Archive for September 26, 2017

North Korea taps GOP analysts to better understand Trump and his messages

September 26, 2017

North Korea taps GOP analysts to better understand Trump and his messages, Washington PostAnna Fifield, September 26, 2017

Spectators listen to a television news broadcast of a statement by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on a public television screen in Pyongyang on Friday. (Ed Jones/AFP/Getty Images)

 North Korean government officials have been quietly trying to arrange talks with Republican-linked analysts in Washington, in an apparent attempt to make sense of President Trump and his confusing messages to Kim Jong Un’s regime.

The outreach began before the current eruption of threats between the two leaders but will probably become only more urgent as Trump and Kim have descended into name-calling that, many analysts worry, sharply increases the chances of potentially catastrophic misunderstandings.

“Their number one concern is Trump. They can’t figure him out,” said one person with direct knowledge of North Korea’s approach to Asia experts with Republican connections.

There is no suggestion that the North Koreans are interested in negotiations about their nuclear program — they instead seem to want forums for insisting on being recognized as a nuclear state — and the Trump administration has made clear it is not interested in talking right now.

At a multilateral meeting here in Switzerland earlier this month, North Korea’s representatives were adamant about being recognized as a nuclear weapons state and showed no willingness to even talk about denuclearization.

(Video at the link. — DM)

But to get a better understanding of American intentions, in the absence of official diplomatic talks with the U.S. government, North Korea’s mission to the United Nations invited Bruce Klingner, a former CIA analyst who is now the Heritage Foundation’s top expert on North Korea, to visit Pyongyang for meetings.

Trump has close ties to Heritage, a conservative think tank that has influenced the president on everything from travel restrictions to defense spending, but no personal connection to Klingner.

“They’re on a new binge of reaching out to American scholars and ex-officials,” said Klingner, who declined the North Korean invitation. “While such meetings are useful, if the regime wants to send a clear message, it should reach out directly to the U.S. government.”

North Korean intermediaries have also approached Douglas Paal, who served as an Asia expert on the National Security Council under presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and is now vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

They wanted Paal to arrange talks between North Korean officials and American experts with Republican ties in a neutral location such as Switzerland. He also declined the North Korean request.

“The North Koreans are clearly eager to deliver a message. But I think they’re only interested in getting some travel, in getting out of the country for a bit,” Paal said.

(Video at the link. — DM)

North Korea currently has about seven such invitations out to organizations that have hosted previous talks — a surprising number of requests for a country that is threatening to launch a nuclear strike on the United States.

Over the past two years in particular, Pyongyang has sent officials from its Foreign Ministry to hold meetings with Americans — usually former diplomats and think-tankers — in neutral places such as Geneva, Singapore and Kuala Lumpur.

They are referred to as “Track 1.5” talks because they are official (Track 1) on the North Korean side but unofficial (Track 2) on the American side, although the U.S. government is kept informed of the talks.

But since Trump’s election in November, the North Korean representatives have been predominantly interested in figuring out the unconventional president’s strategy, according to almost a dozen people involved in the discussions. All asked for anonymity to talk about the sensitive meetings.

Early in Trump’s term, the North Koreans asked broad questions: Is President Trump serious about closing American military bases in South Korea and Japan, as he said on the campaign trail? Might he really send American nuclear weapons back to the southern half of the Korean Peninsula?

But the questions have since become more specific. Why, for instance, are Trump’s top officials, notably Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, directly contradicting the president so often?

“The North Koreans are reaching out through various channels and through various counterparts,” said Evans Revere, a former State Department official who dealt with North Korea and is a frequent participant in such talks. There are a number of theories about why North Korea is doing this.

“My own guess is that they are somewhat puzzled as to the direction in which the U.S. is going, so they’re trying to open up channels to take the pulse in Washington,” Revere said. “They haven’t seen the U.S. act like this before.”

Revere attended a multilateral meeting with North Korean officials in the picturesque Swiss village of Glion earlier this month, together with Ralph Cossa, chairman of the Pacific Forum of the Center for Strategic and International Studies and another frequent interlocutor with Pyongyang’s representatives.

The meeting is an annual event organized by the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, a government-linked think tank. But it took on extra significance this year due to the sudden rise in tensions between North Korea and the United States.

