Freshman Representative Ilhan Omar Was Labeled Anti-Semitic for Saying the Pro-Israeli Lobby Influences Congress Through Donations

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN), WIki
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) threatened sanctions against freshman Representatives Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) after they expressed concern that the the Israel lobby in the US, called AIPAC, by making massive donations to cooperative politicians, had gained too much control over US foreign policy. Omar responded by saying McCarthy’s threats were “all about the Benjamins” ($100 dollar bills). [We may or not agree with Omar, but it is a sad day when criticism of a lobby on behalf of a foreign government is seen as hatred of the people of that country. That’s like saying that opposition to the lobby of a drug company equates to hatred of the employees of that company.]

M.J. Rosenberg, who worked for AIPAC for years in the 70’s and 80’s, confirmed that Ilhan Omar’s tweet concerning AIPAC was correct and that political fundraising is a huge part of AIPAC’s operation. Rosenberg confirmed that AIPAC is a very organized money distribution system. [Are we now to conclude that Mr. Rosenberg is Anti-Semitic? –GEG

On Thursday, M.J. Rosenberg, who has worked for AIPAC for years in the 70’s and 80’s, confirmed Ilhan Omar’s controversial tweet concerning AIPAC – that it’s “all about the Benjamins” (referring to $100 bills).

“In short, AIPAC’s political operation is used precisely as Representative Omar suggested”, Rosenberg wrote in The Nation. 

This is no small thing, and this shows just how important this debate is – and it’s a debate that Ilhan Omar sparked off. We should be ever so thankful for her person and her courage.

Rosenberg is pushing back against the Israel apologists who seek to shut this debate down. Forward editor Batya Ungar-Sargon, who was actually the first inciter against Omar, tried to downplay the money aspect in relation to AIPAC:

AIPAC, or the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, is a pro-Israel lobbying group that focuses on Israel education, trips to Israel for U.S. politicians, its big yearly Policy Conference, and bills that push for pro-Israel measures. In 2018, AIPAC spent $3,518,028; but none of that was to individual candidates. AIPAC does not endorse candidates, nor does it make campaign contributions, though its members and employees do.

But Rosenberg cuts through all of that:

Officially, of course, AIPAC does not engage in political fundraising; it would be illegal for it to do so, and the lobby is vehement on the point that it doesn’t. And it is true that, to my knowledge, it does not directly raise money to support or defeat candidates. But that is just a technicality.

He explains that “Political fundraising is a huge part of AIPAC’s operation”, provides a long list of job descriptions concerning this lobbying, and concludes:

Not mentioned is what all the information is used for: political fundraising. That means making sure that pro-Israel PACs know what to do with their money. And making sure that individual donors know what to do with theirs. That is why AIPAC has a large national political operation. If it were not in the money-distribution business, it would simply rely on its legislative department to lobby for and draft legislation for members of Congress. Nor would its political director make a half-million dollars a year. In short, AIPAC’s political operation is used precisely as Representative Omar suggested.

In other words, it really is all about the Benjamins, but people are shocked, shocked! – when Omar says it. That’s Rosenberg’s line:

AIPAC denies fundraising precisely the way Captain Renault in the film Casablanca declared he was “shocked, shocked, to find that gambling is going on” in his establishment. As he is saying it, one of the club’s crooks hands him a wad of cash, saying, “Your winnings, sir.”

Rosenberg explains how the actual money-handling goes on in the side rooms of the AIPAC conferences:

AIPAC, of course, denies that anyone raises money at its policy conference. And it’s true. No one does… in the official AIPAC rooms. However, there are also the side rooms, nominally independent of the main event but just down the hall, where candidates and invited donors (only the really wealthy donors get the invites) meet and decide which candidate will get what. This arrangement is almost a metaphor for the whole AIPAC fundraising operation. The side rooms are nominally not AIPAC, so AIPAC can deny that any fundraising takes place at their conference. But in fact, they are the most exclusive venues in the country for candidates to raise money in the name of advancing the AIPAC cause.

This is certainly not the first time Rosenberg comes out against AIPAC. And people like Alan Dershowitz have pressed very hard to discredit him, as when he used the term “Israel firsters” in 2012 and left Media Matters due to the brouhaha. But he is a man with a record, having worked as a Senate and House aide, at the State Department, and at Israel Policy Forum. His words carry weight. And right now, they seem to carry more weight than ever. Right now, people are listening.

Read full article here…

Visit our Classified ads.

Check out our Classified ads at the bottom of this page.

Recent stories & commentary


Top 10 Fake Science Stories of 2019

January 26, 2020 0

This article lists ten news stories from 2019 that were debunked for using fake science, and included a range of issues covering false climate claims, gun violence statistics, inaccurate breathalyzer tests and more.


Radical San Francisco District Attorney Will Allow Criminals to Get ‘Off the Hook’ and Go into ‘Diversion’ Instead of Prison If They Have a Child in the House

January 24, 2020 GEG 0

California passed a law, SB 394, that is optional in each county, and allows diversion for lawbreakers, instead of jail, for primary caregivers of minor children under certain circumstances. According to prosecutors, the only “diversion” that’s going to happen now is that new crimes will get diverted onto more people.


Illegal Alien Arrested for Raping and Murdering 92-Year Old Woman After Allegedly Attacking His Father and Being Set Free, Despite ICE Detainer, Due to New York Sanctuary Law

January 24, 2020 Defense Maven and NY Post 0

Khan was previously released from local law enforcement custody in November 2019 with an active ICE detainer, due to New York City’s sanctuary policies. A spokeswoman for NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio expressed the mayor’s sympathies and chastised President Donald Trump’s administration for “politicizing this tragedy.”


For classified advertising rates and terms, click here. The appearance of ads on this site does not signify endorsement by the publisher. We do not attempt to verify the accuracy of statements made therein or vouch for the integrity of advertisers. However, we will investigate complaints from readers and remove any message we find to be misleading or that promotes anything fraudulent, illegal, or unethical.

Leave a Reply

1 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
1 Comment authors
Susan Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Any thoughts on CAIR? Council of American and Islamic Relations