Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
From LeverNews.com — Lever Time is the flagship podcast from the investigative news outlet The Lever. Hosted by award-winning journalist, Oscar-nominated writer, and Bernie Sanders' 2020 speechwriter David Sirota, Lever Time features exclusive reporting from The Lever’s newsroom, high-profile guest interviews, and expert analysis from the sharpest minds in media and politics.
David Sirota: [00:00:00] Hey, everyone, and welcome to another episode of Lever Time. I'm David Sirota. On today's show, why do polls show a majority of Americans support a ceasefire in the Israel Palestine conflict, and yet only 18 members of the U. S. House are officially supporting a resolution calling for such a ceasefire?
What explains that huge gap between what the public wants and what Congress wants? Part of the answer has to do with how America's political discourse has been deliberately polarized by conservative groups seeking to equate support for Israel's fundamental right to exist with support for the specific policies of Israel's current right wing government.
We discussed that discourse manipulation with Wisconsin Democratic Congressman Mark Pocan who's been calling for a [00:01:00] ceasefire and who recently tangled with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee over its role polarizing the discourse and demonizing Democrats who dare to question the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu's government.
For our paid subscribers, we're also always dropping bonus episodes into our Lever Premium podcast feed. Last week, we published our episode about the online music platform Bandcamp, which was recently sold to the licensing company SongTrader. If you're curious about how corporate influence affects the way you listen to music, make sure to check it out.
In fact, we took the paywall down for that episode, so our listeners can also find it in the regular Lever Time feed from earlier this week. But if you want regular access to our premium content, head over to levernews. com and click the subscribe button in the top right to become a supporting subscriber.
That'll give you access to the Lever Premium podcast feed, exclusive live events, even more in depth reporting, and you'll be directly supporting the investigative journalism that we do here. at the lever. [00:02:00] Okay, we're going to get to my interview with Congressman Mark Pocan. But first, a little background on what's been happening in Congress with regard to the ongoing crisis in Israel and Gaza.
As of the time of this recording, the Israeli government's overwhelming bombing campaign of the Gaza Strip has reportedly killed over 9, 000 Palestinians, including over 3, 500 children. 18 House members have signed on to a ceasefire resolution, which calls for a pause in the bombing, calls for allowing time for humanitarian aid to enter Gaza, and calls for continued negotiations between the Israeli government And Hamas, the terrorist group, that mass murdered 1400 Israeli civilians, and that's holding roughly 200 Israeli citizens hostage.
The few members of Congress who have been critical of the Israeli government's response to Hamas' disgusting terrorist attack, they have received massive pushback from the media. other elected officials, and most aggressively, by AIPAC, the [00:03:00] conservative lobbying group that portrays itself as the leading so called pro Israel lobbying group.
AIPAC depicts unquestioning support for Benjamin Netanyahu's policies as effectively the only pro Israel position. I happen to dispute that. I believe Netanyahu's inhumane and out of control policies are not only immoral, but actively endangering. Israel's security and its survival. But in Washington, the AIPAC view dominates.
And that's because it spends a lot of money on politics, as does the super PAC, Democratic Majority for Israel, or DMFI. Together, they spend big money on elections, demonizing candidates and lawmakers who dare to push for things like a two state solution, peace in the region, and anything that deviates from Netanyahuism.
So today, I was joined by Democratic Congressman Mark Pocan from Wisconsin, who found himself in a dispute with AIPAC because he criticized how [00:04:00] that group Raises money from Republican donors, which is then spent in Democratic primaries. We also discussed the house's ceasefire resolution, his thoughts on the Biden administration's response to the crisis in Israel and Palestine, and most importantly, how to frame a critical response of the Israeli government without alienating the people you're trying to convince.
Congressman Pocan. Thanks so much for taking time with us.
Rep. Mark Pocan: I'm glad to be here, David. Thank you.
David Sirota: Um, so let's first talk about the ceasefire resolution in the House of Representatives. I read this resolution. It seemed like the most minimal, Uh, statement that should be able to be made by literally everybody in Congress.
