Trump calls controversial Omar comments 'a dark day for Israel'

[DonViejo]

Source: Politico



By CAITLIN OPRYSKO 03/05/2019 07:29 AM EST

President Donald Trump said Monday that Rep. Ilhan Omar's suggestion that pro-Israel lawmakers have an allegiance to a foreign country marks a "dark day for Israel," piling onto the Minnesota freshman ahead of her second formal rebuke by the House in recent weeks.

“Representative Ilhan Omar is again under fire for her terrible comments concerning Israel,” the president wrote on Twitter, pointing out that a slew of Jewish advocacy groups had urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) to remove Omar from the latter's high-profile committee.

The president said Omar’s comments, which accused pro-Israel lawmakers of showing “allegiance to a foreign country,” were “a dark day for Israel!”

It’s been less than a month since Omar first came under fire from Democratic leadership for separate comments referring to the pro-Israel advocacy groups that were roundly condemned as anti-Semitic.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/05/trump-ilhan-omar-israel-1203369

[ck4829]

1. Oh that is RICH coming from Mr Jews aren't grateful for what I do in Israel

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211880657

[still_one]

2. Do people really forget in his campaign against Hillary with the Star of David and dollar sign?

[Farmer-Rick]

5. The guy who defended Nazis thinks comments about loyalty to Israel is bad????????

Really, he's is such a f*cking ass (As a farmer, ass is merely a donkey to me.).

When Trump said, "People that were very fine people, on both sides." He included Nazis as very fine people.

[BlueIdaho]

3. No, the real dark days

Are having Netanyahu as Prime Minister.

[maxrandb]

6. No the real dark days are dumbass Democrats

responding to bullshit, You should be able to point out that politicians who take money from one organization or another, might be "biased" for that organization. Whether it's the NRA or AIPAC.

Here's something that Dems SHOULD FUCKING DO. They could point out that all of this controversy and shit comes from CAMPAIGNS BEING FINANCED BY OUTSIDE FUCKING MONEY

If there is no AIPAC or NRA who give millions of dollars to politicians and PACs, there would be no fucking need to BE CONCERNED IF MONEY FROM AIPAC, THE NRA, OR THE FUCKING WALTON AND KOCH FAMILIES IMPACT OUR ELECTED POLITICIANS

The scandal is not that someone "points out" that Congressman, Senators and Presidents are for sale...the scandal is that Congressman, Senators and Presidents "ARE" for sale.

The American people would vote for Democrats at an 80% clip if they would stop attacking their own, and started attacking the corruption of money in politics.

[watoos]

8. How do you really feel?

I know it's not a joke. After I read your post the image of Justice Alito flashed through my mind mouthing, "not true."

I would think that Trump should go after that anti-Semite Gym Jordan first.

We should all remember back to when there was only one lone voice in the House who voted no to the Iraq war resolution, Barbara Lee. Everyone else in the House got it wrong. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having vigorous debates about our foreign policy.

[LisaM]

14. Actually, I think she was the lone vote against the war in Afghanistan.

And she was as right as rain, too.

[EX500rider]

16. So leaving the Taliban who sheltered the Al-Qaeda group in Afg. who planned...

....9/11 in power seemed like a good idea to you?

[LisaM]

17. This war hasn't been a success. I did not agree with it.

It's costing $45 billion a year with no end in sight. According to this article, the Taliban now holds more territory than before, too.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pentagon-says-afghan-war-costs-taxpayers-45-billion-per-year

No, I don't think we went about it the right way, and while yes, they were being harbored in Afghanistan, the ringleaders were Saudis and we continue to have robust dealings with Saudi Arabia.

I don't think it was the right thing to do, no. We could target our anti-terrorism resources much better than that. YMMV.

[EX500rider]

19. Leaving Al-Qaeda untouched and under the protection of the Taliban after 9/11...

....was a no-go with American voters not surprisingly.

And if Al-Qaeda had the support of the Saudi govt they wouldn't be in Afghanistan but in Saudi. One of Al-Qaeda's goals was the overthrow of the Saudi monarchy so they weren't exactly best buddies.

I also notice people blame the rise of the Taliban on the US pulling support from the Mujahadeen after the fall of the Soviet Union. But now they want the US to pull support from the current elected govt of Afghanistan, seems like a contradiction to me.

What was your plan after 9/11...and no, the US Marshals weren't going to be making any arrests at Al-qaeda bases in Agh.

[LisaM]

20. I said I didn't think this war was a success.

For some reason you're trying to imply that I didn't think we should do anything. I don't feel like getting into a circular argument. I don't think the US gainfully reviewed its options. I think Bushco was champing at the bit to get into a war; why else would he put together a war cabinet?

Anyway, this is silly. I didn't agree with the war then, I don't think it's been successful, and I think we could have explored many alternatives. But the barn door is open. We can't go back and fix a failed engagement.

[EX500rider]

24. I am just curious what the alternatives would have been. nt

[Cold War Spook]

26. What are your alternatives in Afghanistan?

We have been there since Oct, 2001. We armed the Mujahideen and I am sure the Russians are paying us back. The Russian are far more ruthless than us, what makes you think we can win?

