‘NYT’ discovers elephant in living room: ‘Pro-Israel billionaires’

“Pro-Israel Billionaires From Both Parties Aid Menendez’s Defense Fund,” is the headline of an article in today’s New York Times that might have been reported by Lobelog or us. The piece by Alexander Burns says that embattled NJ Senator Robert Menendez is getting support from Republican Sheldon Adelson, who wants to nuke Iran, and Democrat Haim Saban, who wants to bomb the living daylights out of Iran, along with assorted other billionaires. (What do you think Menendez’s position is on Iran?).

This explains why Hillary Clinton vowed to her benefactor Saban that she will work “across party lines” to fight the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel.

Here are the first 4 paragraphs of the Times report:

Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey, who was indicted in April on corruption charges, raised nearly $1.6 million for his legal defense fund in the second quarter of the year, including from some of the country’s most prominent pro-Israel billionaires, according to a disclosure report filed this week.

Though Mr. Menendez is a Democrat, his legal fund has attracted support from political donors in both parties who take a hawkish view of Israel’s security. The New Jersey senator has been an outspoken critic of the Obama administration’s nuclear negotiations with Iran, and its often-troubled relationship with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Sheldon Adelson, the casino billionaire who is a prolific donor to Republican groups, gave $10,000 to Mr. Menendez’s legal trust, as did Mr. Adelson’s wife, Miriam, who is a physician.

According to the filing prepared for the Senate Select Committee on Ethics, the Robert Menendez Legal Expense Trust also received contributions from the entertainment magnate Haim Saban, a pro-Israel Democratic donor, and his wife, Cheryl, as well as from the real estate billionaire Mortimer B. Zuckerman. Seth Klarman, a hedge fund billionaire who has donated heavily to Republicans, gave $5,000.

The Times is finding it has no choice but to report on pro-Israel billionaires because they are such a prominent force in US politics on both sides, are the leaders of the opposition to the Iran deal; and because Eli Clifton and Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer and our site too have been pounding the issue so much in recent years. Along with presidential hopeful Sen. Lindsey Graham:

“If I put together a finance team that will make me financially competitive enough to stay in this thing…I may have the first all-Jewish cabinet in America because of the pro-Israel funding. Bottom line is, I’ve got a lot of support from the pro-Israel funding.”

Young officials in the Obama administration all read the Walt-Mearsheimer paper and book “The Israel Lobby” (2006, 2007) and vowed to shape American foreign policy on that basis, reports Michael Oren, Israel’s former ambassador to the U.S., in his new memoir. And though Oren contends that the book advanced an anti-semitic “conspiracy thesis of undue Jewish influence on Congress and the media” he acknowledges its enormous traction:

Nevertheless, the assertion that U.S. support for Israel had precipitated 9/11 and other jihadist attacks against Americans, and that, far from an asset, Israel represented a strategic liability for the United States, tapped into strong campus currents. Graduates of those universities naturally gravitated toward the press and government service. So “The Israel Lobby,” refined into a bestselling book, penetrated the Beltway.

This did not mean that Obama had internalized the views contained in either [Edward Said’s book] Orientalism or “the Israel Lobby.” Still, there was no gainsaying the books’ impact on the academic and policy-making worlds from which his administration’s attitudes sprung. The notion of the need to revise America’s global role, to palliate Islam, and achieve diplomatic distance from Israel had become conventional by the time I arrived in Washington. Even the term “Israel Lobby,” once confined to racists such as Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, entered the mainstream media. Israel’s own policies no doubt accelerated these trends and endowed them with a moral pretext.

“Palliate Islam”– that’s an Islamophobic statement. Palliate, Webster’s:

to reduce the violence of (a disease)

to cover by excuses and apologies

to moderate the intensity of

Imagine someone saying that a writer was trying to excuse Judaism.

Please support Mondoweiss today with a tax-deductible donation.

23 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

If what Abe Foxman constantly claimed, is true , that America is a nation of secret Jew haters , and those Jew haters find out their government has been bought by Pro Israeli fellow Americans and steered into war for Israel,s benefit , then that antisemitism will fuel a serious backlash against American Jews.Of course Adelson/Oren /Saban and the other traitors will not suffer.They could care less what happens to their fellow Jews, as they themselves will be well protected and conveniently out of sight.

It is good that the NYT is publishing this intrusive interference in America,s sovereign affairs.It would not be good if peace and equality seeking American Jews were to suffer because of that interference.

Well, I’ll be…

Thank you, Alexander Burns. Here’s some information on Burns:

http://www.nytco.com/alexander-burns-joins-the-new-york-times/

Thanks, James and Phil!

Thanks also for pointing this fact out: ““Palliate Islam”– that’s an Islamophobic statement.”

Oh, wow! An elephant. Who knew?

I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict that Hillary ultimately fails, DUE to her “billionairesness,” her raising over a billion dollars for her own campaign, and her fealty to certain Pro-Israel billionaires.

If you’re a young, idealistic Democrat looking to get ahead in progressive politics, knowing your pay-check comes from West Bank Settler supporters, will have a selective quality. If you’re a small donor, knowing that she’s raised so much big bucks from people with a clear non-progressive agenda, why contribute when you know it means nothing to her?

And the NYT reports today that, while she’s outraising everyone, she’s also outspending everyone at a high burn rate, awkwardly reported as reflecting “frugality.” She’s in the pocket of “interested billionaires,” she’s spending their money freely, and therefore will need to keep doing what they want to keep the money flowing, and small donors – heart of the Democratic party – can’t feel that they make any real difference to her, regardless of what her high-cost TV ads say about her.

This is where Israel’s strategy of leaving the Left behind, in favor the Right, is so deeply stupid. I turned on Rush Limbaugh for a few minutes yesterday and today, looking for coverage of the Iran Deal, and he’s bloviating pure Netanyahu-speak. The Democratic base, in case you haven’t noticed, doesn’t identify with Rush, and their all aware of the Israel Lobby, and the cost of taking billionaire checks to fund your campaign.

So Hillary expects to win following tried and true political tactics, built on billionaire dollars, just as those billionaires have lost their minds, to fund a mega-campaign intended to rally her base, who are searching their souls about whether to join BDS, in order to finally put enough pressure on Israel to get it to change direction, and still looking for a candidate who will hold financial pirates accountable.

Sugar Daddy Net Worth Candidate(s)
Sheldon Adelson; Casino tycoon $22.9 Billion Christie, Rubio (Maybe)
Norman Braman; Car dealer, Philadelphia Eagles Owner $1.88 Billion Rubio
Harlan Crow; Real estate developer, CEO of Crow Holdings Hundreds of millions Christie
Larry Ellison, Oracle founder $54 Billion Rubio, Paul
Foster Friess; Mutual fund financier $350 Million Santorum
Ken Griffin; Citadel hedge fund founder est. $4.4 billion Walker
David and Charles Koch $40.7 billion each; $81.4 billion combined Bush, Cruz, Paul, Rubio, Walker
Robert Mercer; hedge fund magnate $23 billion Cruz
Robert Rowling; TRT Holdings founder $5.5 billion Cruz

I think it would help to keep things in perspective if we changed our terminology to reflect the changed conditions in our society as our capitalist nobility assumes the role of the feudal nobility of bygone days. Hence, Lord Adelson and Lord Saban. Show some respect!