All the countries involved in the now-defunct six-party denuclearization talks — the United States, China, Japan, Russia, and the two Koreas — were represented, as were Mongolia, the Swiss government and the European Union. The Swiss invited the U.S. government to send an official, but it did not.

The North Koreans at the meeting displayed an “encyclopedic” knowledge of Trump’s tweets, to the extent that they were able to quote them back to the Americans present.

Pyongyang’s delegation was headed by Choe Kang Il, deputy director of the Americas division in the Foreign Ministry, and he was accompanied by three officials in their late 20s who wowed the other participants with their intellectual analysis and their perfect American-accented English. One even explained to the other delegates how the U.S. Congress works.

“They were as self-confident as I’ve ever seen them,” said Cossa. Revere added: “They may be puzzled about our intentions, but they have a very clear set of intentions of their own.”

The participants declined to divulge the contents of the discussions, as they were off the record.

But others familiar with the talks said the North Koreans completely ruled out the “freeze-for-freeze” idea being promoted by China and Russia, in which Pyongyang would freeze its nuclear and missile activities if the United States stopped conducting military exercises in South Korea. The United States, Japan and South Korea also outright reject the idea.

Participants left the day-and-a-half-long meeting with little hope for any improvement anytime soon.

“I’m very pessimistic,” said Shin Beom-chul, a North Korea expert at the South’s Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, after participating in the meeting in Glion. “They want to keep their nuclear weapons, and they will only return to dialogue after the United States nullifies its ‘hostile policy.’ They want the U.S. to stop all military exercises and lift all sanctions on them.”

Ken Jimbo, who teaches at Keio University in Japan and was also at the meeting, said that North Korea may still be interested in dialogue, but on terms that are unacceptable to the other side.

“North Korea wants to be recognized as a nuclear-weapons state,” Jimbo said. “But when is North Korea ready for talks? This is what I kept asking the North Koreans: How much is enough?”

 

The German AfD party has surged and Europe is falling apart

September 26, 2017

The German AfD party has surged and Europe is falling apart, Israel National News, Giulio Meotti, September 26, 2017

(Please see also, Misrepresenting Germany in ‘The New York Times’ — DM)

The German chancellors come and go. But their country is here to stay. And their ideological model, not the 13% so called “neo-Nazis”, is what is endangering Europe.

********************************

In the course of last year, the European Union has faced an emergency known as the so-called “populist wave”: Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, Marine Le Pen in France, Ernst Hofer in Austria, Brexit in the UK, AfD now in Germany.

The mainstream media repeats the mantra that behind this right-wing surge lies the xenophobic and fascist hate that has raised its head in Europe, citing Vladimir Putin with his hackers, Donald Trump and his tweets, and other children’s fairy tales. These are the real fake newsmongers.

What lies behind the right-wing surge is, instead, the big cultural shock that hit at the heart of the European democracies.

It is a shock caused by the multicultural disaster (Muslim ghettos, sexual rape during the night in Cologne, chaos in the suburbs), the Islamist massacres (Charlie Hebdo, Hyper Cacher, Bataclan, Theo van Gogh, Nice, Brussels, Copenaghen, Stockholm, Berlin…), the ideological shock (derision of the people by the élites and political correctness), rampant anti-Christian secularization and massive illegal immigration (2.2 million people illegally entered Europe in 2015-2016).

So many physical, cultural, demographic and social borders are in a state of collapse. If Europe stays under siege in its Berlaymont Palace in Brussels without realizing the roots of these political earthquakes, Europe’s walls will be the next to fall.

The main reason behind Brexit was the British fear of German’s immigration chaos. But what about the day all the Syrians Mrs. Merkel allowed in become German citizens? Will the UK still be able to reject and refuse them entry if London is still part of the EU?

Mr. Wilders’ political career is the result of two political assassinations linked to Islam: Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh. He is a survivor.

The rising of Marine Le Pen is the fruit of 50 years of bad French integration policies.

And the AfD’s success is all related to Merkel’s decision to open the doors to one million Syrians.

Germany is a country sick of complacency (“a happy country” said one of Merkel’s slogans) and “frivolity” (the definition that comes from the newspaper Handelsblatt), a wealthy society based on suicidal multicultural ideology and cultural self-censorship (any German book critical of Islam has been demonized and marginalized, from Thilo Sarrazin to Rolf Peter Sieferle), a democracy built on pacifism (the German army is a joke) and a perennial sense of guilt-caused indigestion, which thinks that a border exists only to be overcome (Rudiger Safranski).

