US

NY Times initially claims ‘influential lobbyists and rabbis’ made Dems to support Iron Dome funding

The New York Times quietly removed wording that described the Democratic Party as controlled by ‘influential lobbyists and Rabbis’ due to its still largely supportive stance on Israel. 

The House approved sending Israel $1 billion for its Iron Dome defense system by an overwhelming 420 to 9 majority, after progressive ‘Squad’ members had originally stripped funding from the Pentagon budget bill. 

Reps. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Minn., were among those who voted ‘no’ on Iron Dome funding, but in a dramatic moment, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., at the last second wiped away tears as she changed her vote from ‘no’ to ‘present.’ 

A visibly distraught Ocasio-Cortez can be seen being comforted by Rep. Barbara Lee

The New York Times initially described the exchange as such: ‘Minutes before the vote closed, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez tearfully huddled with her allies before switching her vote to ‘present.’ The tableau underscored how wrenching the vote was for even outspoken progressives, who have been caught between their principles and the still powerful pro-Israel voices in their party, such as influential lobbyists and rabbis.’ 

After the paragraph, part of a story by the Times’ congressional reporter Cadie Edmondson, started to garner attention on social media, it was changed without an editor’s note. 

‘The tableau underscored how wrenching the vote was for even outspoken progressives, who have been caught between their principles and the still powerful pro-Israel voices in their party,’ the current draft of the story reads. 

There was another editor’s note on the story, however, denoting the wrong vote count. ‘An earlier version of this article misstated the final tally for the funding vote. It was 420 to 9, not 490 to 9,’ it read.  

‘In case you still believe anti-Zionism is a different thing from anti-Semitism, @NYTimes makes the connection for you,’ author Ashley Rindsberg wrote on Twitter. 

‘There are many Democrats who would consider themselves both principled progressives and pro-Israel,’ ‘Battle for the Soul’ author and writer for The Atlantic Edward Isaac Dovere said. 

‘I do think most #Jews find it offensive – if not outright #antisemitic- to frame #rabbis as coercive conspiring emotional blackmailers into true belief – @AOC can make up her own mind – do better,’ Sara Yael Hirschhorn, professor of Israeli studies at Northwestern University wrote on Twitter.   

‘97% of the members of Congress supported a resolution to fund the #IronDome because it saves lives. But the @nytimes wants people to believe it was a tough call, between *principles* & *powerful lobbyists*,’ Joel Petlin, contributor at Jewish newspaper The Forward, wrote on Twitter. 

‘“Caught” between their principles and, uh, powerful jews?’ said Washington Examiner commentary writer Becket Adams. 

‘Caught between their principles and their…rabbis? Are the rabbis being mean to the Squad? Did AOC switch her vote because she was afraid she’d get in trouble and miss Shabbos Party? She was supposed to be the ima this week!’ Seth Mandel, editor of the Washington Examiner Magazine wrote on Twitter.   

‘@NYTimes frames the #IronDome vote as pitting “principles”—-the honorable goal of Israeli civilians getting murdered by Hamas—and the raw naked power of the evil Jew Lobby. Including rabbis! It’s that bad!,’ wrote journalist Gary Weiss.

Earlier this month the New York Times quietly deleted a now debunked claim that an October 2020 New York Post article critical of President and his son, Hunter, was ‘unsubstantiated.’ 

The Times had reported on a recent Federal Election Commission decision that said Twitter had not violated election law when they blocked the sharing of the Post’s article about the laptop.

The files on Hunter Biden’s laptop indicated that Hunter had introduced his father Joe Biden to Ukrainian energy company executives while he was vice president.

The Times article had initially described the revelations as an ‘unsubstantiated New York Post article about Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s son Hunter Biden’.

But the story was heavily edited later in the day without any acknowledgement.

The updated article read: ‘Twitter decided briefly last fall to block users from posting links to an article about Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s son Hunter.’

The Post article in question concerned files discovered on a laptop hard drive that belonging to Hunter Biden, which was provided to the outlet by Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump’s personal lawyer at the time.

It reported that emails on the computer pointed to an effort by Hunter to set up a meeting in 2015 between Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser at a Ukrainian energy firm, and his father, who was vice president at the time.

Biden subsequently and successfully lobbied to have a Ukrainian prosecutor fired as he investigated the firm, Burisma, which Hunter held a position on its board from 2014 to 2019.

The Biden campaign had dismissed the revelations as a smear and a Russian disinformation campaign during the 2020 presidential campaign.


Source link

Related Articles

Back to top button