300

Sanders reups vow to boycott ‘war criminal’ Netanyahu’s address to Congress (www.thehill.com)

submitted 1 month ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 46 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) sent Netanyahu a formal invitation that was also signed by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).

If you're surprised that Biden and both parties leaders are on the same page about this, it's because they're all on this same page:

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary?cycle=All&ind=Q05&recipdetail=S

Well. Jeffries isn't because he's new, but he's got his own things going on

https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/hakeem-jeffries/summary?cid=N00033640

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 15 points 1 month ago

I came in here to talk about what a piece of shit Netanyahu is, and to say it actually might not be a bad idea for him to come talk to congress, because of the potential for backlash which it seems to me would outweigh any benefit I could see this carrying for him (like literally I can't really see any productive point to it -- he's already got his weapons; drawing any more attention to himself and giving people a reason to get pissed off at him and say it directly to his face in a fashion that can get onto the news can only lead to bad things for him).

Instead I found myself encountering the word "Biden" for literally no reason at all. You realize that being so transparent about trying to twist around any news story into your favorite conclusion to draw from it, is just throwing into sharp relief how little of a fuck you give about anything that's not related to your project to try to get Trump elected, yes?

[-] MimicJar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

You're allowed to criticize Biden and the Democratic Party.

Without a doubt voting for Trump is the biggest mistake anyone can make. It you're not happy about the Israel situation Trump is the worst person to solve it. Trump's answer is "kill them all" and with no regard for innocent lives, children or civilians. It's continued genocide and it is not acceptable. Trump can't be reasoned with because he isn't a reasonable person.

Biden and the Democratic Party, that's the answer. However it's stupid to ignore the millions in money that have come their way. Biden and Democrats aren't perfect, far from it. But they are reasonable, they can be reasoned with.

No single individual or single election is going to solve all our problems. It's a long process. Biden has done plenty of good, as have Democrats. But Biden and Democrats can do better.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

[-] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago

Perfectly said!! That’s exactly what they do. They twist everthing into a an anti-Biden agenda. In the comments of so many posts you can see them twisting the narrative into “Biden BAAAAD!”

Also note how you almost never them commenting on any posts regarding Trump and his bullshit.

It’s plainly obvious what they’re doing.

[-] YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub 6 points 1 month ago

Buying a senator should be much more expensive. 300k a year is chump change. Jefferies sucks because he supports a genocide, but he is disappointing that he is so… pathetic at doing it for so little money.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

It's always been that cheap.

Like, John Oliver offering Thomas the "motor coach" if he stepped down from the SC is actually a pretty huge offer, if it wasn't a lifetime appointment it probably would have worked.

Part of the reason was campaign donations being capped lowered the max asking price.

Then PACS raised it, and now the DNC and Biden have updated Hillary's program that managed to bankrupt the DNC and most state parties so an individual can give a million each.

Which doesn't exactly solve the problem in anyways, just means that the politicians get bigger checks for the same corrupt bullshit.

It's why the only people seriously trying to get money out of politics is progressives. They have nothing to lose by it, their donations come from individuals and is already averaging well below the 3k a person is legally able to give a year. They just have a shit ton more donors (actual voters) than a bunch of giant corporations and bundlers.

[-] Substance_P@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Biden has put only inconsistent pressure on Israel; Trump would have put none.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Biden has put zero pressure on Israel...

But there's no reason we have to lower our standards because trump is worse.

Like, if you had a nice steak dinner, and I just take it and offered you a shit sandwich or a peanut butter and jelly, yeah it's an obvious choice between the less worse options.

So if it happens once you just take the pb&j rather than skip dinner.

But when it's three times in a row, you're gonna start to wonder if the only real solution is to do something about me takingn your steak every night. And maybe the reason is because the people who own the peanut butter and jelly companies paying me isn't just a coincidence.

And you're tired of putting in all the work and cost of buying steak and grilling it, and never getting to eat it.

While I just slap together a PB&J then get to eat your steak.

If we gave everyone the option of a shit sandwich or a steak, even the vegans who don't eat meat for ethical reasons would probably vote against the shit sandwich.

[-] lets_get_off_lemmy@reddthat.com 3 points 1 month ago

This is a similar argument for accelerationism in Marxism. That we should make the world as capitalist as possible because the system will fail quicker and get replaced by something more just.

It's hard for me to believe that this would actually work in either case. The destruction in the meantime would be too great and it may reach a point where we can't climb back. In the case of Trump, he wants to be a dictator, and he may push voting rights so far in one direction that the people won't have a say at all.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's not accelerationism...

It's the opposite

I want to stop both parties from moving further to the right

If I keep voting for one no matter how far right they go, then there's no pressure to ever stop, slow down, and especially not start moving left.

