rep. Brad SchneiderBradley (Brad) Scott SchneiderProgressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Pelosi, leaders seek to squelch Omar controversy with rare joint statement Omar: I wasn't equating terrorist organizations with democratic countries MORE (Ill.), said in a joint statement late Wednesday night.

The United States and Israel are imperfect and, like all democracies, at times deserving of critique, but false equivalencies give cover to terrorist groups. We urge Congresswoman Omar to clarify her words placing the U.S. and Israel in the same category as Hamas and the Taliban, they said.

Omars office said she tried to speak with her colleagues before they issued the joint statement, but her calls were not returned. A spokesperson for Schneider didn't respond to an inquiry from The Hill to confirm that version of events.

Its shameful for colleagues who call me when they need my support to now put out a statement asking for clarification and not just call, Omar tweeted in immediate response to the 12 Democrats after the statement went out late Wednesday night.

Omar went on to accuse her colleagues of engaging in Islamophobic tropes which falsely suggest that Muslims support terrorism.

The islamophobic tropes in this statement are offensive. The constant harassment & silencing from the signers of this letter is unbearable, Omar said.

Omars subsequent statement on Thursday afternoon was more diplomatic while reiterating her defense of her questioning at the hearing and didnt take aim at her colleagues.

Following Omar's latest clarification, Schneider appeared to take a conciliatory step.

"I am pleased @Ilhan heard our concerns about her tweet, issued a clarification, and agrees with our point. I hope all can avoid such offhanded statements in the future as we work together to support American jobs & families," Schneider tweeted.

By contrast, Omar apologized in 2019 after tweeting that its all about the Benjamins baby in reference to $100 bills as her theory for what truly motivates pro-Israel American politicians.

Weeks later in 2019, the House passed a resolution broadly condemning antisemitism and other forms of hate after Omar described the pro-Israel lobby as a political influence in this country that says it is OK to push for allegiance to a foreign country.

Jewish Democrats at the time said that the comment invoked antisemitic tropes about dual loyalties.

The top six House Democratic leaders Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiTrump DOJ seized House Democrats' data from Apple Biden administration releases emergency temporary standard for healthcare facilities Progressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias MORE (Calif.), Majority Leader Steny HoyerSteny Hamilton HoyerOvernight Energy: EPA to reconsider Trump decision not to tighten soot standards | Interior proposes withdrawal of Trump rule that would allow drillers to pay less | EPA reverses Trump guidance it said weakened 'forever chemicals' regulations Progressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Pelosi, leaders seek to squelch Omar controversy with rare joint statement MORE (Md.), Majority Whip James Clyburn (S.C.), Assistant Speaker Katherine ClarkKatherine Marlea ClarkProgressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Pelosi, leaders seek to squelch Omar controversy with rare joint statement Omar: I wasn't equating terrorist organizations with democratic countries MORE (Mass.), Caucus Chair Hakeem JeffriesHakeem Sekou JeffriesWray grilled on FBI's handling of Jan. 6 Progressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Pelosi, leaders seek to squelch Omar controversy with rare joint statement MORE (N.Y.) and Vice Caucus Chair Pete AguilarPeter (Pete) Ray AguilarProgressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias Pelosi, leaders seek to squelch Omar controversy with rare joint statement Omar: I wasn't equating terrorist organizations with democratic countries MORE (Calif.) issued a joint statement Thursday saying that they welcome Omars latest clarification.

Legitimate criticism of the policies of both the United States and Israel is protected by the values of free speech and democratic debate. And indeed, such criticism is essential to the strength and health of our democracies. But drawing false equivalencies between democracies like the U.S. and Israel and groups that engage in terrorism like Hamas and the Taliban foments prejudice and undermines progress toward a future of peace and security for all, they said.

Tlaib tweeted that House Democratic leaders "should be ashamed" following the release of the statement.

"Freedom of speech doesn't exist for Muslim women in Congress. The benefit of the doubt doesn't exist for Muslim women in Congress," she wrote. "House Democratic leadership should be ashamed of its relentless, exclusive tone policing of Congresswomen of color."

Mike Lillis contributed.

See the original post here:
Progressives rally behind Omar while accusing her critics of bias | TheHill - The Hill

With two weeks to go before the Democratic primary, the progressive left has seemed to have coalesced around a single candidate, relying on a time-honored technique: self-elimination.

