Pages

▼

Wednesday, November 20, 2024

Trump’s Cabinet Picks: Good or Bad for the Jews? (Judean Rose)



Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

When Donald Trump won the election, there was great relief in Israel, something like a collective sigh. There was also anxiety. It’s a long time until January, and we don’t know how much longer the hostages can hang on. But there was, and is, a further cause for anxiety, and that concerns Trump’s cabinet picks, which here in Israel we can’t help but think: are these anointed ones good or bad for the Jews and for Israel?

Matt Gaetz

We might as well begin our examination with Matt Gaetz, Trump’s pick for attorney general, a bad choice by all accounts. Gaetz has what we call in Hebrew, “panim doresh steerot,” a face that needs slapping. There is a lot of noise about his sexual peccadilloes, corruption, and illicit drug use. We remember how Gaetz forced Kevin McCarthy out of his role as House speaker. It’s not as if Gaetz didn’t have plenty of support for the ousting of McCarthy. Nonethless, McCarthy insisted that Gaetz had led the charge against him specifically to wiggle out of an ethics investigation:

“I’ll give you the truth why I’m not speaker. Because one person, a member of Congress, wanted me to stop an ethics complaint because he slept with a 17-year-old, an ethics complaint that started before I ever became speaker. And that’s illegal and I’m not gonna get in the middle of it.

“Now, did he do it or not? I don’t know. But ethics was looking at it. There’s other people in jail because of it. And he wanted me to influence it.”

Indeed there are plenty of reasons to dislike Gaetz, but from the standpoint of the Jewish people, the main issue should be his horrid antisemitsm. Gaetz voted against the Antisemitism Awareness Act, saying that International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism would hold the bible itself as antisemitic because, Gaetz claimed, Christian scripture dictates that the Jews are responsible for Jesus’s death.

Um no. That would be the Romans. Which makes Gaetz a horrible person for pinning this death on the Jews. It’s that kind of slander that leads and has always led, to the letting of Jewish blood. There can be no benign reason for an educated person to say such things. Matt Gaetz hates Jews.

“This evening, I will vote AGAINST the ridiculous hate speech bill called the ‘Antisemitism Awareness Act,’” said Gaetz prior to the vote. “Antisemitism is wrong, but this legislation is written without regard for the Constitution, common sense, or even the common understanding of the meaning of words. The Gospel itself would meet the definition of antisemitism under the terms of this bill!”

Matt Gaetz, in addition to blaming the Jews for what the Romans did, invited Charles Johnson, a Holocaust denier and white nationalist, to be his guest at a 2018 State of the Union address. Gaetz claimed he hadn’t know these things about Johnson, then subsequently defended him, and denied the accusations. Johnson, said Gaetz, is “not a Holocaust denier. He’s not a white supremacist.” But Johnson is both.

When crazy Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene compared COVID public safety measures to the Holocaust, Gaetz defended her. “[Greene] defends Israel and attacks Democrats. Media falsely slams [Greene] as antisemitic. Some Republicans take the bait, sadly,” said Gaetz.

Our attorney general-to-be has been known to hire staff members who hang with white nationalists, and say white nationalist things. He called the ADL “racist” when that body called for Tucker Carlson to be fired from Fox News on account of Carlson pushing the Great Replacement theory. Matt Gaetz said that Carlson is “CORRECT about Replacement Theory.”

The Great Replacement theory, as described by the ADL, “claims there is an intentional effort, led by Jews, to promote mass non-white immigration, inter-racial marriage, and other efforts that would lead to the ‘extinction of whites.’”

RFK Jr.

Moving along, we come to RFK Jr., Trump’s pick for secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. RFK Jr. is another one for conspiracy theories. While dining with journalists, Bobby Kennedy Jr. aired a nutty conspiracy theory positing that COVID was designed to spare Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people.

“COVID-19. There is an argument that it is ethnically targeted. COVID-19 attacks certain races disproportionately. COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.

“We don’t know whether it was deliberately targeted or not but there are papers out there that show the racial or ethnic differential and impact,” said Kennedy, who also claimed that vaccine mandates made people less free than Anne Frank under Nazi rule.

After the footage was leaked, Kennedy went into damage control mode, claiming that he never EVER suggested the virus was designed to spare Jews.

“I have never, ever suggested that the COVID-19 virus was targeted to spare Jews,” wrote Kennedy. “I accurately pointed out — during an off-the-record conversation — that the US and other governments are developing ethnically targeted bioweapons and that a 2021 study of the COVID-19 virus shows that COVID-19 appears to disproportionately affect certain races since the furin cleave docking site is most compatible with Blacks and Caucasians and least compatible with ethnic Chinese, Finns and Ashkenazi Jews.”