And yet it only has, as of right now, 18 House members who have signed onto it. So I guess my question is first, tell us what the resolution is, how you interpret it, and [00:05:00] then tell us why so few members of Congress seem willing to sign onto it.
Rep. Mark Pocan: Sure. I, many more members have made statements of either stop the bombing cessation of hostilities or actually use the word cease fire. Um, but, uh, last time I looked, the speaker we have is a religious ideologue from Louisiana. Uh, and there's a Republican majority and the resolution is bluntly Going nowhere.
And while the groups have said they wanted a tool to organize around, not everyone, you know, when something is needed as immediate as this, this is not seen as an answer. I think that's probably the main reason. Secondly, even though in the common vernacular, um, ceasefire, stop the bombing, cessation of hostilities are the same thing.
Officially, a ceasefire process at some point sets it up to stop bombing, but that could be two weeks, two months down the road. And what people really need is an immediate Stopping of the bombing is, you know, 3000 plus kids now and 8000 plus people are dead in [00:06:00] Gaza. So I just think it was a, idea that, uh, wasn't.
As probably good as it could have been for the urgency. We had, um, you know, the first week we did get a letter out, uh, that we worked with Unruh quite honestly on to talk about some things to the president. We got 55 people to sign on. The next thing we did needed to build from that, right? We had to continue to show.
And I think this as a vehicle, As it is a vehicle that is kind of meaningless because the pressure has to be on the White House. Congress, under Mike Johnson, is not going to be doing anything useful on this. I think that was probably the main reason why you see as few sponsors on it as you do.
David Sirota: What have you heard, if anything, from the White House about? President and, uh, the
Pentagon, the State Department using all of its influence, uh, its diplomatic influence and the like to pressure Israel [00:07:00] to dial back what it's doing, dial back and halt the bombardment of Gaza. I mean, are they saying if we do that, then it will somehow undermine Israel's security? Are they saying nothing like what's what?
If any feedback have you gotten
Rep. Mark Pocan: Yeah, and first of all, what you're saying now is the exact thing we should be doing. The pressure has to be on the White House, because the only way you're going to impact what's happening is through the White House pressuring Israel. Um, so whatever we do, and we are looking right now at doing something trying to get above that 55 number, but still gets us to the process, perhaps, of a ceasefire with an immediate.
Way to stop the bombing. So a number of us are actually working on a letter or a statement. We're trying to figure that out in the very immediate future to do just that. Um, but the pressure has to be on the White House and that is where it can be impacted. Now. I know that in the past when there were some bombings a number of years ago.
A number of us were on a call. Um, Ilhan, [00:08:00] myself, uh, Jamal, uh, I think Pramila and a few others. What they told us was, uh, when they were doing the illegal settlements, uh, and that was part of obviously the reason for the, the reaction. Um, that they were seeing that they had told them no unilateral unprovoked actions.
That was the official policy, right? So no more illegal settlements. Um, but they do that, they do it in a quiet, diplomatic way. I think the president doesn't wear his foreign policy on a sleeve in that way. So, one, I can't tell you exactly what they're saying. I wish I did. But part of it is we have tried to put pressure to say, look.
Like 20 trucks of humanitarian aid in a day compared to 500 that normally would come into Gaza is clearly ridiculous for 2. 3 million people, right? And we're trying to put the pressure on in that way, but we need to, as Congress, that is the single most important thing we can do. Um, nothing is going to come out of the U.
S. House of Representatives, uh, with a Republican speaker that's going to be useful. [00:09:00] But the pressure that's needed has to come from the White House and, you know, honestly, the groups we all missed a couple weeks ago, not we all, because some of us were working on it, um, the, the supplemental that was coming, that's the only funding for a year and we were trying to get far more humanitarian aid.
