Jeffries himself uses the same mechanism to get a ton of money from AIPAC without declaring it as such
Nida Allam very narrowly lost her challenge to Valerie Foushee in NC's 4th congressional district because AIPAC poured money into the race through a newly-formed shadow PAC named "Article One PAC" that has close ties with Jeffries
It is genuinely insane that Democrats are silent about AIPAC completely manipulating their primaries by running bad faith ads filtered through shadow PACs so they don't have to say "paid for by AIPAC." In fact not only are Dems silent, Hakeem Jeffries helps to facilitate it.
Satellite analysis by Oregon State University shows widespread structural damage across Iran since the start of the U.S.–Israel war.
Major damage clusters in Tehran and Shiraz.
Julie Gonzales is WFP backed and a supporter of M4A, abolishing ICE, and an arms embargo on Israel.
The genocide expands
Me when I lie
“But, as you see, it's a beautiful day, the Strait of Hormuz is open and people are having a wonderful time.”
The epistemology of Twitter
A reminder as Clyburn runs for another term, at the end of which he will be 88 years old
The story of Citizens United
very epic!! Do you make one that says “my husband is a pedophile”??
Do we even need Adam Curtis anymore when Hillary Clinton is selling epic bacon merch from her Jeffrey Epstein deposition?
Jesus Christ...
Greenblatt didn't misspeak here. This is the ADL's inherently contradictory position. They want to ensure people don't conflate Jews with the actions of the state of Israel, but they also believe it is antisemitic to oppose Israel.
Obviously Jewish people are not responsible for the war, but obviously the “Jewish state” as Greenblatt calls it is, considering they are a belligerent in the war. If you can’t blame a country that started the war, then who can you blame?
Is this not a completely contradictory statement? Greenblatt begins his by conflating Jewish people and "the Jewish state," and then says how dangerous it is for other people to do that?
We are all numb to it, but it is remarkable how little noise 95% of Democrats are making about this war. All we hear is fears that they could put troops on the ground and that they don't have a clear plan. It's all future tense about how things could go wrong, not opposing the war as it exists now.
This is what makes Zohran the most effective communicator in politics
this means it is not open for transit
From a friend in Beirut this morning, who in the last few days has seen several Israel missile strikes within walking distance of their home.
Two things here.
One, you don't sit there and whine about media coverage and headlines if things are going well.
Two, the administration is just outright saying that they fully expect Ellison to use CNN to be a Trumpist propaganda organ.
It turns out global supply chains are really complicated and institutional and you can't just fix the oil market by posting on Truth Social
2.5 million views
85%+ of democratic voters oppose the Iran war. If Josh were to say that Dem candidates should support the war, he would be laughed out of the room because that’s absurd. But throw in this “I thought it was a big tent” bullshit and people take it seriously.
The implied assumption of “big tent” discourse is that the Democratic Party already represents the left, a proposition that is self-evidently absurd to anyone with two brain cells, which unfortunately excludes like 80% of our pundit class
This is precisely why the “big tent” concept is a red herring that only serves as a force of conservatism. A big tent means inviting reactionaries and expecting everyone on the left to just eat shit because where else are we going to go?
