Tuq'r's Correlegionist Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed Struggles, For Some Reason, to Win Over Jewish Voters;
Michigan's Jewish Demcrat AG Says Jews Must Put Aside Worries About Antisemitic Violence to Support Muslims Who Want to Kill Them

The Democrat Party is really hitting on all cylinders now.

Tucker Carlson's pick for the America First candidate for Michigan Senate says Jews should like him but Jews aren't so sure.

The New York Times is sad to admit this:

El-Sayed Wants to Mend Ties With Jewish Democrats, but Some Are Not Impressed

Lingering concerns about the Senate nominee in Michigan could make it harder for him to assemble a winning coalition.

What concerns specifically, NYT? Why are you being vague?

This is why Bari Weiss had to step in and change a headline to specifically say that Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed was deleting tweets about 9/11. The "Journalist" herself (I'm assuming a Karen) didn't want to alert the reader to what the tweets were about so Bari Weiss took the unethical step of informing the readers.

Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic Senate nominee in Michigan, recently spent two days trying to mend fences with Jewish Democrats after an acrimonious primary against a pro-Israel opponent.

For some of them, it wasn't enough.

Specifically, Dr. El-Sayed sought to address remarks he had made shortly after an attack on a synagogue in the Detroit area in March that some interpreted as too sympathetic to the assailant.

WHAT WAS THE COMMENT?

If you told us, we could judge. But you're hiding it from us.

Why is that?

Oh, the comment was, of course, an excuse for the child-slayer: "Hurt people do hurt people." The Muslim was "hurt" -- his feelings, he meant -- so he shot a bunch of Jewish kids.

There's hurt on one side, there's hurt on the other. Let's not bicker and argue about 'oo killed 'oo.

But his apologies last weekend fell short with some Jewish Democrats in part because he seemed to be seeking forgiveness for the timing of his remark rather than its substance.

Dr. El-Sayed's criticism of Israel has concerned many Jewish Democrats. And some are angered by his association with Hasan Piker, a provocative streamer whose comments about Israel have drawn blowback from Democrats and Republicans.

What were those provocative comments, NYT?

The ones about America deserving 9/11? The framed photo of the burning towers behind him in his podcast office? The claim that Jews might have been involved in 9/11? The statement that Hamas' murder of babies was justified because murdering "settlers" is justified and "there are baby settlers" who therefore are justifiable targets for Muslim murder?

WHAT ARE THE COMMENTS?!

It's weird how every salient detail keeps not appearing in this article, which is supposedly about why Jews are rejecting Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed.

It's almost as if the media exists not to report the truth but to hide it.

The frictions revealed the still-fresh wounds from a bitter primary struggle between Dr. El-Sayed and his pro-Israel opponent, Representative Haley Stevens.

Haley Stevens has now been identified twice as "pro-Israel" but Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed has not been identified as "anti-Israel" or "pro-Islam" or "pro-Hamas" or "pro-Muslim Brotherhood."

Their race became a proxy war over the Democratic Party's divisions on Israel, which propelled numerous progressive candidates, including Dr. El-Sayed, to victory.

What divisions? Haley Stevens seems to have a position you identify, but Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed has no position you can identity. How can there be "divisions" when only one side has an opinion and the other side is, we assume, just neutral on the matter?

The lingering tension is a hurdle for Dr. El-Sayed as he seeks to turn to his general-election opponent, former Representative Mike Rogers, a Republican. Uniting Democrats is proving difficult for Dr. El-Sayed, who won his primary by fewer than 18,000 votes. And he is battling on two fronts, as Mr. Rogers and other Republicans, including Vice President JD Vance, have begun to assail him over his position on Israel in an effort to peel off Jewish support.

We still have not heard about Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed's "position" on Israel, but it is nice that we finally know he has one.

Meanwhile, even Van Jones is blasting Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed's anti-Israel extremism, pointing out that the Muslim Brotherhood Manchurian Candidate wants to ban Israel from buying, with its own money, purely defensive arms like the Patriot missile.

Almost as if he wants Israeli civilians to be killed by Hamas and Iranian missiles.

But I know that from a Van Jones clip-- not from the NYT.

With just over two months left before the general election, the dissonance could threaten Dr. El-Sayed's efforts to assemble a winning coalition in a key Senate battleground race that will help determine control of the upper chamber.

What is the reason for the "dissonance"? Why are you so deliberately vague?

And now, after that deliberately falsified article, they admit they made some very minor technical errors in the first published version.

They do this so you believe, wrongly, that what remains is true and complete:

An earlier version of this article misspelled the given name of a Democrat who plans to vote for Republican Mike Rogers. She is Stacy Gittleman, not Stacey Gittleman.

We acknowledge mistakes in our reporting with corrections. If you spot an error, please let us know at corrections@nytimes.com.Learn more.

I spotted a bunch of errors but I don't think you're serious about correcting them.

Meanwhile, Michigan's female Democrat Jewish AG Dana Nessel tells Jews to put concerns about their safety aside and just vote for the guy who wants them all dead.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's remarks on Sunday constitute a new low in contemporary political discourse.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, who is Jewish, was being honored at a gathering of the Michigan Democratic Jewish Caucus on Sunday when Mv

"We have a moral imperative to place the needs of the world above even our own self-interest and, yes, even our own survival," she also reportedly said.

Did you just say that Jews must put aside their own survival to support the Democrats and Hamas' plans to exterminate all Jews in Israel??!!?

Say what?

Nessel's remarks were made in the context of the controversy over the vocally anti-Israel Democratic nominee for Senate in Michigan, Abdul El-Sayed, whom many Jewish Democrats oppose -- and whom Nessel has not endorsed, at least not yet.

Oh, someone finally told me what Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed's position on Israel is.

This is a Democrat who is still open to voting for Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed. Of course.

...

And now, a Jewish Democratic politician -- a state attorney general, no less -- is telling her Jewish constituents that they should be prepared to sacrifice their safety and their survival for some sort of "common good"?

In her speech, again according to the Jewish Insider report, Nessel suggested emulating the biblical Queen Esther to "sacrifice the comfort, safety and security and even the very future of our own people in exchange for the opportunity to save the rest of humanity." Except, of course, it would appear that Nessel did not pay attention in her religious school classes at West Bloomfield's Temple Kol Ami, since Esther did no such thing. What Esther did was risk the displeasure of her husband King Ahasuerus (the Persian king Xerxes I) and possibly her own life in order to ensure the survival of her people -- that is, the Jewish People. Nessel's analogy is, to be kind, entirely off base.

So is her curious attempt to link support for Israel with environmental causes. "What good is defending the historic homeland of our ancestors and demanding that candidates acknowledge its right to exist," she asked, "if the planet upon which it rests is no longer inhabitable?" This is a non-sequitur to end all non sequiturs, and it makes no sense in the present-day political climate.

Is Nessel suggesting that we should ever turn a blind eye to any threats to Jewish safety?

Yes she is. How are you not getting this? Are you stupid?

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 05:15 PM

| Access Comments