Sunday, November 08, 2026

AIPAC on the ropes, but not knocked out. Not with two of its top money takers being Hakim Jeffries and Schumer. Is there to be a knockout punch, or what? Business as usual as a way to piss away the value of a blue shift, by dishonoring progress and saying "as usual" is okay and what the big donors want - is that the promise of a new day or of the old way? More of the same? Later, we trade places again, etc.?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/oct/22/aipac-politics-endorsements-israel 

Aipac, which only launched its political action committee and started endorsing candidates three cycles ago, is hardly getting out of US elections. It pledged to maintain the work of its deep-pocketed Super Pac, United Democracy Project, and to continue to funnel millions of dollars to prop up pro-Israel candidates through individual donors and Aipac members. The shift in strategy was a sign it was adapting to a changing political landscape, not that it was giving up its efforts to shape it.

“Historically, AIPAC sustained an aura of invincibility that ensured it won most battles by walkover – if you are perceived as invincible, the other side doesn’t even bother to fight you,” the political analyst Trita Parsi wrote. “Rather than invincibility, AIPAC’s name now carries such toxicity that the group doesn’t want its own name on its political donations.”

Aipac did not respond to a request for comment. On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that Aipac, which normally backs Democrats, was planning to give as much as $9m to a Pac supporting Republican Senate candidate Mike Rogers over Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan. The group had already spent $32m seeking to defeat El-Sayed, an outspoken critic of Israel, in the primaries.

But the announcement that it would stop directly backing candidates going forward was seen as tacit recognition that Aipac’s open support risked hurting pro-Israel candidates more than it helped them.

“Through this shift, AIPAC openly admitted that their brand has become toxic in the political world,” Beth Miller, political director of Jewish Voice for Peace Action, one of Aipac’s most vocal critics, said. “Fewer and fewer candidates are willing to be publicly affiliated with this extremist, warmongering group. This is a clear signal: being pro-genocide is bad politics and bad policy.”

In a letter from Aipac to members first reported on by Jewish Insider, the group’s leadership seemed to acknowledge that its once formidable power in US elections had suffered as more candidates openly distanced themselves from Israel and from the group itself. In the letter, they noted that the 2026 election was “one of the most challenging environments in recent memory” for the group and predicted that the “challenges we are confronting will continue to grow in the years ahead.”

“To win the fight for the future of the country and the U.S.-Israel alliance, we must build a more strategic, consequential, and nimble political operation,” they wrote. “The only tactic we’re married to is the most effective one.”

While Aipac boasted that it helped 290 candidates this election cycle, leading to the defeat of 29 candidates it described as “anti-Israel”, the group has also suffered major blows – including in Michigan and New Jersey. More than a dozen candidates who took Aipac contributions in the past have since publicly distanced themselves from the group, and New York congressman Pat Ryan announced last week that he would return nearly $250,000 from the group, the latest of several elected officials to return Aipac funds or say they would turn it down.

Dion Nissenbaum, a journalist whose documentary on Aipac was published this week, featuring interviews with former Aipac insiders, told the Guardian that the announcement appeared to be the “first real admission from Aipac that their campaign strategy has backfired”.

Still, he warned, “if Aipac’s super PAC – the main source of its campaign donations – is going to keep operating, it may be an attempt to reinvent itself without ceding the battlefield.”

That is more than enough of the item to get the drift. People voted as if genocide and ethnic cleansing was noticed and met with disapproval. The Guardian item continues, and readers have the link at the top of this post. An enduring policy of ongoing land theft and extreme hostility against those whose land is to be expropriated is not one easy to love. AIPAC is seeing this in real time, and not quitting its throwing its weight around as much as taking a breather to reevaluate its ways and means.

In short - it ain't going away. And, not in the article by name, it still owns Jeffries and Schumer.

With those as Dem leaders, AIPAC can feel comfortable in catching its breath.

 

 

Childish tantrum? Or ---Was it Stephen Miller given the Chief of Staff position because Greg Bovino turned it down? Dracula has been centuries dead, so not a job candidate. It narrows the field when you speculate what Trump wanted after Wiles was efficient, even with the bucket of stuff she'd had to work with.

Stephen Miller is nobody's view of a level efficient honest non-ideologue to be tasked with a difficult job.

Stephen Miller is Trump's way of saying Fuck You to the voting public saying it to him.

Could he have named a more in-your-face individual (JD having VP and not willing to change).

Marco? Figure ten reasons for Miller, not Marco, besides SecState to Staff being a down shift.

What is true, is wrapping an explanation around Stephen Miller as Staff head, and how we all can feel about that, are separate things. To logically analyze a visceral howl to everyone as if having any more to it than action - reaction.

It is primordial brain stem reaction within Trump, to Trump being told voting people hate Trump - Trump and administration, Trump and family. Trump and JD. Trump and Hegseth. Trump and greed. Trump and unmatched corruption, crypto and non-crypto.

You reject me, I hand you Steven Miller, your rejecting me earned that, so go fuck off.

Something like that is afoot. It cannot be Trump seeing merit in Miller. Who could do that?

Miller is the biggest possible insult Trump could imagine to an electorate that said Trump = awful, Then, "I'll show you awful, Miller, come here," being the response. A sick underlying logic to it that Trump being Trump means Miller being elevated to a greater public view, as if a zoo is being remodeled. 

Bessent and Miller, so there! 