The candidate is Maya Wiley, the former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio. Her rise to the top of the progressive pile did not come easily. To get there, her two rivals first had to see their campaigns implode.

First to take himself out was Scott M. Stringer, the New York City comptroller. He was an original progressive favorite, until two women came forward with decades-old allegations of inappropriate sexual advances, causing many progressives leaders to withdraw their support.

Next to run into trouble was Dianne Morales, the former nonprofit executive whose campaign mutinied, tried to unionize and then accused her of union-busting. It was a bad look for a woman who has run on empowering the grass roots.

Four progressive groups, including the Working Families Party, have rescinded their endorsements for Ms. Morales. All are now endorsing Ms. Wiley, joining Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jamaal Bowman, who endorsed her over the weekend.

And three of the citys major progressives groups, the Jim Owles Liberal Democratic Club, the Jewish Vote and New York Progressive Action Network, have all moved from Ms. Morales to Ms. Wiley.

As Eric Adams and Andrew Yang continue to push dangerous pro-corporate, pro-carceral agendas, its more important than ever that we consolidate progressive strength to ensure a working peoples champion wins this year, said Sochie Nnaemeka, the New York State director of the Working Families Party. Maya Wiley has the momentum, platform and growing diverse coalition to win this race.

The rescinded endorsements follow news last week that Ms. Moraless top adviser, Ifeoma Ike, has also defected to Ms. Wileys team.

Although many of these groups are switching to Ms. Wiley, Shaun Donovan, the former federal housing secretary who has remained in the second tier of top candidates, is trying to take advantage of Ms. Moraless misfortune by poaching her supporters.

His campaign has sent texts to Ms. Moraless backers highlighting his support for ending solitary confinement in prisons and removing metal detectors from schools.

Shaun is the only candidate, aside from Dianne, who has called for $3 billion to be reallocated from the police and corrections budget toward community-based public safety and racial justice initiatives, said Jeremy Edwards, a spokesman for Mr. Donovan.

Although Ms. Ocasio-Cortezs endorsement of Ms. Wiley on Saturday made headlines, she also took a stand on the City Council race, throwing support to 60 candidates running in 31 districts.

They had all signed a 30-point pledge aligned with the vision of her PAC, Courage to Change, promising to support policies like a Green New Deal, moving money from the police to social services, investing in public transit and rejecting donations from the fossil-fuel and real-estate industries.

The message: Lasting movements are built from the ground up, and the fight for the bottom of the ticket is at least as important as the top-billed mayoral race.

We are advancing and making sure that we are coming together as a movement, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said, standing before rows of candidates holding purple Courage to Change signs. She urged New Yorkers in their 31 districts to vote for them.

The list includes all six candidates on the Democratic Socialists of America slate: Brandon West, Michael Hollingsworth and Alexa Avils in Brooklyn; Tiffany Cabn and Jaslin Kaur in Queens; and Adolfo Abreu in the Bronx. Those candidates are emphasizing climate and environmental-justice policies such as building publicly owned renewable-energy infrastructure and banning new fossil-fuel infrastructure like gas power plants and pipelines.

In districts with several candidates from her list, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez picked top choices on the basis of their support from grass-roots groups focused on public housing, climate action and immigrant and labor rights.

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez emphasized that to keep its momentum, the progressive movement needs to build a bloc in the City Council to help a Mayor Wiley shift policy to the left.

We have a candidate that grass-roots movements can work with, can influence, can shape, she said.

The shadow of one of the most prominent former New Yorkers loomed large over the Republican mayoral primary last week.

On Thursday morning, Fernando Mateo, a restaurant owner, announced an endorsement from Michael T. Flynn, a former national security adviser to President Donald J. Trump.

Hours later, Mr. Mateo announced at a debate with his opponent, Curtis Sliwa, that he had met with Mr. Trump that same day to discuss the state of New York City.

He is very saddened by the state of this city, Mr. Mateo said of the former president, who was a lifelong New Yorker until he changed his primary residence to Florida in 2019. President Trump has compassion for New York and New Yorkers.

A representative for Mr. Trump, who has not made an endorsement in the race, confirmed the meeting.

Mr. Mateo has repeatedly voiced his support for the former president, who is under investigation by the Manhattan district attorney.

Throughout his campaign, Mr. Mateo has criticized Mr. Sliwa, the founder of the Guardian Angels who only became a Republican last year, for not supporting or voting for Mr. Trump, who remains popular with Republicans.