RFK Jr.’s friendship with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan was cemented through just such views as these. Bobby Jr. in fact, called Farrakhan a “truly great partner” for helping him spread the idea that vaccines cause autism. Andrew Wakefield, now disgraced, concocted this “theory” in 1998 and was subsequently exposed as a fraud. When COVID hit, Farrakhan urged his congregants to "follow Robert Kennedy," claiming that scientists developed the coronavirus vaccine in order to "depopulate the Earth."

If RFK Jr. and Farrakhan agree on these nutty conspiracy theories, what other views might they share in common?

Of course, RFK Jr. was wise to quickly disavow his affinity for Farrakhan the antisemite at the outset of his presidential campaign. When asked about the relationship between during his campaign, Kennedy said he is an “opponent” of Farrakhan and "never endorsed anything that Louis Farrakhan has said," which of course, is a lie.

Should Jews look the other way on RFK Jr.? Perhaps. Bobby Jr., speaking to Reuters, expressed support for Israel’s fight against Hamas in Gaza, and for the return of the hostages. Asked if he was in favor of a temporary Gaza ceasefire, Kennedy said, "I don't even know what that means right now," commenting that every previous ceasefire was “used by Hamas to rearm, to rebuild and then launch another surprise attack. So what would be different this time?

"Any other nation that was adjacent to a neighboring nation that was bombing it with rockets, sending commandos over to murder its citizens, pledging itself to murder every person in that nation and annihilate it, would go and level it with aerial bombardment," said Kennedy.

"But Israel is a moral nation. So it didn't do that. Instead, it built an iron dome to protect itself so it would not have to go into Gaza," he added.

Nutty conspiracy theories notwithstanding, so far Bobby Jr. sounds okay on Israel. Perhaps he inherited his views from his father? Bobby Sr. spent time in Pre-State Israel, reporting for the Boston Post and was kindly disposed toward the Jews, and supported their efforts at statehood. Unfortunately, he was murdered because of this support.

Tulsi Gabbard

We come next to Tulsi Gabbard, who is to be national intelligence secretary. It’s hard to dislike Gabbard. She’s a serious person, and is unafraid to change her mind when changing her mind is called for. But she backed the Iran deal, and that’s a huge problem. Gabbard also voted against a House resolution to condemn the U.N. Security Council resolution regarding Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria, saying, "While I remain concerned about aspects of the U.N. resolution, I share the Obama administration's reservation about the harmful impact Israeli settlement activity has on the prospects for peace."

Seriously?? Jews building homes has a harmful impact on “prospects for peace?” That’s just reprehensibly antisemitic, and I don’t care how popular it has become to repeat the canard that Jewish families building homes, threaten peace. It’s a disgusting and stupid thing to say no matter how many people say it and no matter how often it is said. It’s just, pardon my French, total crap.

I hope that Gabbard will now be able to take a step back and examine the issue from a more commonsense position with good people to take her through it. Maybe now, as part of the Trump cabinet, she’ll educate herself on Israel. In her past, however, she has taken some problematic positions.

Gabbard defended Ilhan Omar, for example, when Omar tweeted that US support for Israel is “all about the Benjamins.” Speaking to CNN, Gabbard said, "There are people who have expressed their offense at these statements. I think that what Congresswoman Omar was trying to get at was a deeper issue related to our foreign policy, and I think there's an important discussion that we have to be able to have openly, even though we may end up disagreeing at the end of it, but we've got to have that openness to have the conversation."

Gabbard also voted for House Resolution 246, which expressed House opposition to the BDS movement and affirmed support for a two-state solution. When asked to explain her vote, Gabbard said she supported "a two-state solution that provides for the rights of both Israel and Palestine to exist, and for their people to live in peace, with security, in their homes. I don't believe the BDS movement is the only or best way to accomplish that. However, I will continue to defend those who choose to exercise their right to free speech without threat of legal action."

The two-state solution is a naïve and unworkable concept, and always was. Neither of the parties want it. So why do pols continue to push the two-state solution down the throats of people who do not want it, and do not see it as the solution it is touted to be? Why does Tulsi Gabbard, who is clearly a clear-thinking person, think the two-state solution makes any sense at all?

There can only be two reasons for supporting the two-state solution: 1) Anti-Jewish prejudice, that is to say, a desire to take land away from the Jews and give it to the people who want to kill them, and 2) Ignorance on the part of people who have never actually studied the matter. “Two-state solution” is just something people say. Endlessly. Meaninglessly. One would hope that Tulsi would know better.

But we have all watched Tulsi Gabbard evolve in her politics. We watched her leave the Democratic Party, become an Independent, and finally, become a staunch, pro-Trump Republican. Perhaps Tulsi’s views will evolve on Israel and antisemitism.