I've tried a lot over 20 years, nothing works, if anything the party has become more antagonistic to progressives.

Will they listen and move left?

Probably not.

But what else can I do that has a better chance?

Have you seen Biden's response to protests? Primaries are a joke, my only option on ballot this year was Biden, and he had crowned himself months earlier anyways. And it's already been multiple cycles since the DNC told a judge it's totally cool for them to rig it, because the results are nonbinding.

They canceled a fucking states primary this year...

That was a big fucking deal

So seriously, if you have any better solution I'd love to here it

[-] lets_get_off_lemmy@reddthat.com -1 points 1 month ago

Just to be clear: you're saying your solution is to vote for Trump though?

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, all on the same page, supporting the best hope for democracy in the middle east while also containing Iran, the biggest state threat to global security for the next 100 years, isn't controversial in Washington. Gasp!

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Accepting money does not make a politician beholden to the donator. Especially so if the donor changes position on the value of civilian lives after providing the donation.

Just ask Chuck Schumer, who accepted $1.7M and still publicly called for Netanyahu’s resignation while labeling him as the obstacle of peace in this conflict.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-senator-chuck-schumers-speech-israeli-elections-are-the-only-way/

[-] blazera@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Accepting money does not make a politician beholden to the donator.

Good lord how low the bar has become. Trying to argue that bribes are fine and dont influence anyone. Bribes from a foreign country engaged in genocide.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Yes, nuance is hard. Sorry the news made you sad. I hope you feel better soon.

[-] blazera@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

If you thought there was any nuance that would make the bribes okay you would have just presented the nuance.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

So edgy, calling lobbying bribes.

[-] blazera@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

Money paid to an official to influence their authority.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I’m saying if they pay for favor, then commit atrocities, the deal’s off. Listen to Shumer’s speech. Does that sound like a guy that was bought with $1.7M?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Schumer was one of the people who invited Netanyahu to directly and publicly provide his employees with their marching orders.

[-] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

provide his employees with their marching orders.

Care to provide evidence of this??

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

That congress does whatever Netanyahu wants? They overwhelmingly voted against conditioning aid to Israel while Netanyahu was obviously committing a genocide.

[-] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee -2 points 1 month ago

So… no proof then. Admit you’re here with misinformation, and we can move on.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I offered my rationale for my statement. Which was a formality since you intended to dismiss in bad faith anything I said.

[-] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So for those following at home…

Reality: 1

Ensign_Crab: 0

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Oh no. You baselessly declared victory after dismissing my comment in bad faith. How will I survive?

[-] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago

Bad faith? I simply asked you to support your statement with proof. Are you so delicate that your rhetoric can’t even be scrutinized without becoming a victim?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

I provided my rationale. You dismissed it, and you were going to dismiss it regardless of what I said. That's bad faith.

without becoming a victim?

Republicans insist that anyone who disagrees with them is playing the victim.

[-] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I asked you to prove your words, you refused because you cannot. Then you make excuses and accusations to explain your cowardice.

This is all that needed be shown. As I believe all bad-faith statements should be called out… my work is done here.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

I asked you to prove your words, you refused because you cannot.

I explained myself. You keep pretending I didn't.

[-] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

Everyone knows you didn’t. You never do. That’s the point.

Thanks for playing though.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

Reported as misinformation. Please Google before hitting the report button.

https://apnews.com/article/israel-netanyahu-war-gaza-congress-596b0adf6ed8f71ccaaecccec8b9d341

"The invitation from House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, along with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, has been in the works for some time. No date for the speech was set."

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

The article you linked to indicates that Schumer's invite to Netanyahu came after it was clear that Netanyahu was committing genocide:

Johnson first suggested inviting the Israeli leader, saying it would be “a great honor of mine” to invite him. That came soon after Schumer, who is the highest ranking Jewish elected official in the U.S., had delivered a stinging rebuke of Netanyahu. Schumer said in the speech that Netanyahu had “lost his way” amid the Israeli bombing campaign in Gaza.

Even so, Schumer had said he would join in the invitation because “our relationship with Israel is ironclad and transcends any one prime minister or president.”

Schumer invited Netanyahu AFTER the genocide commenced. I'm confident that my comment was not misinformation.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Correct, which is why I ignored the report on it and posted the link. ;)

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Ah. I was confused. I thought you were saying you had reported it, like to the admins or something.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Nah, I would have just removed the comment if it were legit misinformation and noted it. :)

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Very confusing.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Which does make more sense, yes.

[-] blazera@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

Very much so yes, tons of israel ass kissing

[-] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Democrats are insanely stupid. Don’t they remember the last time Nethanyahu was invited in campaign time? Even if you support Israel, certainly as a Democrat you cannot support this guy??

this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2024

300 points (96.6% liked)

politics

18081 readers

1987 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News