Thanks To Citizens United AIPAC And The Crypto-criminals Control Congress
Bernie gave an inspiring speech at the convention last night. You can watch the whole thing at the bottom of the page. His point was a familiar one: “We need an economy that works for all of us, not just the billionaire class.” And he connected the dots with a call to action: “When 60% of our people live paycheck to paycheck, the top one percent have never, ever had it so good. And these oligarchs tell us we shouldn’t tax the rich; the oligarchs tell us we shouldn’t take on price gouging, we shouldn’t expand Medicare to cover dental, hearing and vision, and we shouldn’t increase Social Security benefits for struggling seniors… At the very top of that political to-do list is the need to get big money out of our political process. Billionaires in both parties should not be able to buy elections, including primary elections. For the sake of our democracy we must overturn the disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision and move towards public funding of elections.”
Former Illinois Congresswoman Marie Newman, a stalwart progressive who was targeted and defeated by AIPAC in a flood of DMFI sewer money 2022, made much the same point on her substack this morning: “If over two-thirds of the nation wants it and it seems like we have all the infrastructure to provide Healthcare-For-Everyone, then why can’t we? Every other nation of the top 30 has universal childcare, why can’t we? What is the real reason Congress has not addressed the housing crisis? Why are we losing so many progressive voices in Congress? The short answer is: Corporate PACs and foreign lobbies. Period.”
She wrote that “Many people have said it before me, but I agree members of Congress who take corporate PAC money and/or foreign lobby money should wear t-shirts so that we would know who pays for their elections. It would help us understand the blockade against commonsense legislation that would modernize the US, make us healthier and happier, such as healthcare for all, affordable drugs and housing. The longer answer is most of the members of Congress— roughly 85%, according to End Citizens United— take corporate PAC money and because of that, those members frequently either ignore issues, work against issues or dilute approaches that would address them to appease their corporate donors.”
Foreign Lobbies such as AIPAC are wildly influential across all of Congress. In fact, their strong-arming has created an ugly and divisive fissure in the Democratic party that will need to be reckoned with in order to get coalition work done moving forward. Politico (6/24) reported AIPAC is the biggest source of donations dominating Democratic primaries challenges against both incumbents and open seat situations. All directed at preventing progressives from being elected or reelected. The model has been the same in each of the primaries they play in: Step 1. look for progressives to take out and fund a conservative Dem to replace them. Step 2. Viscously attack the progressive incumbent or challenger via character assignation 3. Win the seat for the conservative candidate and own that member of Congress’ every vote and move, forever. AIPAC, themselves reported raising $100 million to use in primaries to support devotees of Israel (remember Israel is a foreign country, so let that sink in) and aggressively go after any candidate that has even a moderate approach on the Middle East, meaning those that call for a ceasefire (which would bring the hostages home), end the occupation and work on permanent peace. Progressives are clear these policies will keep both Israelis and Palestinians safe, but AIPAC has a long history of not supporting a tangibly defined two-state solution while they continue to support illegal land annexation and also opposing measures that would allow both sides be free, prosperous and self-governing.
AIPAC, because of their immense power in Congress, in just this 2024 cycle alone took out two very popular and well-aligned-with-their district, congresspeople: Rep Jamal Bowman and Rep Cori Bush. In both primaries this year, AIPAC broke historical records on primary spending. In Bowman’s primary, AIPAC spent a never seen before $16 million against Bowman and several million in favor of their highly conservative candidate, George Latimer.
In both instances, there was no reason to “take down” these two incumbents. They were hard working, popular in their districts, highly effective and strongly respected. Bowman and Bush’s sins were being progressive on all issues, wanting peace in the Middle East with an end to the war and for not being conservative. This is the criteria AIPAC uses when choosing the primaries in which to engage. Often, their takedown targets are women or people of color.
But AIPAC’s takedown successes go far and wide. In 2022, they took down Andy Levin (a long-time member well aligned with his district and a synagogue president), Donna Edwards (former congressional member who ran again and beloved) as well as the author of this article. In 2024, they took down primary candidate Susheela Jayapal, Rep Bowman and Rep Bush. They attempted in both 2022 and 2024 to take down Rashida Tlaib, AOC, Summer Lee and Ilhan Omar, unsuccessfully, but again spent millions of dollars. There were several other primary candidates who were annihilated by AIPAC money in primaries up and down the ballot as well just because they were progressive.
As an aside, but important note, AIPAC almost never speaks about Israel in any way in their ads either for or against a candidate. Their campaign communications are without fail, simply character assassinations of their takedown target. This is done so they can concentrate on weakening their target, and is usually highly undeserved, but never actually talk about their mission and their reason for being is never mentioned. Antithetical to working for a mission, yes. Maniacal– absolutely.