We could have used some support on that, but everyone It was kind of focused on the resolution, which had they talked to us, we would have had them walk and chew gum because at least walking would move forward. Chewing gum alone wasn't, you know, the answer and we didn't have a lot of support. And, you know, to Barbara Lee's credit, to be blunt, she and I were on the phone until about 9 45 Thursday night.
She got about an extra billion dollars, um, included from where they're going, but we would have liked billions more to really do the job that's going to be needed to not just rebuild Gaza, but for humanitarian aid period. So, again, I think whatever pressure we do, we do need to have the White House. Um, doing, whether they do it in their normal back channel way, uh, or other way, I'm not going [00:10:00] to necessarily tell them because I think it's harder to change the president on years and years of practice, but they need to know that Congress cares and we need to have a sign from Congress.
That we're above the 55 mark, not at an 18 mark, right? And I think we're working on a vehicle to do that right now.
David Sirota: now, there was this recent resolution in the house that passed overwhelmingly with only 10 nos, a resolution described as standing with Israel as it defends itself against the barbaric war launched by Hamas, uh, and and other terrorist groups. there was, I guess among the 10 who voted against it, there was, I guess what I inferred from that was they were opposed to a one sided statement.
Um, yeah. What do you make of that resolution? What were the Republicans trying to do? I don't think they're not usually acting in good faith. You did vote for this, but some of your progressive caucus colleagues voted against it. Just your thoughts on that resolution, why some [00:11:00] folks voted against it, why it passed overwhelmingly and the like.
Rep. Mark Pocan: Yeah, when it was introduced, it would have been the time to pass it, but the Republicans couldn't select a speaker and we couldn't do any process. So, you know, um, at the time it was valid and it still is that, you know, Hamas is a Terrorist organization that did a horrific attack and I think that's essentially the essence of it.
Um, we often get into this conversation about, well, the numbers have changed, you know, more people now have died here since that was written. And yes, that's one of the problems with putting specific numbers in a resolution, which Quite honestly is the same problem with the resolution that's out there right now asking for a ceasefire.
It has numbers that were weeks old That was probably the main objection I think if people would have liked to shown the totality of what happened But it was a statement by the United States condemning Hamas for the horrific attack, which it was And that's all it was really. And, uh, you know, I think sometimes, you know, trying to get the [00:12:00] language perfect when it's already written and it was written at a certain time that had it passed would have been probably more significant than when it ultimately did, had more to do with our chaotic, uh, functioning of the Republican majority.
David Sirota: So I want to go a little further on this question about Hamas and Israel. Um, since bombing has begun. Uh, and I have, I have supported a ceasefire. I think we need a ceasefire immediately. I just want to make clear for all the listeners who are listening to this. I am people who've listened to this. They know that.
But I think there has been a a kind of slide among some into saying Israel's bombardment is unacceptable. The occupation must end. There needs to be a ceasefire. There needs to at least be a humanitarian pause into Hamas is a legitimate Armed resistance to what Israel is doing. And you've seen that kind of theme bubble up a little bit.
Now [00:13:00] I I reject that. I find that odious. I find that disgusting. I find Hamas is not legitimate. I it is a terrorist organization in the classic sense of the word. But there are folks who who I think there's this perception that any criticism of Hamas somehow means that you're a Supporting everything that the Israeli government, uh, is doing subsequent to the Hamas attack.
what do you say to folks who would say that Hamas represents and what it has done is a legitimate form of armed resistance to Israel's wrongheaded and unacceptable occupation?
Rep. Mark Pocan: Yeah. So I think any attack where you. Um, go after innocents, uh, specifically children and babies, uh, where you, uh, go into a music festival and randomly kill noncombatants, um, is seen as a horrific attack. So I think, you know, the way I describe it is clearly there's a horrific attack by a terrorist [00:14:00] organization, Hamas, onto Israel, and Israel has a right to go after the terrorist organization.
Where the difference is and the difference is really based on fact. I think you and I would agree that clearly every person in Gaza, 2. 3 million people is not Hamas. I mean, Hamas, it was about 1000 people that day and the collective punishment of what we're seeing. That is really the only way you can describe it when you take out a quarter of the buildings in northern Gaza, and we've seen the pictures in the video of that, or when you've got 8000 dead, including 3100 children, and those are several day old.
