Israel Lobby’s Activities Are Massively Illegal
Their campaign “help” and other “benefits” to lawmakers violate the Emoluments Clause.
A NATION’S sovereignty is susceptible to foreign influence via bribery, blackmail, favors, etc. The founders of the United States knew this very well; they feared it happening to the US. To prevent it they put specific restrictions on accepting gifts, titles and other favors from foreign governments and representatives. It is called the Emoluments Clause, Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution.
The Title of Nobility Clause is a provision in Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, that prohibits the federal government from granting titles of nobility, and restricts members of the government from receiving gifts, emoluments, offices or titles from foreign states without the consent of the United States Congress.(From Wikipedia)
This law has been blatantly violated for years by many politicians. The corruption has gotten to the point that it has become the norm, as you will see in the article below.
A detailed scoreboard on candidates for the Senate and House of Representatives shows that 28 pro-Israel PACs and numerous pro-Israel individuals have given candidates millions of dollars in campaign contributions.
The scoreboard presents 29 bills and resolutions that were introduced on behalf of Israel… 20 passed into law or on-record statement, many by unanimous consent. The legislation has accrued a total of over 3,300 co-sponsors…
Over 80 congressional challengers have also accepted donations from at least one pro-Israel PAC; most from more than one…
Here are the scoreboards:
A just-released Midterm Elections Scoreboard shows that Israel partisans have dominated Congress over the past ten years, despite the preference of American voters, who consistently wish evenhanded policies and feel the U.S. gives Israel too much money.
The detailed scoreboard on candidates for the Senate and House of Representatives* shows that 28 pro-Israel PACs and numerous pro-Israel individuals have given candidates millions of dollars in campaign contributions. There are currently no pro-Palestine PACs (although one of the pro-Israel PACs supports some Palestinian positions).
The scoreboard presents 29 bills and resolutions that were introduced on behalf of Israel, some openly drafted by AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Twenty have passed into law or on-record statement, many by unanimous consent. The legislation has accrued a total of over 3,300 co-sponsors.
In the rare cases when pro-Israel bills were unpopular, the split usually occurred along party lines, suggesting that the action was motivated by partisan politics, not deviation from pro-Israel positions.
Only one bill explicitly supportive of Palestinians (opposing Israel’s widespread imprisonment of children) has been introduced. The bill has so far garnered 29 cosponsors.
The Scoreboard was compiled by If Americans Knew, a nonpartisan organization that focuses on Israel-Palestine and the U.S. connection.
Five pieces of legislation in the study addressed military aid to Israel, including the Memo of Understanding (MOU) that President Obama signed, promising Israel $38 billion over the next ten years. A bill currently before Congress cements this nonbinding agreement into law — the largest such aid package in U.S. history and an amount greater than US military aid to all other countries in the world combined. American taxpayers presently provide nearly a quarter of Israel’s annual defense budget. Six in ten Americans feel that is too much.
Six pieces of legislation grant congressional support to Israel’s “right to self-defense” against the unarmed enclave of Gaza or the Palestinians in Jerusalem; six others took a stand against actions of the United Nations which sought to safeguard Palestinian rights; an additional four supported the erosion of Americans’ rights to free speech.
In addition to bills and resolutions, the Scoreboard includes 11 open letters — some penned by AIPAC — to presidents and other influential leaders. Six of these letters endorsed pro-Israel policy and were signed by a significant number of legislators. The five letters encouraging actions that would benefit Palestinians gathered modest support.
An overwhelming majority of the incumbents running for re-election voted for the pro-Israel legislation and signed the pro-Israel letters.
The Scoreboard also indicates which incumbent candidates received campaign donations from pro-Israel political action committees (PACs), which totaled over $2.2 million for the 2018 election cycle. Pro-Israel Individuals contributed an additional $13 million.
Thirteen Senators and 14 Representatives received money and/or endorsements from five or more pro-Israel PACs.
Over 80 congressional challengers have also accepted donations from at least one pro-Israel PAC; most from more than one. According to Open Secrets, there are currently 28 pro-Israel PACs.
Unlike most PACs, which announce their focus in their name, most of the pro-Israel PACs use names that disguise their focus, such as “Americans United in Support of Democracy,” “Americans for Good Government,” and “Because We Care.”
While there are currently no pro-Palestine PACs, one pro-Israel PAC, J-Street, is supportive of some Palestinians rights. However, J-Street aligns with Israel on many of its major policies, and supports the massive aid to Israel.
Open Secrets, a project of the Center for Responsive Politics, points out, “Few lobbies dedicated to international issues are so active and well-financed as the Israel lobby.”
Open Secrets continues, “A powerful pro-Israel force has carved out an influential place in American campaigns in the form of super PAC mega-donor Sheldon Adelson.” Adelson’s contributions to national political campaigns in 2018 alone reached over $113 million — all to Republicans/conservatives.
The Scoreboard indicates that a substantial number of the 410 incumbents on the ballot in both houses voted pro-Israel most of the time: 355 members of Congress (87%) had a pro-Israel score over 70%.
63% of House incumbents (240 of 378) had 100% pro-Israel scores — 74% of those (177) were Republican.
One Senator (Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-MS) had 100% pro-Israel rating; 78% of Senate incumbents (25 of 32) had a rating of 80% or higher. Six of these were Republican.
Congress considered only one piece of explicitly pro-Palestine legislation during the entire decade: Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) offered HR 4391 “No Way to Treat a Child,” which has garnered just 7% congressional backing (29 cosponsors).
“No Way to Treat a Child” challenges Israel’s illegal practice of detaining, interrogating, and torturing Palestinian children — part of the brutal military occupation that has been ongoing for over half a century.
In the words of the No Way to Treat a Child campaign, “Israel has the dubious distinction of being the only country in the world that systematically prosecutes between 500 and 700 children in military courts each year.”
UNICEF, the UN Children’s Fund, reports that ill-treatment of children (as well as adults) in the Israeli military detention system is “widespread, systematic, and institutionalized.”
In spite of this documented disregard for international humanitarian law on the part of Israel, only 29 members of Congress (7%) have signed onto HR 4391.
If Americans Knew says that the scoreboards will be updated and expanded as more information becomes available, and has announced that it welcomes sourced information from readers.
* * *
* The House Scoreboard can be viewed in quick-loading sections by region, or as a whole (which takes up to 10 minutes to load).
Full version of all 50 states (remember to be patient: this takes about 5-10 minutes to load.)
Documentaries on the Israel lobby:
* * *
Trump’s top campaign donor was an Israeli dual citizen Sheldon Adelson.
Here is a video listing Trump’s Campaign donors and campaign staff. How can Trump be impartial toward Israel with owing favors to these people?
A Jewish writer for the Huffington Post named Robert Kuttner put forward the case of impeaching Trump using the Emoluments Clause before Trump was even elected. (Source). He should be careful what he wishes for. If Trump was impeached based on these grounds, it would open the door to the removal of many US politicians from office. I believe a case can already be made as things are now. There is just no case history as these impeachment lawsuits are the first time the Emoluments Clause has been tested in court. Which I find to be mind-blowing. How can no politician be found to have violated this law in over 200 years?
* * *
It is not only Israel but many other countries have contributed to the corruption of American politicians:
“As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.”
About factions and partisanship in-fighting- “It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.” Farewell Address, 1796
* * *