- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
With the squawking of the Rs, and the deafening silence from the Ds not pushing back and making this a talking point, every establishment figure is scared of this guy.
Good.
The establishment Democrats might have signed their own death sentence by attacking Zohran Mamdani
controlled opposition being controlled? why is this even a news
Every single Dem politician should be screaming about this at the top of their lungs. This is a direct threat to them as well, but they’re not gonna do it.
Why?
Because AIPAC and their billionaire donors are telling them to stand down.
Establishment Dems put more effort into resisting Mamdani than they put into resisting Trump since 2016.
Can you share some source for this aipac claim? I mean, fuck aipac, but I just want to make sure we don’t go down the shouting about the evil Jewish billionaires controlling everything route.
Cuomo is one of war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu’s legal defense team members. He has worked tirelessly on behalf of AIPAC for years.
Regardless, AIPAC gets all its special favors for terrorist state Israel by complete regulatory capture in the US. It’s how they’ve convinced Americans to give up their own constitutional right to free speech - if you criticize Israel too harshly, American gestapo will arrest you.
So, of course they consider Mamdani an existential threat. Once voters realize socialist policies help them in a tangible way instead of further funneling money to billionaires like Miriam Adelson, there is going to be a political reckoning resulting in AIPAC having no power and Israel being left to fend for itself without US intervention. They’re terrified of this scenario.
This is an interesting question and I didn’t have an immediate answer. Let me start off by pointing out that many many Jews in the US are horrified at the genocide in Gaza and do not want to be associated with AIPAC at all. The Jewish community in the US seems to be engaging in very serious internal debate on the topic (https://mondoweiss.net/2017/03/daughter-defense-apartheid/).
AIPAC itself doesn’t seem to have any direct statements about Mandami at all. They do make the dubious claim that “are more than 6 million pro-Israel Americans” (https://www.aipac.org/). Since there are an estimated 7.1 to 7.7 million Jews in the US (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Jews) they claim to represent the vast majority of Jews in the US.
I’m guessing that OP is referring to a sermon by Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove (https://pasyn.org/sermons/2025/on-the-record/). I can’t find any statements on if he is or is not an official member of AIPAC but he is generally described as a very conservative by various Jewish publications. Jonathan Shulman then encouraged rabbi’s across the country to sign the letter. (https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/article-873068). He left AIPAC after 18 because “the group’s brand was becoming increasingly toxic amid the war in Gaza.” As of Friday, over 1,000 rabbis have signed (https://jewishmajority.org/a-rabbinic-call-to-action).
My read on this is that AIPAC is now known to be bad marketing and it’s already getting rebranded; the people behind it will just regroup under a new name. While they didn’t claim responsibility for the letter, their supporters created and spread it.
There’s no “source”, AIPAC deals directly with politicians and those discussions are not public. But we know that AIPAC gives lots of money to Democrats to the point that they can and have dictated policy, and we know that AIPAC’s spokesperson has been on national news shows specifically to fearmonger about Mamdani both before and after the election. Most direct source here is gonna be using your noggin.
AIPAC’s spokesperson has been on national news shows specifically to fearmonger about Mamdani
Wouldn’t this be a source?
Brother in Christ, Democrats have been controlled opposition for quite some time. It wasn’t until Bernie, AOC, Mamdani, and others of their class that began to stand out from the Establishment. With Citizens United, there isn’t much of a difference in terms of which party sucks Corporate dick.
Yeah, I’m not refuting that. I’m asking about the AIPAC claim. Because, as I stated, this feels like the dangerous “evil Jewish billionaires” thinking that we should not idly engage in. Mamdani is Muslim, so falling into the trap that the Jews are behind this is…fucking dangerous. Why make that assumption without any evidence?
https://www.trackaipac.com/states/newyork
$1.7 million from aipac to chucky.
Now don’t take my word for it… Verify.
But he also went on record saying that his job is to keep the left pro-Israel.
AIPAC doesnt represent Jews, they represent the interests of the government of Israel in America.
maybe Israel should stop shouting anti-semitism at every criticism
I think if you don’t know the roll AIPAC has played in modern politics, it’s on you to go get a baseline education. It s not something some one should have to educate you on in a short form post. They’ve played a transformative role in US politics and are practicing why we can’t have nice things as a country.
I’m not saying the interest isn’t valid, but I also feel like understanding AIPAC is table stakes in US politics
I’m not saying the influence of AIPAC isn’t important, but I feel like being a patronizing twat instead of seizing a moment to help educate someone on the topic isn’t a great way to welcome people to the cause.
To be fair, he WAS being a patronizing twat to a patronizing twat who keeps hinting that any criticism of AIPAC might be antisemitic like the Dem leadership keeps doing every time anyone criticizes their favorite fascist apartheid regime.