So I know that number is higher now clearly is not a targeted attack. Uh, after Hamas, uh, you are doing a broader punishment and the fact that we've seen leaked some plans that say you take everyone out of Gaza and put them in the Sinai, like, you know, clearly, um, there is a lot more going on here and that is why, uh, the calls to stop [00:15:00] hostilities against civilians immediately.
Honestly, probably has 50 or 60 people have said that in some form here, and we would be wiser to collect all those statements. And again, from a position of strength, use that, um, because I think more people do believe that that was the initial kind of support we had that first week. And then we found a way to kind of fumble it a little bit.
And now we're trying to Get it back up again to show that that is a concern. But, you know, when you talk to many members, they get it. And I, I've talked to other members who will just outright say, you know, there are casualties in war. And I think it's an absolutely ridiculous, asinine argument back, um, because, you know, these are clearly innocent kids are not Hamas and there's absolutely zero justification for what's happening.
Um, but you know, they're now hitting refugee camps and they're using the same. Old, uh, line that, oh, you know, Hamas uses human shields. Well, no, if you supposedly have one of the most sophisticated intelligence, uh, entities on the planet, like [00:16:00] Israel supposedly has, uh, you can be more specific and actually attacking Hamas without doing what they're doing, the amount of damage, uh, both in human lives and physical structures.
So, um, yeah, I just talked about it very simply. It was a horrific attack by Hamas. Um, Israel has a right to respond to Hamas. They have, uh, over gone, uh, they've, they've done more than that. It's become collective punishment. Uh, we need to stop the bombing of civilians, period. Uh, that includes from Hamas and Islamic Jihad as well as, uh, from the Israelis.
And we want to see a plan because I don't think they've shown the United States a plan. And you know, I also describe it, and this is not some people's favorite description, but. You know, if, if Israel is an ally, which they are the United States, you know, if you go to a bar and a friend gets drunk, you may not tell the person at the end of the bar, they shouldn't drive.
Because you don't know the person and why would they listen to you, but you tell your friend that and right now What Israel is doing in my opinion is clearly wrong and we have a moral [00:17:00] obligation Especially as we're supplying them with weapons To you know, make sure that they stop this and that should be the minimum More humanitarian supply, uh, has to, uh, clearly, uh, get into the country.
There has to be corridors for people to be able to leave. You can't tell people they gotta go to the South and then bomb the South. You can't bomb refugee camps. Like, we've gotta really put the moral argument that I think is behind the United States behind, uh, what's happening right now. And, and at least people aren't seeing that.
And if it is happening behind the scenes, I do think it would be helpful to, to say that more publicly by the White House.
David Sirota: I mean, I think what Israel is doing, there's a trifecta of bad here. I mean, it is first and foremost, it is, it is gone beyond self defense into the immoral. It is collective punishment. It is unacceptable and immoral. Yeah, I think it frankly endangers Israel, and I believe that Israel does have a right to exist.
I want to state that clearly. I know there's some on the [00:18:00] left who don't think Israel even has a fundamental right to exist in the 1948 or 1967 borders. I believe Israel has a fundamental right to exist. And I think this policy, on top of being immoral, endangers Israel's survival. And I also think it endangers Jews across the world because I think that, uh, Anti Zionism is not anti Semitism, but anti Zionism often, uh, prompts anti Semitism, uh, and I think that what this has done, uh, is endangering Jews across the world.
And I, I am Jewish, so I am personally concerned about that for my community as well. I want to turn to the other side of, of the discourse.
Rep. Mark Pocan: Can I say one quick thing
David Sirota: Sure. Go
Rep. Mark Pocan: if I could? And thank you for raising that point, because that is something we are talking about as well. Um, that by doing what they're doing, you are more likely to have Hezbollah and others get involved. And long term, this is a failed strategy. If you're a kid who's only [00:19:00] grown up in an open air prison, because Israel controls who goes in and out of Gaza, and is constantly bombed, and then this happens, and they've lost family members in their home, Do you think they're going to become peace activists, uh, or do you think they're likely to turn to a group like Hamas?