AIPAC’s influence stems from the Democratic Leadership in Congress’ unwavering support for them because of their financial resources and notoriety around retribution if you cross them. AIPAC leaders and supporters proudly talk about taking congresspeople down all over social media. It is some next level schoolyard Bully crap. While there is evidence to suggest this is starting to chip away, in that Dem leadership has called for the ending of sending bombs to Israel, we are not anywhere near were we need to be in ending their undue influence and bullying of members. The threat of being primaried and AIPAC funding opponents is a fear most members of Congress live with daily. They will never choose to cross AIPAC for fear of the iron glove organization primarying them and taking them out.
So, what is the answer? There are many things we can do:
Support legislation that ends corporate PACs and their affiliates (Congressman Ro Khanna has a great bill that would achieve this key step)
Support a law requiring all PAC and lobbying groups to spend most, if not all, campaign messaging dollars on their stated mission and for their candidate, not character assassinations against their opponents in their campaign communications
Additional legislation to support would be ending:
lobbyist’ ability to donate to campaigns
foreign PACs to be able to engage in campaigns
super PACs entirely, who literally have no rules around communications, truth in messaging, spending transparency or specific origins of amounts spent by whom
Of course, keep fighting for healthcare for all, universal childcare, affordable housing and fairness of campaigns.
The number one best action: IN THE 2026 CYCLE, DO NOT SUPPORT CANDIDATES WHO TAKE CORPORATE PAC OR FOREIGN LOBBY MONEY. PERIOD.
Nor is AIPAC and its toxic pro-genocide network the only one universally feared and obeyed by Congress. The crypto-criminal network is becoming just as powerful… and really quickly. When AIPAC and the crypto-criminals work together, as they often do, their unprecedented hoards of money control elections. This morning, Brendan Pedersen, reporting for PunchBowl, wrote that “The crypto industry’s campaign spending in 2024 really is unlike anything we’ve seen in modern politics, according to a report that will be published later today by the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. The report… compares the crypto sector’s spending to previous cycles and other corporate interests. In 2024, no industry comes close to crypto in terms of corporate election spending. Using campaign finance data compiled by Open Secrets, the Public Citizen report estimates that crypto corporations have spent at least $119 million in the 2024 election through Q2. That’s nearly half of all corporate money spent in this cycle, or 48%, and it doesn’t include millions of dollars donated by individual crypto executives. This year’s deluge is historic. Crypto companies are now the second largest campaign spending group since 2010, when the Supreme Court removed major restrictions on campaign finance on First Amendment grounds. The non-renewable energy sector still holds on to the No.1 spot by a decent margin.”
“Direct corporate election spending at this scale is unprecedented,” the report says.
How unprecedented? After this cycle, crypto companies will account for nearly one out of every six campaign dollars spent by corporations since 2010.
“Crypto corporations’ total spending in the past three election cycles— $129 million— already amounts to 15% of all known corporate contributions” since 2010, the report said. The vast majority of that total, or 92%, is from 2024 alone.
Much of that spending has flown through the Fairshake crypto super PAC network. According to Public Citizen’s analysis, Fairshake has received more corporate funding than any other super PAC since 2010 except for one— the Senate Leadership Fund.
Public Citizen also noted Fairshake’s tendency to spend big in targeted races without ever actually mentioning digital assets. That includes the PAC’s attacks on Reps. Katie Porter (D-CA) and Jamaal Bowman (D-NY).
“Rather than criticizing candidates for not sufficiently supporting crypto, both attack campaigns smeared the candidates’ using unflattering claims having nothing to do with crypto policy,” the report said.
The impact: Public Citizens’ report also attempts to map the influence this spending has had over the course of the election. One big development the report nods to is Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s embrace of the crypto sector last week.
But the consumer watchdog is also concerned about the broader legacy of this spending blitz.
“If crypto corporations are successful in directly leveraging their financial power into political power, more corporations and business sectors may follow the same playbook,” the report said.
Schumer has also been a major conspirator for decades in helping AIPAC build power in Congress. So, yeah… we all want to keep Mitch McConnell from controlling the Senate, but we should do it with our eyes wide open and understand what kind of a reptile we’re keeping in place to keep McConnell— another reptile— out. And you wonder why millions of Americans are turned off to politics and have given up on voting?
Oh, by the way, as long as we're on the topic, last night, Politico reported that ex-Republican and conservative billionaire Michael Bloomberg gave Hakeem Jeffries’ House Majority PAC $10 million, which he’ll be able to waste on right-of-center candidates like Jared Golden, Mary Peltola, Don Davis, Rebecca Cooke, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, Rudy Salas, Adam Gray, Janelle Stelson, John Mannion, Peter Barca, John Avlon... who are eager to undermine Kamala’s progressive economic agenda. Hurray?
Comments