Also, politeness or lack of same aside, AIPAC IS big and influential enough that there’s country excuse to know about them when discussing American politics and prejudice against Muslim politicians.
It’s the equivalent of never having heard of Citizens United, the Heritage Foundation, or the Federalist Society.
Exactly and I’m not even saying that it’s not ok to be interested, just that, like if you don’t know who or what AIPAC is coming into a political discussion forum, this ain’t the place to start.
Like you couldn’t have gotten through 2023-2025 being even adjacent to politics and not have developed some understanding of the role in US politics.
And, honestly, it’s hard to evaluate how important AIPAc really is to US politics. We readily acknowledge things like the Heritage foundation or project for a new American century, but we rarely discuss what interests are have idealogically captured the Democratic party.
I’m trying to find the exact quote, because I heard it referenced on a podcast and I’m not sure Schumer actually said this, but the circumstantial evidence is strong, that Schumer specifically did not endorse Mamdani because he sees his primary role as serving Israel. I want to dig into this more later because that’s an astonishing admission if true.
They are the same group of billionaires. Just with different T-shirts to perform for the poor
Translation: “The GOP really can’t afford for democratic socialism to spread throughout the country. We will be labeled as criminals, called evil, jailed as terrorists and violaters of human rights. The wealthy will be less wealthy. The poorest will have more needs net. This is unacceptable!”
"A great American city is on the precipice of being run by a communist who has publicly embraced a terroristic ideology,”
I’d love for reporters to start pushing politicians when they say dumb shit. Don’t just let them say it and then gawk at the camera like you’re Jim from the office or move on with questions.
“in what way are you concluding that Mr. Mamdani is a communist? Are you aware of the difference between communism and socialism, and could you explain how he is a communist?”
“what terrorist ideology? waits for answer In what way is this the ideology of a terrorist?”
Show that they have no idea what the words they spew mean. Show that they’re just using buzzwords that sound scary.
And then give the facts.
Read the article. The republicans have answers for most of these questions.
Too often they treat what these people say as if it the news itself. Unbiased, and a source of truth. Reporting has just become gossip repeating the worse people say.
This really is a big problem, “look at what this person said” type stories are basically how Donald Trump Rose to power, his words quoted as if they were the news itself, without any sort of filtering to fact checking. If he had simply been reported as lying without repeating the LIE his power would be significantly reduced
but how do you do that when the maga base all believe there is a big kabal against them. If the reporters just say the politician lied the base will claim the reporter lied.
either they need to call out the politician on the first lie and not let it go further until they respond with the explaination or you give them absolutely no air time, not even stating they lied. make them responsible or invisible.
You hit the nail on the head. It’s insanely frustrating.
It’s beyond frustrating, they are complicit in the evil that’s taking place
It’s a consequence of access journalism. And the false notion that neutrality is possible. The grain of wood is biased. The proteins that make up our body and its biological functions fold in a biased way. The fundamental particles and fields of the universe have biases too.
There is nothing wrong with bias as long as it is biased in favor of the truth. Performative neutrality, presenting two positions weakly/lazily as equally plausible. It has no value. If we lived in a society where individuals not only had the time, but desire to independently research everything for themselves as well. This wouldn’t be such a problem. But we don’t.
People read reporting and articles to be informed. When the reporting doesn’t present anything definitive other than party A said one thing and party B said another thing. Then the reader simply chooses the one they prefer. Regardless of the facts.
Totally agree. Way too many stories are about the quote itself.
Person says subjective or demonstrably true or untrue objective thing
vs
Demonstrably true objective thing (with person substantiating)
if only…
i don’t really ever watch news anymore, but when I did I would scream at the television, “ASK A FUCKING FOLLOW-UP QUESTION”
I don’t know what is being taught as journalism anymore but it seems to be just take the statement, get the sound bite, and think up a clickbaitable title.
“wow, this politician is saying batshit crazy things. This will earn me a lot of clicks. Gotta release the article before the other news sites do. I’ll use AI to write it up.”
It’s telling enough when you see fox segments that were supposedly made to demonize him and it’s things like “free child care for all, fare taxes for all, fare wages based on labor”.
I think they’re so up their asses that they completely forgot how regular people even think. Many of their attacks were basically advertising for his campaign lol.
And then give the facts.
The problem is that even facts are even subjective for these people. It’s always been that way.
I remember that after 9/11 I had a coworker who was convinced the problem was with Islam itself. “I’ve read their book”, he would explain to everyone who was within earshot, “They want to kill all the infidels. Their religion is incompatible with our country”. He held that as a fact, just as sure as the fact that the sun sets in the west, and that God gave him the right to bear arms.