Understand the N.Y.C. Mayoral Race

The two have also sparred over the lie that Mr. Trump won the 2020 election Mr. Sliwa says he did not which has become a litmus test for conservative candidates across the country.

Mr. Flynn, a former general who became one of the most ardent voices in Mr. Trumps push to overturn the election and recently suggested at conference organized by adherents of the QAnon conspiracy theory that he would support a military coup, cited Mr. Mateos embrace of the former president as the reason for his endorsement.

He understands, supports and embraces President Trumps America First agenda, Mr. Flynn said.

Mr. Yangs wife, Evelyn, rode the Cyclone roller coaster in Coney Island, Brooklyn, with him in his first advertisement.

Mr. Stringers wife, Elyse Buxbaum, appears with him in an ad showing the couple getting their two sons ready for school.

Now, as the former Wall Street executive Raymond J. McGuire continues to struggle in the polls, his wife, Crystal McCrary McGuire, a lawyer and filmmaker, is appearing solo in an ad set to launch on Tuesday.

The ad shows Ms. McCrary McGuire with Mr. McGuire and their 8-year-old son, Leo, and talks about his work behind the scenes helping New Yorkers as a private public servant, including on the board of NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital.

There are literally hundreds of stories about how Ray has been serving the community of New York City for three decades, but he hasnt been putting out press releases about it, Ms. McCrary McGuire said in an interview.

Mr. McGuire entered the race with strong support from the business community. He has raised more than $9 million and has a super PAC supporting his campaign, but he has not been able to break through with voters, according to available polling.

For weeks, Andrew Yang has been treated by the other mayoral candidates as a front-runner, drawing sustained attacks at debates and on the campaign trail. Yet Mr. Yang is sharpening his attacks on someone who is not even running against him: Mr. de Blasio.

On Tuesday, Mr. Yang delivered what his campaign called a closing message, blaming Mr. de Blasio and his administration for problems associated with crime and quality of life.

Then on Thursday, Mr. Yang showed up outside a Y.M.C.A. in Park Slope, Brooklyn a gym famously frequented by Mr. de Blasio where he planned to talk about how best to turn the page on the de Blasio administration. (Mr. Yang was heckled by protesters and forced to leave.)

It has been a shift in tone for Mr. Yang, who had for months positioned himself as an exuberant, optimistic political outsider.

But the attacks serve several functions. By targeting Mr. de Blasio, Mr. Yang is seeking to cement his position as a reform candidate. He is also implicitly drawing a contrast with some of his top rivals in the race.

He has cast Eric Adams, who is vying with Mr. Yang for moderate Democrats, as an ally of Mr. de Blasio. And two other rivals worked for Mr. de Blasio Ms. Wiley and Kathryn Garcia, who served as sanitation commissioner making criticisms of the mayors record a form of proxy attack against them.

Link:
Wiley Wins the Progressives: 5 Takeaways From the N.Y.C. Mayors Race - The New York Times

Vice President Kamala Harris had strong words for migrants making their way to America's border on her first trip as vice president, to Guatemala. "Do not come," Harris saidtwicewhile speaking to reporters. "The United States will continue to enforce our laws and secure our border. There are legal methods by which migration can and should occur, but we, as one of our priorities, will discourage illegal migration."

Her words were a rebuke to the masses of people flocking to the southern border since Joe Biden won the presidency, some of whom have explicitly referenced Biden's language on immigration as the impetus for their journey north. But the idea that America should have a national borderone which it polices and securesand that America is entitled to a formal legal process whereby it grants citizenship to would-be immigrants, was not an obvious point to everyone.

"This is disappointing to see," tweeted Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), the standard-bearer for the progressive Left. "First, seeking asylum at any US border is a 100% legal method of arrival. Second, the US spent decades contributing to regime change and destabilization in Latin America. We can't help set someone's house on fire and then blame them for fleeing."

Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez's disappointment that Vice President Harris was discouraging illegal immigration seemed to suggest that the only position she would welcome would be one in which every immigrant is indiscriminately welcomed. In publicly expressing her dissent, Ocasio-Cortez telegraphed to the Biden administration in no uncertain terms that any legal restrictions at all on immigration will face fierce opposition from the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. She was not the only one.

"We should not abandon our values and rights to far right white nationalists," tweeted fellow Squad-member Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) atop video of Harris's speech.