So I actually think their strategy, that's why we need a strategy from them. I don't think I see a strategy from Israel unless it is just, you know, turning Gaza into a parking lot and trying to do a start over, which would be unacceptable on many levels. So I'm glad you said that because we are talking about that as well as a significant factor.
David Sirota: Yes. And to be clear, I think that the conditions that Israel has created helped create with the occupation and is helping create now with this bombardment, makes the blowback inevitable. It doesn't mean Hamas's blowback is justified. And that's a key distinction. Inevitability is different than justified.
Uh, and so I agree with you. I think it's endangering Israel. I think it's endangering Jews across the world. So [00:20:00] let's turn to the other side of the debate because this is really important here. AIPAC, the American Public Affairs Council, um, uh, DMFI, the, uh, the pro Israel group that has spent in Democratic primaries, uh, a lot of Republican money spending in Democratic primaries.
And the message from that side of, and I'm putting it, quote, Pro israel in quotes because I don't believe APAC's position and DMFI's position is the solely quote pro israel position But that's their brand and they make the argument that the only thing that anybody who supports the existence of the state of Israel should be doing is supporting whatever the Netanyahu government does, uh, and they've spent a lot of money on elections to, I think, scare Democratic members of Congress into not piping up, uh, not saying something different, not advocating for a two state solution, not advocating for a ceasefire.[00:21:00]
How powerful is APAC and DMFI in, um, Keeping your Democratic colleagues quiet for fear that they're the next ones to be targeted in a Democratic primary by that money.
Rep. Mark Pocan: Yeah, so DMFI is trying to desperately become the little sister of AIPAC, uh, but they're not doing so well. I don't think they're as significant. AIPAC clearly is the, you know, for overused, uh, saying 800 pound gorilla sort of in that realm. Um, and clearly, uh, what we saw in the last election, uh, was they had a huge impact, right?
They put in. Millions and millions of dollars from largely Republican donors and then spent it in Democratic primaries. Um, and I think, you know, what many of us have seen and we're trying to call out right now is, you know, I feel like they are a wholly owned subsidiary really of the Republican party and of the conservative movement that happens to use Israel as one of the [00:22:00] issues that they care about.
Um, but they are very much, um, there to support Republicans. We look no further than over a hundred insurrectionists were supported for reelection by AIPAC. So, you know, they're, they're so against terrorism, except maybe when it happens in our country, um, because they supported a hundred. Of those folks.
And, you know, as someone who's an out gay man, I think they should just come out as a conservative Republican organization because you can live freer, uh, by being true to yourself rather than playing this game, um, that they are and they need to be called out because I think some of the stuff they're doing, um, is not just really, you know, on behalf of the conservative movement and, and Netanyahu in particular, when it comes to Uh, Israeli issues, uh, but I find much of it, um, you know, borderline sexist, racist, uh, you know, they're really going after certain specific members.[00:23:00]
I think the only reason I've been, um, included in their attacks lately is because I'm a white man and they wanted to not just be seen as going after people of color. And I think somehow I got in there and also I've been very vocal on them and they've brought me into the fight, honestly, because. I hadn't been saying a whole lot lately.
I've always, you know, kind of went after AIPAC and called them out for what they are, but now I'm more than glad to continue to do that. If they want to have the fight, I'm, I'm here. Um, but, you know, we need to call them out for what they're doing and really, um, it is nothing more than standing up for the Republican Party, the conservative candidates, the proof insurrectionists.
And then they take Republican money and spend it in Democratic primaries to try to find someone who will be closest to their values, knowing that their values really are of being a conservative organization overall, not just specifically a front for Netanyahu's positions.