[EX500rider]

27. I didn't say we could "win", with Pakistan offering refuge across the border.

But we have troops in Japan & Germany and Korea 60+ years after their wars so maybe keeping a small presence in Afghanistan is just something we will have to do.

[Cold War Spook]

28. There is a slight difference.

The Japanese, Germans and South Koreans were/are not trying to kill our military.

[EX500rider]

29. Ours guys are pretty safe on the bases.

What the Afghans mostly need is air support, intel and some mentoring. Makes for a very realistic training area for our Special Forces guys also. And US combat deaths have dropped way below accidental deaths lately.

?w=700&strip=all&quality=75

[Cold War Spook]

30. "realistic training area"

that's your euphemism for a war zone? How many combat tours have you had, when and where? DD214 please. Also what is our exit strategy or do you want us to stay in Afghanistan for ever?

[EX500rider]

31. My experience is none of your business but was in Kandahar province in 2005.

Leaving Afghanistan could happen when the Taliban fades away. But I think we would have to get much tougher on Pakistan first.

[Cold War Spook]

32. Since in all our back and forth you have yet to have one intelligent post, I am ingnoring you.

No txt.

[EX500rider]

33. Oh no, how will I survive?? lol nt

[Celerity]

21. It was not just Afghanistan per se. She was the only vote against

The Authorisation for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) resolution, which gave almost unlimited powers to Bush and all POTUS after him.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/html/PLAW-107publ40.htm

A blank cheque to a never-ending series of wars based upon a vague concept of terror is how she phrased it. It was not a vote solely against going after Afghanistan.

[duforsure]

4. They don't even know or care who she is,

And what is a dark day for Israel is watching their leader be indicted for his corruption, and abuse of his position in their government. That'll be us here soon when trump and his crime family are brought down and justice is served to them, but that'll be a really great day here for the American people.

[maxrandb]

7. How fucked up and corrupt is money in politics

when Donnie Shit for Brains sounds like senior Democrats in Congress?

[watoos]

9. I don't think it very intellectual

to follow blindly everything that Bibi wants. Many of Bibi's interests aren't even the best interests of Israel let alone ours. Tearing up the Iran peace agreement was a foolish move on our part, where is the outrage? Bibi wants us to go to war with Iran, is that in our best interests?

As I said before, we need vigorous debate regarding our foreign policy, not blind loyalty to Bibi.

[Timmygoat]

10. My head seems to be spinning

The rethugs are picking on this young lady because she is a muslim, seems like just yesterday the Trump Co were sniffing around the Saudi's looking for money, also protecting them from blowback over Kahshoggii,s murder.

[maxsolomon]

22. She's touching the 3rd rail.

Blind obeisance to Israel/Likud is the only acceptable path for a federal-level politician.

Omar needs to refine her speech - make her statements less broad-brush and more targeted. Criticism of American ME Policy is legitimate.

[maxsolomon]

11. So many Dark Days with Likud in control.

The Darkest Day was the Right Wing assassination of Yitzak Rabin, which lead to Netanyahu.

Does anyone here remember the controversy when HRC was mildly critical of West Bank Settlements, then didn't show proper obeisance at AIPAC? As a result, my elderly Jewish neighbors, liberal to the core, voted for Trump because "he was better for Israel". That was a Dark Day.

Blindly supporting Israel's worst policies in their self-destructive de-facto annexation of the West Bank and imprisonment of Gaza is doing our ally no favors.

When you love someone, you have to tell them when they're on the wrong path. HRC did that EVER SO SLIGHTLY, and paid the price.

Omar's articulating, albeit imperfectly, the opinion of millions of people of other Americans WHO SUPPORT ISRAEL BUT NOT LIKUD, and she's instantly punished for it by Dem leadership. Meanwhile Steve King cartwheels down the halls of Congress.

Binary Oppositions are the death of progress.

[Mosby]

13. in the last two general election

HRC got 71% of the Jewish vote

Obama got 69% before that.

The average Jewish vote for the Democratic candidate since 1968 is 71%. It's the highest for any demo except AAs.

So your assertion that she "paid the price" is bullshit.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-voting-record-in-u-s-presidential-elections

[maxsolomon]

23. she paid the price in that my neighbors didn't vote for her

and in the bullshit that was thrown at her for daring to criticize settler policy.

"trump is better for Israel" was the bullshit they bought. trump is better for Likud and Netanyahu is the reality, but Likud is not Israel.

I made no assertion of the percentage of Jews that voted for Democrats. I know it's high.

[itcfish]

12. Trump Trying

to sell nukes to Saudia Arabia is actually the "Dark Day for Israel"

[ck4829]

25. Yep

[dem in texas]

15. Pledge to Israel in state contracts

A few weeks back, I read in the Dallas Morning News about a lawsuit against the state of Texas about a clause in contracts signed with the state that requires any person or business that signs the contract to pledge to support Israel. I don't remember the whole story, but this pledge is something that is being pushed by important Israeli supporters to put in contracts in all states, not just Texas. this pledge has been added to state contracts in 26 states. Several lawsuits have been filed including one by the ACLU. I thought that this is what she was talking about.

[Grins]

18. A dark day...

A "dark day". "For Israel."

Eff them. It took me a few years, but I've had it with Israel (more correct, with the Likud.)

[ck4829]

34. Kick