This view, that discouraging illegal immigration is a white nationalist value, is actually a new one for progressives. "Open borders?" democratic socialist Bernie Sanders (D-VT) scoffed in an interview with Ezra Klein for Vox as recently as 2015. "That's a Koch Brothers proposal."

"It would make a lot of global poor richer, wouldn't it?" Klein pressed.

"It would make everybody in America poorer," Sanders responded. "You're doing away with the concept of a nation-state, and I don't think there's any country in the world that believes in that. If you believe in a nation-state or in a country called the United States or U.K. or Denmark or any other country, you have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people."

It was a right-wing proposition to have unbridled immigration, Sanders insisted as recently as six years ago. "What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy," Sanders explained. "Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don't believe in that."

Sanders was voicing what many Americansboth white and people of color had already figured out. A large majority of African Americans and Hispanics said they would vote for a presidential candidate who stood for strengthening our border security to reduce illegal immigration, a 2019 Harvard-Harris poll found. That shouldn't be surprising; illegal immigration has been tied to a 20-60 percent decrease in Black working-class wages. Another recent study suggested that immigration accounts for a third of the decline in the Black employment rate over the last 40 years. "Black Americans are more supportive of limiting immigration than any other bloc of the Democratic coalition. And Hispanics actually tend to be more concerned about illegal immigration than are whites or Blacks," the sociologist Musa al Gharbi reported.

You wouldn't know this to listen to the politicians and influencers of the Democratic Partyand not just from the progressive wing; when Democratic candidates running for the 2020 presidential nomination were asked if they would decriminalize illegal border crossing, almost all of them said yes.

Why? How did progressive leaders go from understanding that mass immigration is a de facto tax on the pooras recently as six years agoto casting it as the only morally defensible position, the only non-racist one?

It has to do with who the Democrats' new base is. In a new paper, the French economist Thomas Piketty along with a others detailed a colossal shift that has been underway in Western democracies in terms of who populates the ranks of the Left. If in the 1960s, the Democratic Party and other liberal-leaning political parties were filled with members of the working class, over the course of the past 60 years, they have become the bastion of the highly educateda Brahmin Left whose concerns and demands increasingly constitute Democrats' agenda.

It's counterintuitive, write Picketty et al., given the skyrocketing inequality across the developed world. "Given this recent evolution, one might have expected to observe rising political demand for redistribution and the return of class-based (income-based or wealth-based) politics," write the economists. "Instead, Western democracies seem to have shifted to new forms of identity-based conflicts in recent decades, embodied by the increasing salience of environmental issues and the growing prosperity of anti-establishment authoritarian movements."

A class-based political spectrum has been replaced by what Picketty et al. call a "multi-elite party system." If we once had one party representing the rich and one party representing labor, today, we have one party representing the rich and one party representing the highly educated and no party representing the working class. In 2020, Biden won 84 of the 100 counties with the highest percentage of college degree-holders. But the ranks of the rich are increasingly split, too: In 2020, Wall Street donors gave more money to Biden than to Trump.

Needless to say, they didn't do so because they are keen on economic redistribution.

The truth is, the Brahmin Left doesn't want redistribution; it wants culture wars over identity. It wants environmentalism, open borders, and student loan forgiveness.

Open borders was once the calling card of the libertarian-infused Right. Now, it's a humanitarian cri de coeur that flatters the vanity of highly educated liberals while working class Americans of all races bear the burdenand are then smeared as racists for being afraid they might lose their jobs due to an influx of labor.

"The history of Citizenship in the US is deeply woven with the history of racism," tweeted Ocasio-Cortez back in 2019. "It has been used as the legal enforcer of racism for most of US history."

She got it exactly backwards: Protections from racism, like all civil rights, depend on a national border and on the compact a sovereign citizenry makes with its own government. A Left that was invested in the working class wouldn't have forgotten this, wouldn't have had the luxury of smearing people afraid of losing their jobspeople of all racesas racists. But instead of listening to the concerns of our multiracial working class, the Democrats are listening to the Squadthe patron saints of the Brahmin Left.

Batya Ungar-Sargon is the deputy opinion editor of Newsweek.

The views in this article are the writer's own.

Read more from the original source:
The Immigration Debate Shows Progressives Have Abandoned the Working Class | Opinion - Newsweek

But some maneuvers can easily overshadow the others. Perhaps the most incendiary move by DOJ in recent weeks came in the lawsuit against Trump by E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of rape in 2019. After Trump publicly denied her claims and called her a liar, Carroll filed a defamation lawsuit against him in New York state court. Last September, the Barr Justice Department intervened and sought to move the case to the federal courts, substituting the United States as a defendant. The department justified the move by noting that Trump made the denials while he was president, thus implicating the executive branch itself. Under Garland, DOJ is declining to change course.