There is reason to be optimistic about Gabbard. Tulsi Gabbard criticized Biden and Harris for not joining a solidarity March for Israel as the Jewish State fights the war forced on it by Hamas. She is clear in that she supports a strong U.S.-Israel relationship. When Gabbard was still a Democrat, in 2015, unlike 58 other Dems, she did not boycott Netanyahu’s address to Congress, stating that “It’s unfortunate that an issue as important as preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons has been muddled by partisan politics. This is an extremely serious issue, at a critical juncture, that should not be used as a political football.”

Gabbard also said that it was important to “rise above the political fray, as America continues to stand with Israel as her strongest ally.”

Nice words and a real show of support for Israel.

Mike Huckabee and Pete Hegseth

Now we come to Mike Huckabee and Pete Hegseth. I know what you’re going to say. Why are they included in this list of potentially problematic Trump candidate members? Both are staunch friends of Israel. They don’t fall prey to propaganda, don’t use terms like “Palestinian” or “West Bank.” They don’t have a problem with Jewish sovereignty, or Jews building homes in their indigenous territory.

Take for example Mike Huckabee, who is slated to become the next ambassador to Israel. Asked whether he would stop using the terms “Judea and Samaria” to describe what most of the world now calls the “West Bank,” Huckabee said, “I can’t be what I’m not. I can’t say something I don’t believe. As you well know, I’ve never been willing to use the term ‘West Bank’. There is no such thing. I speak of Judea and Samaria. I tell people there is no ‘occupation.’ It is a land that is ‘occupied’ by the people who have had a rightful deed to the place for 3,500 years, since the time of Abraham.

“A lot of the terms that maybe the media would use, even the people who are against Israel would use, are not terms that I employ, because I want to use terms that live from time immemorial, and those are the terms like ‘Promised Land’ and ‘Judea and Samaria’. These are biblical terms, and those are important to me, and so I will continue to follow that nomenclature unless I’m instructed otherwise, but I don’t think that’ll happen.”

Huckabee has also said plainly that there is “no such thing as a ‘Palestinian.’” Being that there was never an Arab state called “Palestine,” that makes perfect sense. As Huckabee rightly stated during his 2008 failed presidential campaign, the assertion of the existence of a “Palestinian” identity, is only “a political tool to try and force land away from Israel.”

So far, there is not one thing here with which this writer disagrees.

Of the moronic idea known as the “two-state solution,” Huckabee commented in a 2015 interview on Israeli TV, that it is “irrational and unworkable,” and also said that “there’s plenty of land” outside of Israel in the “rest of the world” for a Palestinian state.

All true.

Pete Hegseth, picked for secretary of defense, says all the right things when it comes to Israel. At a 2018 Israel National News conference Hegseth spoke of the right of the Jewish people to claim their indigenous territory for themselves, and themselves alone.

"I, and others, had a chance to go see the Western Wall, the Temple Mount, the Western Wall Tunnels, and so much of the Old City," said Hegseth. "When you stand there, you cannot help but behold the miracle before you."

"It got me thinking about another miracle I hope all of you don't see as too far away. 1917 was a miracle, 1948 was a miracle, 1967 was a miracle, 2017, the declaration of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel was a miracle, and there's no reason why the miracle of the reestablishment of the Temple on the Temple Mount is not possible. I don't know how it would happen, you don't know how it would happen, but I know that it could happen, that's all I know," he said.

"A step in that process is the recognition that facts and activities on the ground truly matter. That's why going to visit Judea and Samaria, understanding that the very sovereignty over Israeli soil, cities, locations, is a critical next step to showing the world that this is the land for Jews, and the land of Israel," concluded Hegseth.

So why are Mike Huckabee and Pete Hegseth included in an article on Trump cabinet picks who might not be good for the Jews/Israel? Both men are respectful of Jewish beliefs and rights. That respect springs out of their Christian faith, which is fine. What would not be fine is if either the two men or Israeli officials began to speak about “shared values” or “Judeo-Christian values,” as if that were a thing.

Judaism stands alone. We Jews have our own faith, our own laws, and a religious narrative we do not share with Christians or those of other faiths. We should not want Christians telling us they are like us, and we should not want Israeli leaders to do so, either. That should be and must be a red line that is respected on both sides.

We can see the good in these two men without searching for nonexistent religious common ground. It is hoped that Huckabee and Hegseth understand these sensitivities and will remain as respectful to the Jewish people as ever. On the other hand, will official Israel be able to control itself—to refrain from slobbering over these men? It’s a problem.

It is so rare for Israel to have staunch friends, people who understand us, and believe in our right to our rights. Their sincere friendship makes us Jews feel like we actually belong to the family of man—at last there is someone who sees us.

Within this warm circle of cozy coexistence lies a temptation—the temptation to assert that we are alike. But we are not, and it is wrong to say otherwise. Hegseth, despite the allegations against him in the media, seems like a nice person. Huckabee, too. And that’s where the similarities start and end.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!
 

 

at