"top five clinton donors are jewish" - how anti-semitic is this fact? published: october 29, 2016 source: moon of alabama 




top five clinton donors are jewish, campaign tally shows. 




something is wrong with the above statement. isn't it anti-semitic? did trump say that? readers of that statement may assume, somewhat reasonably, that there is a club of rich jewish people controlling the clinton campaign and, maybe, clinton herself. that sounds like it was taken from the fake protocols of the elders of zion. it clearly must be anti-semitic. 




it is also true . 




facts have no bias. they can't be anti-semitic (or can they?). but while facts as such can not have a racial-religious bias, openly stating them surely can. thus the above statement is anti-semitic. the fact itself isn't bad, reporting it publicly is bad, bad, bad. 




who but an alt-right rag would report such at all? and for what purpose if not for spreading anti-semitism? 




well - quot licet jovi, ... 




jewish papers are of course allowed to report such a fact. that isn't anti-semitic. it is solely to brag about jewish powers. within the club that is not only allowed, but welcome. thus haaretz writes (sourced to the the jewish telegraph agency) under the identity defining headline at the top of this post: haim saban, george soros and others stand at the head of a list of wealthy donors who contributed mainly via super pacs. 




the washington post analysis, posted october 24, named the top donors, who are contributing $1 of every $17 of the over $1 billion amassed for the democratic nominee<u+2019>s presidential run. 




they are donald sussman, a hedge fund manager; j.b. pritzker, a venture capitalist, and his wife, m.k.; haim saban, the israeli-american entertainment mogul, and his wife, cheryl; george soros, another hedge funder and a major backer of liberal causes, and daniel abraham, a backer of liberal pro-israel causes and the founder of slimfast. 




many of the big clinton campaign donors also give to the clinton foundation which at times is a washing machine to put money into the clinton's private accounts. it is kind of difficult to understand where clinton inc begins and where it ends. campaign funds, clinton foundation, speech fees, private accounts - does it even matter? surely those who pay, to whatever clinton entity, expect a service in return. given the clinton's occupations as senator, secretary of state and president the ask in return is unlikely to be commercial. it will be political. 




and here is why it matters that the five top donors to clinton's campaign are jewish, and all big supporters of israel. (haim saban: "i'm a one-issue guy, and my issue is israel.") they surely will ask for political favors in the interest of the zionist entity. this is also the reason why haaretz, an israeli paper, finds the strong racial-religious bias at the top clinton campaign tally newsworthy. big money paid to a clinton entity can directly effect u.s. policies towards israel. it buys its acquiescence to israeli escapades even when those are not consistent u.s. interests. 




clinton's positions towards syria, iran and russia (which limits israel's freedom of action) are surely not independent of israeli interests. 




but that is of course, anti-semitic speculation ...
"top five clinton donors are jewish" - how anti-semitic is this fact?
noauthor