The German chancellors come and go. But their country is here to stay. And their ideological model, not the 13% so called “neo-Nazis”, is what is endangering Europe.

Misrepresenting Germany in ‘The New York Times’

September 26, 2017

Misrepresenting Germany in ‘The New York Times’, PJ MediaBruce Bawer, September 25, 2017

YouTube screenshot from New York Times documentary about a refugee in Germany

It is strange to think that there was a time when I bought The New York Times every morning and pored through it over my coffee, genuinely convinced that I was reading the most reliable news source on the planet. In my defense, I was very young. And The New York Times was a better paper then, although nowhere near as good as I thought it was. It has, in any event, long since become a travesty – a propaganda sheet that systematically, and dangerously, distorts the truth about the most crucial issues of our time.

Case in point: a 14-minute “Times documentary” entitled “Seeking Asylum in Germany – and Finding Hatred.” Credited to Ainara Tiefenthäler, Shane O’Neill, and Andrew Michael Ellis, and posted front and center on the Times website last Thursday, it’s about Abode, a tall, lanky 22-year-old Libyan refugee who, at the beginning of the film, has been living in the Saxon town of Bautzen (pop. 41,000) for over two years.

From the outset, Abode is presented as an innocent victim of racist hatred. We see him in his room at the Bautzen asylum center, talking softly, his large brown eyes oozing sensitivity. We see a cell-phone video in which a young white woman half his size kicks and hits him, apparently without provocation. We see him rehearsing for a hip-hop stage adaptation of Romeo and Juliet in which he plays Mercutio; the theater director, a middle-aged woman, speaks of him glowingly.

Providing contrast to this peaceable young man, we see a ragtag neo-Nazi group in Bautzen’s town square, waving flags and praising Donald Trump. And we see close-ups of racist online comments (in German) about refugees.

Abode says that when he used to see pictures of Europe on TV, he thought it looked wonderful. But now he hates it. “Libya is the land of good,” he says. Germany, by contrast, is a land of Nazis.

“Nazi” is a word he uses a lot. He says he’s had “problems with Nazis and the police” ever since his arrival in Germany. Eventually we discover that he’s been described in the local media as the head of a gang of refugees who engage in rioting and violence. We see a newspaper front page featuring a picture of him aiming a machine gun.

But Abode has explanations. The picture with the gun, he says, was taken at a wedding, where the guests fired rounds to celebrate. He claims that he’s never started a riot, but only acted in self-defense. He admits to having committed an act of violence, but only because he “blew up” at the sight of a Nazi rally. The theater director makes a curious statement: “He is someone who steps to the front when there is conflict.” She makes it sound as if he’s some kind of peacemaker, trying to put an end to conflict – not a gang leader, inciting conflict.

Toward the end of the documentary, we jump to “three months later.” An intertitle reads: “Since last year’s clashes between far-right locals and refugees in Bautzen, the police have opened up two dozen investigations of Abode.” Clashes? Why haven’t we see any of these “clashes”? Investigations? Two dozen? For what? The film doesn’t tell us.

We’re told Abode has been identified as “a public safety risk.” Why? The implicit message is that Abode is a victim of untiring police harassment. We’ve heard him complain about his “problems with Nazis and the police.” The film seems to want us to equate the two.

Finally, we’re shown Abode on the asylum center roof, threatening to jump. An end title informs us that he didn’t jump, has been relocated to an asylum center in another town, and is banned from Bautzen for three months. Finis.

After seeing Abode depicted as an undeserving object of hatred in a town full of neo-Nazis, I turned to the local German newspapers. They told a different story. Abode’s real name, I discovered, is apparently Mohamed Youssef. (The papers do him the favor of reducing his surname to an initial, “T” for Targi.) He came to Germany in 2014.

Here’s one detail omitted by the documentary: our hero calls himself “King Abode,” just as a Mafia don in a Sicilian village might call himself its king. One source points out something that’s obvious from the first moments of the film: while Abode claims to be from Libya, he doesn’t look Libyan – my guess would be he’s really from Somalia.