If the departments position prevails in court, most legal experts believe that it is exceedingly unlikely that Carrolls lawsuit will succeed. The move drew the ire of Trump critics who expressed horror at the prospect of the Biden administration formally defending a former president over one of his accusers. Carroll herself strongly criticized Garland for the decision. They argue that Trump was doing his job when he repeatedly slandered me and told the world that I was too ugly for him to rape, she wrote in her newsletter. (Emphasis hers.) Bidens DOJ turns out to be run by someone who may be more interested in protecting his vision of the DOJ institution than in cleaning up its corruption.

Other observers noted that Garlands stance in the Carroll case reflects the departments broader goal of defending the executive branch and the presidency itself, no matter who happens to hold the White House. The issue is whether a presidents duties include answering questions during an interview given in his official capacityincluding questions about his earlier private life that may reflect on his fitness for office, Randall Eliason, a George Washington University law professor, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed this week. Assuming they do, then federal law provides that he cant be sued for what he said. Eliason said that the alternative was that any federal employee could face lawsuits for their on-the-job remarks if opposing lawyers are clever or tenacious enough.

Eliason said the same long-term reasoning also appeared to be guiding Garlands actions in the Barr memo case. As for the Mueller investigation memo, if Garland simply agreed to release it, he creates another precedent, he wrote. Future senior advisers to the attorney generalor to other government officialsmight be reluctant to offer their candid views in controversial cases out of fear of disclosure if the political winds shift. Thats why the law has long recognized legal privileges for such internal communications. He added that he expected the department to prevail in both cases.

Continue reading here:
Merrick Garland's Moves Have Progressives Feeling the Angst - The New Republic

The pattern of events in the recent hostilities between Israel and the terrorist organizations, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, was unfortunately predictable in many ways. We have witnessed the same routine in several previous battles, since Hamas violently took over the Gaza Strip in 2007. Hamas shoots rockets at Israeli civilians. Israel responds by bombing Hamas infrastructure located in the midst of Gaza civilians. Israel is accused of using disproportionate force and of war crimes. A ceasefire is eventually agreed upon.

What was different this time was the immediate attack against Israel by extreme-left members of the United States Congress. The vehement assaults by progressive members of the Democratic party were shameless in their irresponsible slander against Israel that was dictated solely by the ideological requirements of their woke agenda.

On May 13, three days after Hamas initiated the latest round of hostilities, the Progressive caucus dedicated time to allow members of The Squad six Democratic members of Congress and their leftist comrades to proclaim their outrage at Israels self-defense against the onslaught of thousands of rockets shot at Israeli civilians. Their well-known jargon apartheid, ethnic cleansing, brutalization, violent oppression, occupation, etc. flowed freely in their frenzied condemnation of Israel.

Get The Jewish Chronicle Weekly Edition by email and never miss our top storiesFree Sign Up

A particularly obnoxious, yet very telling, speech, was delivered by Cori Bush, the representative from St. Louis. This newly inducted member into The Squad sounded more like a propagandist for Islamic jihad than a member of Congress. Apparently unencumbered by any knowledge of the subject, Bush felt free to accuse Israel of ethnic cleansing and apartheid, among other human rights violations. Clearly, one need not agree with all Israeli actions, but accusations of ethnic cleansing and apartheid are sure indicators of extreme ignorance or extreme malevolence. She did not speak one word in opposition to Hamas violation of international law and human rights by shooting thousands of rockets at Israeli civilians from within its own civilian population

Bushs speech typified the progressive attack against Israel. Their self-righteous sense of morality expresses itself in spontaneous outrage in support of their designated victim without any regard for facts, context or history. Their convoluted sense of social justice is based on the simplistic notion that there are the oppressors and there are the oppressed. The oppressors can do no right and the oppressed can do no wrong.

The very use of the term progressive is misleading. The designation progressive has been used to mean anything from liberal Democrat to hard left neo-Marxist. These Congressional progressives would be better described as Washington wokesters adherents of the woke culture, with an unshakeable faith that they epitomize the heights of moral clarity. In fact, they embody the depths of neo-Marxist depravity. Woke politics employs gang-like methods: cancel culture, shaming, intimidation, threatening job loss and more, to force their moral certitude on others.

