editorials
The Trump Wars
F ormer President Donald Trump is facing a wave
of civil and criminal investigations. The American
people are not accustomed to such probing, public
inquiries of the business and political dealings of
their former presidents.

Yet in light of the almost daily drumbeat of alle-
gations and taunting between proponents and
opponents of Trump in connection with every
aspect of his personal, business and political life,
the fact of these investigations is no surprise. And
it is similarly not surprising to read daily dueling
narratives regarding the merits of one or another
aspect of the investigations.

Those pursuing the investigations face a daunt-
ing reality. In today’s toxic, hyper-partisan politi-
cal environment — where hyperbole reigns and
allegations of overreach and political motivation
substitute for rational engagement and discussion
— nothing they do will be accepted at face value.

As such, the pressure on investigators and law
enforcement is intense, and they need to exercise
enormous care in all aspects of their activities.

In each case, Trump is entitled to the same rights
guaranteed to every American: the right to due
process, the right to protection from illegal search
and seizure, the right to protection from self-in-
crimination and the presumption of innocence. But
also like every American, Trump is not entitled to
declare himself exempt from the legal process.

We are in for a noisy,
messy and raucous
process. Buckle up for a
bumpy ride. Ignore the
noise. Ignore the claims
of righteousness.

In New York, Trump is being investigated for
his business practices. In Georgia, the inquiry
focuses on efforts to overturn his loss in that
state in the 2020 presidential election. And, of
course, there are multi-pronged investigations
into the Jan. 6 riots in the Capitol. The House’s
Jan. 6 Select Committee’s investigation has been
intense and far-reaching. And the Department of
Justice is also carrying out a criminal probe of the
Jan. 6 riots, including issues relating to Trump’s
involvement. Finally, press reports indicate that
there are other governmental inquiries regarding
other aspects of Trump’s actions while in office
and immediately thereafter.

On Aug. 8, FBI agents executed a search
warrant at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence and
removed about a dozen boxes. Reports indicate
that the seized documents had been improperly
removed from the White House and not returned
after several government requests. Trump him-
self and his army of supporters offer an entirely
different narrative on those actions. And on Aug.

11, at a deposition conducted by New York’s
attorney general, Trump refused to answer ques-
tions about his business dealings, citing his Fifth
Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Each of these processes should continue. And
they will. But unfortunately, every step taken by
either side will continue to be scrutinized, criti-
cized and characterized by warring spinmeisters,
with an eye toward scoring political points or
achieving a political result rather than a legiti-
mate, legal one. And that is unfortunate, even if
inevitable. We are in for a noisy, messy and raucous
process. Buckle up for a bumpy ride. Ignore the
noise. Ignore the claims of righteousness. Ignore
the claims of targeting or victimization. Let the
legal process play itself out and insist that both
sides play by the rules. There is a lot riding on
the results of each of the investigations. But there
is even more riding on how both sides go about
doing their work. We demand that it be done
properly and with dignity. JE
A Missed Opportunity
I n hindsight, it seems obvious.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), a well-known and
often vilified opponent of Israel and member of
the “Squad,” barely fended off her primary chal-
lenger on Aug. 9, beating former Minneapolis City
Councilman Don Samuels by a mere 2,500 votes.

Two years ago, Omar comfortably defeated her
primary challenger by 35,000 votes.

Omar’s primary race two years ago generated
significant interest from the pro-Israel commu-
nity. In addition to meaningful contributions to
the Antone Melton-Meaux campaign by individ-
ual pro-Israel donors from around the country,
a pro-Israel PAC spent nearly $2.5 million to
oppose Omar.

This time around, with even more ammunition
concerning Omar’s record on Israel and other
issues, the pro-Israel community stayed out of the
race. Not a single pro-Israel PAC got involved, and
pro-Israel donor involvement was very modest.

By way of comparison, 72% of Melton-Meaux’s
donations in 2020 came from individuals outside
Minnesota; this year 11% of Samuels’ contributions
12 AUGUST 18, 2022 | JEWISHEXPONENT.COM
came from out-of-state.

This begs the question: Was this a missed oppor-
tunity by the pro-Israel community, or was there a
good reason to stay out? The answer seems to be
a little of both — this was a missed opportunity, but
the decision not to get involved was deliberate and
for what appeared to be good reason.

The pro-Israel PAC successes in this cycle are
impressive. Leading the charge is the AIPAC-
affiliated super PAC called the United Democracy
Project, which has spent more than $26 million
thus far. Super PACs don’t work directly with cam-
paigns and run independent ad and advocacy
efforts to promote their views. AIPAC’s affiliated
PAC, called the AIPAC PAC, which has raised
close to $12 million, contributes directly to cam-
paigns. AIPAC PAC has supported 212 candidates
in elections around the country thus far, and has a
whopping 98% success rate, with some 207 of its
favored candidates prevailing.

So, why didn’t the pro-Israel community step
in against the very high profile and overly confi-
dent Omar, who refused to debate her primary
opponent and chose not to run ads in support
of her campaign? Add to that Omar’s reputation
for poor constituent service and voter anger
over her efforts to defund the police — and the
race seemed tailor-made for the kind of support
pro-Israel super PACS had successfully provided
in other races.

Neither AIPAC nor any of the other pro-Israel
PACs are saying very much. Some have speculated
that the pro-Israel community stayed out because
they believed that nationalizing the race would
raise Omar’s profile and help her draw national sup-
port. Or perhaps the fear was that if Omar prevailed
again in the face of significant out-of-state support,
she would have additional evidence to support her
famous charge that “it’s all about the Benjamins.” Or
maybe the hope was that Omar’s vulnerability on
community issues alone would be enough for her
to lose. But, of course, that was wrong.

This was a missed opportunity. It is unfortunate.

While the misstep doesn’t diminish the many
pro-Israel successes in 2022, it creates a footnote
for what could have been. JE