Kudos to Politico Playbook writer Jake Sherman for actually mentioning Benjamin Netanyahu’s points about MIFTAH, the group sponsoring Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar’s now-defunct Israel visit, being a decidedly problematic outfit. Too bad Sherman couldn’t resist the urge to try to paint Netanyahu as some kind of hypocrite:
Happy Friday … in Playbook this afternoon.
When @netanyahu denied @RashidaTlaib and @IlhanMN entrance to Israel, he said, in part, it was because they were going with MIFTAH.
Israel allowed a MIFTAH trip in 2016 when it was a group of 5 Dem male members pic.twitter.com/NXzFscj0vv
— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) August 16, 2019
What’s your point, Jake?
What's MIFTAH Jake?
— George Smith (@P1B_WMichigan) August 16, 2019
The blood libel was regularly published by Der Sturmer in Europe while the Jews were been systematically exterminated.
How about doing a bit of research instead of covering for such disgusting groups?
— Milton (@LFTUnderworld) August 16, 2019
Jake left out quite a few details about MIFTAH’s history. And about Israel’s history, as well:
How do you write this up without identifying 1) why they object to The group: because the group promotes blood libels, Neo-Nazi articles, and terrorists
Or
2) That the Israeli law which requires a denial of entry to BDS advocates wasn’t in place until 2017? https://t.co/W6LYS55qlr
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) August 16, 2019
Seems like that’s pretty significant, no?
So your point is that @netanyahu didn't apply a law that didn't exist in 2016?
— Mark Haywood (@sharkhaywood) August 16, 2019
Maybe google the whole law they passed in 2017, just saying.
— Brian K. (@kleppy321) August 16, 2019
Dude come on. Its even on Wikipedia. Do some research next time OK? Maybe spend a little less time on Agenda pushing and more time on research? Isn't that your job? https://t.co/7Yt6Smvtln
— EverythingYou_Like_isOverrated (@EIsoverrated) August 16, 2019
Knowing now that the law didn't actually take effect till 2017, this is where a responsible newsman would say, "Ooops, my bad."
— Tim Joiner (@joinertek) August 16, 2019
Evidently Jake Sherman is not a responsible newsman, then:
The law to bar boycott advocates wasn’t on the books in 2016, which you could have found out with a quick google search
— Lahav Harkov (@LahavHarkov) August 16, 2019
Yes, but Netanyahu took issue with Miftah in addition to its support of BDS
— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) August 16, 2019
.@politico @apalmerdc @JakeSherman regarding your piece in PlaybookPM, I think it's a really important and consequential point to note that while MIFTAH hosted a delegation in 2016, the law barring people who traffic in BDS wasn't enacted until 2017(after the previous visit)
— Matt Brooks (@mbrooksrjc) August 16, 2019
Yes, that’s very true, and we will note that. But Netanyahu’s issue with Miftah — as he stated it — was not only BDS. He said Niftah had "members are those who have expressed support for terrorism against Israel.”
So, support for BDS is a gripe, but one of several.
— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) August 16, 2019
Jake, you’re confusing a few different points. Israel cites Miftah and other reason for why they did not grant a special waiver for entry to Omar and Tlaib. But that waiver was only needed because of a law passed in 2017. Was not necessary before that.
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) August 16, 2019
Im not confusing anything. The Israelis have said that BDS was not the only reason they had issues with this trip. They said they had issues with the itinerary and the organizer of the group.
— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) August 16, 2019
Again, the law currently requires them to bar entry to BDS activists like Omar and Tlaib. The reasons cited were for why they would not grant a specific waiver to them (which is allowed under the law).
The law is specifically related to BDS.
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) August 16, 2019
That doesn’t mean they didn’t have issues with a Miftah-sponsored trip in 2016. It means the law didn’t require them to make a judgement as to whether to grant a specific waiver for such a trip back then.
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) August 16, 2019
Come on, Jake. Just admit you left out information that would’ve undermined your narrative.
Oh look. Jake lying/misleading his followers because he knows they won’t do their own research. Great work Jake ! You are awesome.
— TheAmishTerp (@TheAmishTerp) August 16, 2019
Lies of omission. Propagandist fake media trick 101.
— Paul Chapman (@PaulCha06788609) August 16, 2019
Maybe the media would get a little more respect if they did a little more to earn it.
I get some reporters who get mad at me for publicly embarrassing them. The thing is that I rarely do it to those who thoughtfully engage and make some effort to get things right. But if you're too lazy/arrogant to do that, you can't really blame me/others for calling you out.
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) August 16, 2019
Yep.