According to the German papers, Abode has caused plenty of trouble in Bautzen: he’s committed robberies, sold drugs, harassed women, thrown bottles at cops. And more, much more. But town authorities have gone soft on him in the name of “peaceful coexistence.” His asylum application was rejected, but he can’t be deported because it’s on appeal. What’s more, in defiance of the ban mentioned at the end of the film, Abode has returned repeatedly to the asylum center in Bautzen. Instead of punishing him for this, town officials have tried to work out a compromise, such as allowing Abode to stay at the Bautzen asylum center but asking him to stay away from the town square.

To read these stories about Abode is to see the narrative of the Times documentary completely unravel. Far from being a victim of police brutality, he turns out to be a thug who thumbs his nose at the law. Instead of being Nazi bullies, the folks that run Bautzen out of town prove to be toothless — scared to subject even the most dangerous of rejected asylum seekers to even the mildest of punishments. No surprise here, of course: if this town really were full of Nazis, as the film suggests, Abode would’ve beat a hasty retreat long ago — or ended up in a shallow grave in the woods.

The German newspapers make the facts crystal clear: this young man is a predator who’s been allowed to torment and terrorize an entire town for over two years, and whom multiculturalism-infatuated local officials, police, and courts have been terrified to touch.

That’s Germany today – the very opposite of what the New York Times wants you to believe.

TOP 10 most powerful weapons of the Israeli Army ( That we know of )

September 26, 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlR-HAZQLZw

This list leaves out the most important weapon of all: The brilliant and dedicated Jewish youngsters who fight to protect us…

Israel Defense Forces most powerful weapons.
0:00 Spike 1:15
F-15 2:43
Tavor 3:58
Namer 4:47
Delilah 6:04
Atmos 7:30
Merkava 4 8:13
Arrow 3 ABM 8:57
SAAR 5 10:24
Iron Dome

Support for a United Iraq Plays into the Hands of ISIS and Iran

September 26, 2017

Support for a United Iraq Plays into the Hands of ISIS and Iran, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, September 26, 2017

(How would Secretary Tillerson respond to Greenfield’s highlighted question about “catering to the whims of our Islamist enemies anyway?” — DM)

Why is the State Department in the business of catering to the whims of our Islamist enemies anyway?

******************************

The State Department had a very predictable reaction to the Kurdish referendum.

The United States is deeply disappointed that the Kurdistan Regional Government decided to conduct today a unilateral referendum on independence, including in areas outside of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region…

The unilateral referendum will greatly complicate the Kurdistan Regional Government’s relationship with both the Government of Iraq and neighboring states. The fight against ISIS is not over, and extremist groups are seeking to exploit instability and discord. We believe all sides should engage constructively in a dialogue to improve the future of all Iraqis. The United States opposes violence and unilateral moves by any party to alter boundaries.

The United States supports a united, federal, democratic and prosperous Iraq and will continue to seek opportunities to assist Iraqis to fulfill their aspirations within the framework of the constitution.

1. The Iraqi constitution is a joke. Much like Iraqi democracy.

2. Iraqi federalism doesn’t exist in Iraqi Kurdistan. It’s mostly independent already.

3. Iraqi federalism is what created the latest incarnation of ISIS. Trying to uphold a united Iraq to fight ISIS is the same dumb, bankrupt foreign policy that made this mess under Bush and Obama.

A “united Iraq” means letting Iran’s Shiite puppets in Baghdad run the country. The Sunnis, unsurprisingly opt out, Al Qaeda, in some form or another, comes calling. And that’s how we ended up with ISIS. And then we have to choose between Iran and ISIS. Unfortunately, as the Hezbollah-ISIS convoy and the 9/11 report shows, they also have a secret relationship.

So it’s Catch 22. Either way the terrorists win and we lose.

The only “solution” is to support de facto partition of Iraq along demographic lines. It won’t be easy or smooth, but it’s going to keep happening in the form of outbreaks of violence anyway until it’s finally realized. Iraq, like Syria, is an imaginary country created by Western powers.

And that means letting the Kurds, who are the closest thing to a success story in Iraq, go their own way.

Iran and ISIS and Turkey will be most unhappy. Good.

Why is the State Department in the business of catering to the whims of our Islamist enemies anyway?

