Despite the persistent presence of antisemitism, some seem to believe that more voices are needed to amplify it.
However, critics of Israel and former President Trump, both in the media and beyond, have found a fresh angle to criticize America’s involvement in the conflict with Iran.
The latest narrative suggests that Trump was only convinced to confront the Iranian regime due to a misleading and aggressive push from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
This story implies that, without such influence, the Middle East might have been on the verge of peace rather than embroiled in yet another conflict.
Leading the charge in promoting this narrative is none other than The New York Times.
A font of misinformation and biased reporting about everything Trump, starting with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax in his first term.
The paper was also a leading proponent of the false claim that Israel committed “genocide” in Gaza and was intentionally starving children.
It saw no evil either in Hamas or a murderous Ayatollah seeking nuclear weapons and is now combining its obsessions to push distorted allegations against Trump and Israel over Iran.
The “evidence” comes from two Times’ reporters who claim they got an exclusive view of a crucial February meeting of American and Israeli leaders in the top secret White House Situation Room.
Because the room is supposedly secure, anyone who gave the paper details and even direct quotationes, assuming they are accurate, had to have been there– — and probably likely committed a federal crime.
The story included descriptions of who sat where and who said what, including the reactions of Trump and members of his national security team to a presentation by Netanyahu.
Distorting the truth
The story also revealed details of a supposed second meeting held the following day that involved only Americans.
They were identified as the president, vice-presidentVice President J.D Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, DefenseWar Secretary Pete Hegseth and Susie Wiles, Trump’s chief of staff.
It contained what were supposedly direct quotationes from nearly everyone in the room.
The most pointed ones were from Ratcliffe, Rubio and Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.
The article said CIA head Ratcliffe described Netanyahu’s claim in the first meeting that an attack would lead to quick regime change in Tehran as “farcical.”
Then, according to the Times, Rubio added, “In other words, it’s bullshi–t.”
The paper cited a long quote attributed to Gen. Caine while he was speaking to the commander-in-chief: “Sir, this is, in my experience, standard operating procedure for the Israelis. They oversell, and their plans are not always well-developed. They know they need us, and that’s why they’re hard-selling.”
Trump was quoted as responding that regime change would be “their problem,” but “it was unclear whether he was referring to the Israelis or the Iranian people.”
Then came the conclusion that Trump was very interested in accomplishing two parts of Netanyahu’s presentation, described as “killing the Ayatollah and Iran’s top leaders and dismantling the Iranian military.”
But the real problem with the story isn’t just what it says, it’s also what it doesn’t say that distorts the truth.
Absent is the fact that Trump has waged a decade-long campaign to defang Iran and make sure it never acquires nuclear weapons.
His decision to eliminate the mullahs’ terror mastermind, Qasem Soleimani, in his first term was a radical break from the appeasement policies of Barack Obama.
Love for Obama deal
Trump fully repudiated his predecessor by withdrawing from the weak-tea nuclear agreement with Iran that Obama crafted.
It involved a lifting of American sanctions and a shipment of pallets of cash to the mullahs, much of which was used to fund Hamas, Hezbollah and other terror proxies in the region.
Of course, tthe Times loved Obama’s deal, and denounced Trump for withdrawing from it.
So its coverage of Trump’s policies now must be seen through that lens.
Similarly, its hatred of Netanyahu goes back years, and the paper supported the unsuccessful meddling by Obama and Joe Biden in Israeli elections that aimed to defeat Netanyahu.
Its Iran coverage also conveniently overlooks how Trump’s 2024 opponent, then-Vice President Kamala Harris, whom the Gray Lady supported, even described herself as a hawk on Iran.
Asked in an interview which country she believed was the US’s “greatest adversary,” she answered, “I think there is an obvious one in mind, which is Iran. Iran has American blood on their hands.”
The Times also ignores Trump’s bid to negotiate with the mullahs this term, and how they boasted of their enriched uranium and said nothing could stop them.
Unfortunately, the papers’ fact-challenged coverage is not without consequences.
As the leading voice of the Democratic Party, its anti-Trump, anti-Israel campaigns carry great weight among many voters.
That impact is magnified because leftist news organizations, including many newspapers, magazines, the major broadcast networks and most cable outlets, fall in lockstep with its positions.
The impact of the widespread media tilt is enormous, with a recent Pew poll showing that 60% of U.S. adults hold an unfavorable opinion of Israel.
Only 37% hold a favorable view, a 20-point decline since 2022, Pew reports.
The survey found that 70% of people under 50 hold unfavorable opinions of Israel, including 80% of Dems and 41% of Republicans.
The splintering of GOP support is happening rapidly, and is at least partially because formerly conservative media figures are turning against the Jewish state.
Tucker Carlson is especially vicious, and Megyn Kelly increasingly is, too.
On a recent podcast, she called Israel “the fly in the ointment” while accusing it of jeopardizing the cease-fire negotiations that started Saturday.
She denounced Netanyahu as “bloodthirsty” for continuing to bomb Hezbollah in Lebanon despite Iran’s claims that the halt included Lebanon.
Low IQ pundits
A transcript shows she also accused the White House of “pretending” Israel is right that the terms did not cover Lebanon and said Trump shifted positions “following a phone call” with Netanyahu, whom she said “won’t stop” bombing Hezbollah.
Without mentioning Hamas, Hezbollah’s attacks or Iranian pledges to eliminate Israel, she claimed Netanyahu doesn’t want a cease-fire “just like the president’s most ardent, bloodthirsty supporters who got us into this war.”
On Israel, she added, “we need to reevaluate our relationship with this country.”
“We can’t keep getting dragged into these never ending conflicts thanks to them,” she said, adding that “Israel is a liability for us.”
Trump, to his credit, denounced Kelly and Carlson, as well as Candace Owens and Alex Jones, saying on Truth Social that “I know they think it is wonderful for Iran, the Number One State Sponsor of Terror, to have a Nuclear Weapon — Because they have one thing in common, Low IQs.”
Intelligence scores aside, Trump is right that the defectors don’t grasp the stakes of the Iranian regime’s bid to get– — and promise to use– — nukes against Israel and the U.S.
He might have added that their views make his former supporters a perfect fit for jobs at the Times and CNN– — or even Al Jazeera.
