Politics: Nuland, Israel, Musk

There’s a mildly interesting debate going on regarding Victoria Nuland’s departure: Did she jump or was she pushed? Originally, many thought she was pushed out. Larry Johnson now says she jumped, because she knew foreign policy was shifting and wanted to leave before she could be blamed for the Ukraine disaster. A more nuanced view is put forward by Scott Ritter, saying that it was a combination of the two. Part of Ritter’s reasoning rests on his contention that Nuland was making unauthorized calls to the Pentagon, pushing policies that had not been agreed upon at the White House. But she also saw what was coming and jumped. Alastair Crooke says something similar. He points to Nuland’s probable successor—Crooke says it will be China hawk Kurt Campbell—as a sign that the Zhou regime is trying to wash its hands of Ukraine and “pivot” somehow to China. I agree with all the above.

Alastair Crooke usually appears with Judge Nap on Mondays, and the two discuss issues raised in Crooke’s latest article. That happened today, as usual (Biden Out of Touch with Reality), but there’s a fair amount of difference between the video and the article:

‘Out of Touch With Reality’ – White House Fails to Navigate the Israeli Re-calibration

A fair amount of the article (and video) reprises Crooke’s typical themes—for example, that Israel as a society has changed fundamentally changed, in ways that Americans, including politicians, just don’t get. He’s talking about the increasing intolerance for half (the Arab half) of the population of Greater Israel and the trend toward a nationalistic theocracy.

Another issue that is discussed is the Benny Gantz visit to DC, where the Israeli general and politician talked with everyone in the regime barring Zhou. Crooke says the White House thought they were going to somehow trigger a “soft regime change” in Israel. Instead, he says, Gantz told everyone he spoke with that there was no distance at all between himself and Netanyahu in terms of policy on Gaza. Crooke, again, attributes this fiasco to American misunderstanding of Israel and how Israel has changed over the decades.

Finally, as regards Crooke’s article, I’ll quote a few paragraphs that frankly puzzled me—focus on the last few paragraphs:

U.S. administration officials heard from Gantz the very same policy agenda that Netanyahu has repeated to them in recent months: Gantz also warned that trying to ‘play him off’ against Netanyahu was pointless: He might very much wish to replace Netanyahu as prime minister at some point, but his policies wouldn’t be substantively different from those of the present government, he explained.

Now that the visit is over and now that Gantz has said what he said, the White House is coming to terms with a new experience: The limitations to U.S. power and to automatic compliance by other states – even the closest of allies.

…

Netanyahu is an experienced ‘old Washington hand’. He prides himself on his ability to read U.S. politics well. No doubt he calculates that whilst Biden can raise the rhetoric a pitch or two, the latter is on a tight leash in respect to how much of a gap he can open between him and the Jewish mega-donors in an election year.

…

Team Biden urgently needs to reassess its approach, starting from the understanding that it is Israel that is rupturing from the stale, ill-judged U.S. consensus. Most Israelis agree with Netanyahu, who said again yesterday that “the war is existential and must be won”.

How is it that Israel can contemplate severing from the U.S.? Possibly because Netanyahu understands that the ‘power structure’ in the U.S. – as in Europe – that controls much, if not most of the money shaping U.S. politics, and particularly the stance of Congress, is heavily dependent on the Israeli ‘cause’ existing, and continuing to exist, and it is not therefore the case that Israel is wholly dependent on the U.S. power structures and its ‘good will’ (as Biden pre-supposes).

The ‘cause of Israel’ both gives domestic U.S. structures their political meaning, their agenda and their legitimacy. A ‘No Israel’ outcome would pull the carpet from under them, and would leave U.S. Jews experiencing existential insecurity. Netanyahu knows this – and also appreciates that the existence of Israel, per se, offers Tel Aviv a certain degree of control over U.S. politics.

To judge from yesterday’s State of the Union Address, the U.S. Administration is incapable of navigating the present impasse with Israel, and is instead doubling down rather on its time-worn and platitudinous notions. Using the State of Union Address as a bully-pulpit for old thinking is no strategy.

This is unclear to me. It sounds to me as if Crooke is suggesting that, if Israel no longer existed, American Jews would lose their motive for political giving. They would no longer have a cause to rally around, and this would therefore leave the “US power structure” without the pro-Israel funding that they have relied upon. I’m open to other suggestions, but that’s how that sounds to me.

I’m skeptical. Obviously the Israel Lobby contributes a lot of money to its cause for use in influencing US policy with regard to Israel. On the other hand, Jewish political giving extends to far more than just the Israel issue. If I’m understanding Crooke correctly, I think he fails to understand the degree to which many Jews—not all, but perhaps a majority—fear what they believe is the latent anti-Semitism that is certain to break out from any empowerment of Ragin’ Rural Whites, also known as Christian Nationalists—or simply Christians for short. This fear translates, in my opinion, to heavy Jewish support for what conservatives typically term ‘liberal’ or, now, ‘woke’ or DEI causes—as a means to counter Christian influence in US society and culture.

Conservatives typically fail to appreciate this dynamic and are left befuddled by what they often see as a counter intuitive Jewish support for a Left that—from a conservative perspective—is patently intolerant. Conservatives fail to take into account the ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ dynamic. All this is complicated by increasingly outspoken critiques of Israel and of Jews emanating from the political Left in America. Regardless, I believe Crooke—not an American—is failing to understand the complexities of US politics and social divides.

Whatever. Elon Musk:

Nearly 19 Million People Have Seen Elon Musk's Warning: Democrats' Census Scheme Has Changed the 'Entire Balance of Power'
Western Journal ^ | March 10, 2024 | Jack Davis

Illegal immigrants are tilting the balance of power towards Democrats, who are refusing to change the practice of counting them in the Census.

“Most Americans do not know that the US census currently counts, for purposes of voting power, all people in a district, regardless of citizenship!” Musk posted on X Friday, in a post with 19.2 million views as of Sunday night.

“Senate Democrats just voted unanimously to defeat an amendment that would have stopped counting illegals for congressional seat apportionment and electoral college (presidential) votes,”

...

Most Americans do not know that the US census currently counts, for purposes of voting power, all people in a district, regardless of citizenship!

Senate Democrats just voted unanimously to defeat an amendment that would have stopped counting illegals for congressional seat apportionment and electoral college (presidential) votes.

Since illegals are mostly in Democrat states, both the House and the Presidential vote are shifted ~5% to the left, which is enough to change the entire balance of power!

This is a major reason why the Biden administration is ushering in record levels of illegals and doing so few deportations.

...

More power to Trump for bringing this to the attention of so many people.