President Trump JUST Drops Executive Order NOW Kim Jong Un Is Panicking(VIDEO)!!!

September 26, 2017

President Trump JUST Drops Executive Order NOW Kim Jong Un Is Panicking(VIDEO)!!!, Global News via YouTube, September 26, 2017

(The title seems excessively dramatic, but Dear Leader Kim will feel the new sanctions China claims to support.  The more interesting segments of the video deal with our military options. — DM)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5maJZEN_fXA

The blurb beneath the video states,

President Trump drops executive order now Kim Jong Un is panicking. President Trump signed an executive order targeting North Korea’s trading partners, calling it a powerful new tool aimed at isolating the regime. Foreign banks will face a clear choice. Do business with the United States or facilitate trade with the lawless regime in North Korea.

The IDF is in Mexico

September 26, 2017

 

 

 

THE NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY

September 26, 2017

Source: Jeremy Corbyn struggles with the shadow of Antisemitism. – Opinion – Jerusalem Post

Caroline B. Glick
September 25, 2017 21:2
Since 2015, Britain has been one election away from having an antisemitic prime minister.

Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn

BRITAIN’S OPPOSITION Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn listens to speeches at the Labour Party Conference venue in Brighton yesterday.. (photo credit:REUTERS)

Two years ago, Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader of Britain’s main opposition Labor Party. That officially put an end to Tony Blair’s alignment of the Labor Party with the political center in Britain, both in economic and in foreign affairs.

Corbyn is an antisemite. He refers to Hezbollah and Hamas – two terrorist groups that openly support the genocide of world Jewry and the annihilation of the Jewish state – as “our friends.” He has shared stages with Hamas terrorists and Holocaust- deniers. Since his ascension to leadership of the Labor Party, he has overseen the mainstreaming of antisemitic actions and rhetoric by his party members and supporters.

Shortly after Corbyn’s election, repeated, well-publicized acts of antisemitism by senior Labor Party members forced Corbyn to call for an investigation of the phenomenon. He appointed his ally Shami Chakrabarti to oversee the effort.

The Chakrabarti report – first presented at a Labor Party conference convened last June for that purpose – was not merely a whitewash. It effectively denied that it is possible to be concerned with antisemitism without being racially insensitive to other minority groups. In other words, concern for antisemitism is a form of racism in and of itself.

As for Corbyn himself, he couldn’t be clearer about his feelings. His remarks at his conference on antisemitism were antisemitic.

Corbyn insisted that it’s wrong “to assume that a Jewish friend is wealthy, part of some kind of financial or media conspiracy or takes a particular position on politics in general, or on Israel and on Palestine in particular.”

After all, not all Jews are bad, rich Jews who run the media and support Israel.

If that wasn’t enough, Corbyn then proceeded to allege that Israel is as evil as Islamic State. In his words, “Our Jewish friends are no more responsible for the actions of Israel and the Netanyahu government than our Muslim friends are for those various self-styled Islamic states and organizations.”

Since then, according to Jewish Labor Party members, Corbyn has refused to take any steps to diminish the increasingly strident antisemitic rhetoric and character of his party.

This then brings us to the American Democratic Party.

Over the past week, two incidents occurred that indicate that the party of Harry Truman and Bill Clinton is becoming increasingly comfortable with blaming the Jews.

First, last Thursday, Obama loyalist and former CIA operative Valerie Plame approvingly shared a fiercely antisemitic article on her Twitter feed.

The article, “America’s Jews are Driving America’s Wars,” was written by Philip Giraldi, a fellow former CIA officer and outspoken Jew-hater.

Giraldi’s piece included all the classic antisemitic tropes: Jews control the media and culture; they control US foreign policy; and they compel non-Jewish dupes to fight wars for Israel, to which the treacherous Jews of America are loyal.

Giraldi recommended barring Jews from serving in government positions and participating in public debates related to the Middle East. And, he added, if an American Jewish Israel-backer refuses to recuse himself, the media should duly label him, “Jewish and an outspoken supporter of the State of Israel.”

Such a label, he contended, “would be kind of like a warning label on a bottle of rat poison.”

Plame, who ultimately issued a contrite, defensive apology for circulating Giraldi’s anti-Jewish screed, initially justified her decision to repost the article and say it was “thoughtful.”