To many people in this country, Muslim = Terrorist, no further questions asked. You can’t argue with that. Not because they are right, but you literally can’t argue with someone who thinks God gave them those incorrect facts.
US “journalists” are almost universally paid shills from one of 3 companies, who are directed to never challenge their interviewee.
The reason is because they’re threatened with never getting the earliest scoop, and thus the most clicks, if their interviewee feels challenged.
The White House & Pentagon set this standard perhaps most sternly after 9/11, and its only ever gotten worse.
“No more questions and you’re also a communist terrorist anarchist antifa.”
They won’t answer. They don’t have to.
“Why are you so afraid of answering questions?”
“democrats answer questions like this every day, surely you want to prove you’re better than them?”
Get digs at their egos. At the very least, there may be one or two conservatives out there who see that and go “yeah, why IS he afraid of answering a simple question?”
If they had a scintilla of shame your strategy might work
idk…all those questions give them too much information about the potential disanswer. I think they should just say, “do you have any evidence to support the claim you just made?”
Journalists are owned by billionaire’s such as Jeff Bezos. The only teeth journalism has are small independent shops as the Big Journalists of our time work for an Oligarch.
“If Mamdani lied on his naturalisation documents, he doesn’t get to be a citizen, and he certainly doesn’t get to run for mayor of New York City. A great American city is on the precipice of being run by a communist who has publicly embraced a terroristic ideology,” Representative Andy Ogles from the Republican party said in an October 29 news release, after asking US Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate Mamdani.
Andy Ogles you are pathetic. Have you considered calling him a poopoo head?
Republican.
Ah!
Will they apply this same standard to the first lady and her anchor child?
or to Musk? it is a fact he lied on his naturalization documents regarding his studies and employment. nothing will be done.
I’m actually surprised there was no widespread attempt to claim Kamala Harris wasn’t a citizen like there was with Obama
They were still campaigning against Biden. No doubt that would have come up if we had a 2 year campaign for her
Assuming Mamdani is a commie and a radical islamist, he made no attempt to hide it - as evidenced by the fact that the very fascists who want to strip him of his citizenship are themselves aware of it.
This naturally leads to the following question: what do the fascists make of the fact that a majority New Yorkers voted for him, thereby indicated that they WANT a communist islamist running their city?
Are the fascists implying that most New Yorkers are fucking morons who can’t see a dangerous individual when they see one, or that a majority of New Yorkers should be either deported or thrown in the slammer for communist tendencies and terrorism?
What the fascists fail to realize is that they’re spitting in the face of several million people and insulting their intelligence, and that sure as hell won’t earn them any good will.
A lot of kentuckians thought they had a right to vote for mayor of New York and governor of Virginia
Trump lost NYC 1:5 in 2024
So
Are the fascists implying that most New Yorkers are fucking morons who can’t see a dangerous individual when they see one, or that a majority of New Yorkers should be either deported or thrown in the slammer for communist tendencies and terrorism?
Por que no los dos?
I mean, four out of five NYC voters could clearly recognize a dangerous individual when they see one, as evidenced by the results. But Trump et al live in bizarroland where they are innocent.
They’re not making these arguments in good faith so there’s no point in treating them as such. If tomorrows problem requires taking the opposite position from today then they will do so without hesitation. Recognize these as the self-serving, useful in this particular moment, lies that they are and move on.
New York is a
Democratic HELLHOLE full of DISASTER that NEEDS ICE to Set it Straight!Great American City!If it weren’t for peak desperation and hatred the GOP wouldn’t have anything. Except pedophiles that is
Well, go on then. Don’t worry, I’m sure there won’t be any backlash for that at all…
Ogles cited rap lyrics Mamdani wrote in 2017 supporting the “Holy Land Five”, a reference to five men in the Holy Land Foundation, a Muslim charity, convicted in 2008 of providing material support to the Palestinian group Hamas. Some lawyers have criticised the case’s evidence and use of hearsay.
They are so going to be glued to that and will spin antisemetism so hard.
Ogles cited rap lyrics Mamdani wrote in 2017 supporting the “Holy Land Five”, a reference to five men in the Holy Land Foundation, a Muslim charity, convicted in 2008 of providing material support to the Palestinian group Hamas. Some lawyers have criticised the case’s evidence and use of hearsay.
I heard he shelled Berlin …from the east
It’s a concept album.
I can’t tell if they’re high, or just really, really stupid.
Neither. Even their supporters aren’t this stupid. The politicians are lying, and their supporters are lying to us about being that stupid. They are literally fascists who are taking advantage of the benefit of the doubt extended by merely stupid people.
2025 Republicans are not adequately explained by stupidity - it is malice.
I bet this man will never take office. (Sadly)