David Sirota: I mean, look, the pro Israel quote [00:24:00] unquote, this pro Israel side of the, of the discourse targeted for, for, for electoral elimination, Andy Levin, a Jewish Democrat in Michigan, an incumbent, uh, you know, in a redistricting fight, they targeted him because he had pushed for a two state solution and didn't express the line that the only way to be, uh, to support the existence, the fundamental existence of the state of Israel is to support, uh, the particular Israeli government that's in power right now.
And, and, and so I, I think that's a good place to end this, this, this conversation, which is to ask you this. get concerned sometimes that people will hear a criticism of AIPAC or DMFI, a righteous criticism, a criticism that I believe in, uh, that they will hear that as, uh, the, and they will hear terms like the Jewish lobby as, and interpret it as all [00:25:00] Jews are to blame for this, that, that to go back to the old tropes, Jews are just a powerful cabal, uh, and that the Jewish community is one monolith.
I guess the question that I, that's on my mind a lot is. How do we make these arguments in ways, uh, these righteous arguments in ways that don't risk or at least mitigate against evoking that kind of much uglier antisemitism, uh, that can be flown under the banner of social justice? I, I think there's a tension there and I just want to know how you as a congressman navigate that.
Rep. Mark Pocan: Yeah. And David, you bring up a good point because I read, uh, too many, probably too many social, uh, media comments and a lot of people wind up going into that and it's kind of a trap, right? It's, it's, it's not the issue. It's not, um, the issue is you have a group like APAC that is a Trojan horse, For the, the conservative movement and really the Republican Party by extension, um, doing what they're [00:26:00] doing.
And, um, that is not something that's because it's a pro Israel position. It's a pro Netanyahu position, um, but it's not a pro Israel position. I mean, you know, we, I, I completely agree with you. We should be able to support the right for both Israel and Palestine to have a state, a two state solution that I still think is the best path forward.
And you could support... In fact, when I've been in the region, and I've been there three times, um, on the ground, I see more real people, both Israelis, uh, and, um, Palestinians who, who believe that. It's often those governmental leaders, and Netanyahu in particular, don't forget, if he's not in power, he may be in jail, right?
He's got extra incentives to try to stay, uh, in his job. Um, but these other groups are not about. The support of, of the Jewish population. They're about playing in into conservative politics, Trojan horsing, using that as an issue. And they need to be called out for that.
David Sirota: I [00:27:00] appreciate you calling, calling it out. I appreciate other members calling it out. And by the way, I want to be clear. I appreciate you calling it out in a way that is precise and that, that makes clear that, that those set of groups. That are doing this are not representative of the Jewish religion and not representative of the Jewish community writ large.
There is something much deeper, much more nefarious going on here. And I really, really just want to appreciate say that I have gratitude for you explicitly calling it out. It needs to be called out. Even more, it's doing a disservice to the, frankly, to the existence of the state of Israel, to the Jewish community, uh, and to the most importantly in the here and now to stopping the killing of thousands of civilians in Palestine, Congressman Mark Pocan, thank you so much for your time today.
Rep. Mark Pocan: Sure. David, thank you as always appreciate it.
That's it for today's show. As a reminder, our paid subscribers who get LeverTime Premium, you get to hear next week's [00:28:00] bonus episode, our episode about the recent sale of the online music platform Bandcamp.
David Sirota: To listen to Lever Time Premium, just head over to levernews. com to become a supporting subscriber. When you do, you get access to all of Lever's premium content, including our weekly newsletters and our live events. And that's all for just 8 a month or 70 for the year. One last favor. Please be sure to like, subscribe, and write a review for Lever Time on your favorite podcast app.
The app you are listening to right now, take 10 seconds and give us a positive review in that app. And make sure to check out all of the incredible reporting our team has been doing over at levernews. com. Until next time, I'm David Sirota. Rock the boat.
The Lever Time Podcast is a production of the Lever and the Lever Podcast Network. It's hosted by me, David Sirota. Our producer is Frank Capello with help from Lever producer, Jared Jacang Mayor.