She added, “Many neocon hawks ARE Jewish.”

And she should know.

Plame rose to fame in 2003, when she was at the center of a chain of events that led to the delegitimization of Jewish neo-conservatives in the Bush administration through a campaign of antisemitic innuendo and legal persecution.

In 2003, Plame’s husband, former diplomat Joe Wilson, published an article in The New York Times in which he falsely denied White House claims that Saddam Hussein had sought to purchase uranium yellow cake from Niger for the purpose advancing his nuclear program.

Apparently in retaliation for his false allegations, then-deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage leaked to syndicated columnist Robert Novak that Wilson’s wife Valerie was a CIA officer. Plame was a covert operative at the time, making Armitage’s leak a crime.

The Justice Department appointed special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to oversee the investigation and prosecute the leak. Fitzgerald knew almost from the outset that Armitage was the source of the leak.

Yet he failed to prosecute him.

Instead, Fitzgerald went on a fishing expedition to root out then-vice president Richard Cheney’s Jewish chief of staff Scooter Libby. After a multiyear investigation, Libby, who did not leak Plame’s identity, was indicted and convicted on a specious count of perjury.

The effect of Libby’s indictment, prosecution and conviction was to place all his fellow Jews in the Bush national security team under constant and deeply antisemitic scrutiny. This defamation of Jewish American security experts in many ways paved the way for Barack Obama’s wholesale use of antisemitic undertones to defend his nuclear deal with Iran.

As Omri Ceren from the Israel Project recalled in a long series of Twitter posts after Plame circulated Giraldi’s article, Obama and his advisers repeatedly argued that “lobbyists” and Israel were seeking to convince lawmakers not to act in the US’s best interest. Instead they tried to manipulate senators into defending Israel and oppose Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, to the detriment of America. These exhortations, made repeatedly by Obama and his surrogates were then expanded upon and made explicit by their political allies in places like the Ploughshares Foundation, which served as focal points of Obama’s media campaign on behalf of the Iran nuclear deal.

Until she resigned on Sunday, Plame served on the Ploughshares board of directors.

Plame’s wing of the Democratic Party is not explicitly antisemitic. Obama never said, “Jews are undermining US national security.” Instead, he attacked Israel and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. He attacked “lobbyists” and foreign interests.

Plame’s mistake last week was that, in tweeting a link to Giraldi’s article, she moved beyond Obama’s dog-whistle approach.

In a way, she can be excused for crossing the line, because the rising force in her party has little problem openly trucking in Jew-hatred.

That force, of course is the Bernie Sanders radical leftist wing of the party.

Around the same time that Plame was tweeting her way into ill-repute, Iran was showing off a medium- range ballistic missile capable of hitting Israel and Europe and Sanders was giving a foreign policy speech in Missouri.

Israel was a key focus for Sanders, who is now in charge of the Democratic Party’s outreach efforts.

Sanders said the US is “complicit” with Israel’s “occupation” of Judea and Samaria and Gaza. He said that he would consider cutting off US military aid to Israel. He argued the US should take a more evenhanded approach to Israel.

No similar statements have ever been made by any major presidential contender or political leader in either party.

And yet, they have raised no outcry among his fellow Democrats.

Sanders’s rise has unleashed forces in the party such as former Nation of Islam spokesman Rep.

Keith Ellison and BDS activist Linda Sarsour. Both have been outspoken in their antisemitism. Both routinely defame and delegitimize American Jews who support Israel. And both are all but unanimously embraced as leaders by their partisan colleagues.

Since Donald Trump’s election, most of the media coverage of US politics has centered on cleavages within the Republican Party. But while it is true that the Republican Party is dysfunctional, the Democratic Party is transforming into something never before seen in mainstream US politics.

In 2016, the party of Bill Clinton ceased to be the party of the working class. Hillary Clinton abandoned her husband’s Rust Belt base, referring to his voters as “deplorables.”

Today, the two predominant branches of the party are the Obama branch – which is comfortable with antisemitic dog whistles – and the Sanders branch, which is comfortable with Corbyn-style Jew-baiting and open discrimination of pro-Israel Jews.

Absent a major restructuring of the party’s makeup, Plame’s forced resignation from Ploughshares may be remembered as the high-water mark in the new Democratic Party’s efforts to root out antisemitism from its ranks.