All that is progressive about the woke left is its progressive descent into the netherworld of poisonous propaganda, moral distortion and vile antisemitism.

These Washington wokesters, can be classified into two undesirable groups:(1) the wacky and wonky wokesters whose unabashed ignorance of the Israeli-Arab conflict allows them to speak freely on the subject without fear of embarrassment by unaccommodating facts; and(2) the willful and wanton wokesters who will distort or ignore any fact in their malicious drive to defame, demonize, and delegitimize Israel.With their loud and obnoxious speech and action, the Washington wokesters are quickly effecting the transformation of the Democratic party from a party of liberal Democrats to a party of neo-Marxists.

Wokesters use cheap and meaningless slogans to promote a selective application of lofty concepts such as social justice and human rights. Their accepted parameters of social justice often include ignoring calls by Palestinian leadership to murder Jews and its denial of Jewish history. The Palestinian Authoritys encouragement and reward for suicide bombings, knifings and car rammings also are not condemned as part of their woke sense of justice. Hamas charter calling for the destruction of Israel, its launching of incendiary balloons, shooting rockets and building tunnels to target Israeli civilians, seem to pose no problem for the wokesters understanding of human rights. By not forcefully denouncing these terrorist and criminal acts, they give legitimacy to them. They seem to excuse the Palestinian Arabs for these acts because they are oppressed victims.

Yes, the Palestinian Arabs are victims. They are victims of their incompetent, corrupt and criminal leadership. They are victims of the anti-Jewish hatred that their schools teach, that their mosques preach and that their media screech. Palestinian Arabs have rejected every effort at peace for the last 100 years. They teach an ever-changing historical narrative that leaves no place for a Jewish state in the Middle East. Radical as it might sound, perhaps the Palestinian Arabs have actually played some role in the perpetuation of their victimhood.

One of the original members of The Squad is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. During the Israel-Hamas hostilities, she was a lead sponsor, along with eight other leftist Democrats, of a Democratic resolution to block a $735 million sale of precision-guided weapons to Israel during the hostilities. Israels ability to strike Hamas and Islamic Jihad targets with, usually, incredible precision would be an inducement for the terrorists organization to agree to a ceasefire sooner rather than later. Without such weaponry the choice is: (1) to not respond at all to Hamas attacks; (2) to bomb Hamas targets with much less precision causing innumerably more casualties; or (3) to attack Hamas on the ground by entering Gaza causing still more casualties. Thankfully the resolution did not pass, but this is only a taste of what is to be expected from the Washington wokesters.

The insidious infiltration of the woke culture into the Democratic party in Congress brings to mind the resistible rise of Jeremy Corbyn as head of the British Labour party in 2015. During his term as Labour leader from 2015 to 2020, Corbyn moved the party to the extreme left. He once referred to Hamas and the Lebanese terrorist organization Hezbollah as his friends, although he later expressed regret for doing so. In 2014, he was present at a wreath-laying at the graves of Palestinian Arab terrorists who murdered Israeli athletes in Munich in 1972. The rise of antisemitism in the Labor party grew immensely during Corbyns reign. Corbyn himself was accused by many, including the late Chief Rabbi of England, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, of being an antisemite and of tolerating antisemitism in the ranks of the Labour party. Many members of the Labour party who complained about antisemitism were harassed and abused by Corbyn supporters and left the party. Corbyn and the Labour party suffered a humiliating defeat in the 2019 general election and Corbyn resigned in disgrace.

The far lefts hatred of Israel is interwoven with left-wing antisemitism. This awaits the Democratic party if it remains an obsequious kowtower to the arrogance and dangerous madness of the Washington wokesters.

It is not unreasonable to postulate that the dramatic rise of anti-Semitic attacks in the United States, during and following the Israel-Hamas hostilities, is occurring, not only due to the vile attacks against Israel in social media and the unprofessional and irresponsible reporting by large segments of the mainstream media. It, no doubt, has also increased due to the extremist political attacks by the Washington wokesters.

Lets hope and pray, if there are any adults left in the Democratic party who still adhere to the values of liberal democracy, that they develop some moral courage and fight back. PJC

Reuven Hoch, J.D., is a legal editor living in Squirrel Hill.

Original post:
The danger to Israel and Jews posed by progressives in Congress - thejewishchronicle.net