_______________UPDATE_______________ 

search = Steven miller as Trump revenge against voters --- three returned items

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/house-gop-erupts-at-stephen-miller-as-trump-elevates-him-after-midterm-massacre-megalomaniac/ar-AA2gX72J 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/nov/07/trump-stephen-miller-midterms 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/stephen-miller-trump-chief-of-staff-reaction-b3080823.html 

 If you dislike the Crabgrass understandings, write your own.

 

Friday, November 06, 2026

JD did that long tweet saying Republicans suffered over the Iran war, it was the Iran war, only the Iran war, no other problems. Democracy Now! notes otherwise. And use the "c word."

 

Corruption Watchdog: Voters "Have Eyes" & Saw Trump "Enriching Himself" at Their Expense

 And the Trump family, him and his offspring, were not alone. The billionaires getting their tax and business breaks shift the burden of financing the government on the little guys, who see it as that immediately but felt powerless to fight it. Candidates ran saying they had fight in them. Now the problem will be the Dem establishment who were in bed with the Repubs in serving the donor rich, and will want to continue business as usual. That is why Schumer has to go. That is what JD hoped to sweep under the carpet. Or choose a parallel cliche.

The establishment Dems, voicing but not doing will be the big stumbling block progressives will face.

It is unclear if there will be an answer since there are more establishment types than progressives, so numbers stand against good government actually taking root.

Watch the video.

And note, JD is trying to hide the truth under a hat. And playing the money in politics game is a Schumer thing also. 

UPDATE: Make it clear. Schumer is into the money to get candidates elected. Not like Trump and offspring, in it to enrich themselves, first, the campaigning wins second. But Schumer is a bit too indiscriminate about whose money he takes and what's expected in return. It has to be made squeaky clean or it remains a failed system overly favorable to the wealthy and their class warfare against the rest. 

And then there is the Israel bias, with a blind eye to how the Israelis conduct themselves. That cannot be accepted. 

 

 

It is widely reported, Stephen Miller will from now on be Trump's Chief of Staff. Vomit worthy individual gets promotion is an alternate phrasing

 It is on X. Wiles out. Stephen Miller to be Trump's Chief of Staff. JD is supportive.

 https://x.com/JDVance/status/2118789426813821141

 

Don't just say it. Do it. Watch out for the door knob.

 https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/minnesota-gop-senate-candidate-denied-171314543.html

"A CNN KFile review found that, in the years before launching her Senate campaign, in tweets and on her podcast, Tafoya repeatedly said she planned to leave Minnesota," the network reported. "At times she described Minnesota in sharply negative terms because of its politics, while often identifying herself as a part-time Floridian and praising that state as a model of conservative governance.

"In just the past three years," the report continued, "Tafoya told followers at least four separate times that she planned to leave the state."

Better without her. Sooner the better. The DC fat job exit door is closed. What's holding things up?

 

 

 

This is a major hypothetical thought experiment - might Iran - if giving up nuclear ambitions and cooling state religion emphasis by getting more secular people into power - prove a better regional hegemon than Israel has been? Keeping a stable self-interested world oil economy perspective at the Strait of Hormuz and tempering Gulf Arab chutzpah rather than allying in tricky ways with it?

 The headline poses the question of long term best world interests. It is an open thread in that posing the question says Crabgrass is not viewing that outcome as off the table, but with Crabgrass not expressing a biased view one way or the other. The Gulf Arabs do need checks and balances. They reportedly get into intrigues. As with Kushner during Trump 45. They throw the weight of their wealth around a lot. 

Less might be more.

It need not be as with the Shah as a U.S.A. known puppet. That failed big time. But with their own chosen people running their show, their way, with a worldview of economic needs of other nations for stability and fair pricing. The Persians are not a dumb or weak people. Trump's war has shown that. 

______________UPDATE_____________ 

With elections being held many places settling government balances after the voting, might this be a better time to expand weighing new viewpoints, rather than any time else? 

Bibi time is or might be on the wane. AIPAC is showing itself to not be of much use or value to rank and file American regular people. It specializes wrongly. Or has so specialized. It needs tooth pulling. Reform by any gentler way being unlikely to work.

 


 

Purge the surrogate appears to be a Republican ploy to get an impeachment but not a Senate removal vote, thus keeping the status quo while trying to redirect blame to the surrogate and not Trump.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/11/04/politics/pete-hegseth-impeachment-trump 

It is Trump's Iran war and Hegseth had nothing to do with the Trump tariff mess. On that tariff score, impeachment of Scott Bessent would matter more than Hegseth.

BOTTOM LINE: It is all Trump's fuck-ups, too numerous to count, but the shooting war and tariff war are key. Surrogates are syncophants, but it is Trump, Trump, Trump, and nobody else important enough to shift blame. Trump is the top, middle and bottom of the blue wave. All else is posturing.

If the Republicans want a sacrificial animal, only Trump satisfies the bill. Stow the rest. Stow removal arguments that some underling purge will satisfy needs.

UPDATE: Can you say crypto corruption? Jarad and the Trump 45 Gulf Arab slush funds? There is not even a cabinet level person to purge there. And Stephen Miller behind ICE excesses, is not cabinet level.

It all comes down to Trump. Him. His family. Corruption was a major election factor, and the Hegseth jump-on is not about corruption. Corruption was separate from Hegseth's incompetence and ill directed ideas. I.e., demonizing/scapegoating Petey is only a part of the need to say the loss was all Trump, primarily Trump, and Hegseth under the bus is a "So what?"