Controversially, not all of that money comes from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. 

“It’s as broad as possible, and that’s by design,” TrackAIPAC co-founder Casey Kennedy told The Intercept. Instead of just AIPAC, the group tracks spending from across the pro-Israel lobby. “We want to provide the most encapsulating picture that we can of who’s giving to the lobby and where they’re giving to,” Kennedy said.

TrackAIPAC started in 2024 as a scrappy bulwark to the powerful, conservative pro-Israel lobbying group for which it is named. Amid TrackAIPAC’s rise, U.S. voters’ support for Israel plummeted to historic lows as horrified Americans watched their government support genocide in Gaza, and AIPAC, once an indispensable ally for most federal politicians, transformed into an electoral liability. 

Depending on whom you ask, TrackAIPAC is a hero for pushing pro-Israel spending into the forefront of voters’ minds, a scourge peddling antisemitic tropes, or a well-intentioned activist group with an imperfect, ever-evolving model. An advocacy group called Citizens Against AIPAC Corruption launched in May 2024 and soon merged with TrackAIPAC, giving the lobby watchers the power to endorse and fund candidates. TrackAIPAC’s graphics are easily digestible and often go viral, lending the group political weight in an era when online audiences want to consume information in as little time and with as little brainpower as possible — and turning its signature red card into a political scarlet letter.

TrackAIPAC’s growing influence has set off a debate over its messaging and methodology, part of a broader conversation about outside spending in politics refracted through the lens of Israel. This was especially felt in Illinois’ recent primary elections, where AIPAC funneled its financial contributions through front PACs, or its major donors gave as individuals. AIPAC’s more elusive strategy proves the necessity of lumping several kinds of pro-Israel money together, TrackAIPAC allies say, giving the group the responsibility of acting as an analyst rather than a conduit of information.

Related

AIPAC Is Retreating From Endorsements and Election Spending. It Won’t Give Up Its Influence.

“The work tracker accounts do is important because AIPAC and other dark money lobbies are intentionally very difficult to track,” said Morriah Kaplan, executive director of the progressive Jewish-led Palestinian solidarity organization IfNotNow. Calling AIPAC’s tactics “extremely antidemocratic,” she noted that major donors can have a range of political aims, favoring tech giants, weapons manufacturers, and fossil fuels in tandem with supporting Israel.  

“Without understanding how TrackAIPAC defines ‘pro-Israel,’” Kaplan said, “it’s not as valuable a tool for transparency as it could be.”

In the 9th District of Illinois, TrackAIPAC’s broad approach drew controversy when it deployed a red graphic not just for state Sen. Laura Fine, the congressional candidate AIPAC’s funders and front groups supported, but also for Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss, who campaigned and won as a progressive, said he would support the Block the Bombs Act, and was a main target of AIPAC-funded attack ads.

When TrackAIPAC posted a red graphic for Biss, the group pointed to his refusal to call Israel’s actions a genocide, his opposition to the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement, his support for U.S. funding for Israel’s Iron Dome, and $460,357 “spent by the pro-Israel lobby groups and their donors.” 

That money mostly came from J Street, which bills itself as a liberal alternative for Zionist American Jews who want to counter AIPAC’s hardline influence. In recent years, the group has supported halting some weapons transfers to Israel and opposed Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. But J Street was slow to label Israel’s assault on Gaza a genocide — its president Jeremy Ben-Ami came around to the term in August— and it opposed initial calls for a ceasefire. 

Tali deGroot, J Street’s vice president of political and digital strategy, was frustrated by her group’s conflation with AIPAC, calling TrackAIPAC “intellectually dishonest” for the distance between its name and its methodology. TrackAIPAC does label the specific sources of pro-Israel funding that make up its sums on its website, along with a list of organizations it tracks in addition to AIPAC, but they seldom appear on the red cards that circulate on social media. Some critics have labeled this blurring of lines sloppy or confusing, while others on the left and right have accused the group of antisemitism over its generalized “pro-Israel” language.

“I think the candidates and members should be held to account for taking AIPAC support,” deGroot said, “but the way that [TrackAIPAC] is going about it is doing so much harm.”

A TrackAIPAC spokesperson said the group’s members “wholeheartedly agree” that J Street and AIPAC have significant differences, but said they would still classify J Street as part of the pro-Israel lobby.

“J Street might have some disagreements with AIPAC,” Kennedy said, “but they are both working in favor of a foreign government within our government.”

The group does appear responsive to some of the criticism. TrackAIPAC is planning to modify its anti-endorsement cards in response to recent controversies. They’ll still be red, but the graphics will now spell out how much a candidate has received from specific pro-Israel groups, or individual major pro-Israel lobby donors, as well as additional information about their policy positions on Palestine and Israel.

“Every graphic released regarding Daniel Biss stated clearly that the total of the donations reported were from the pro-Israel Lobby,” the TrackAIPAC spokesperson said. “It would be intellectually dishonest to call J Street anything but a member of that advocacy wing in the United States. That said — we will be breaking their donations out and labeling them separately for transparency purposes moving forward.”

Changing the Cards

As the founders tell it, the “AIPAC” in TrackAIPAC’s name was always meant as a synecdoche, with the lobbying giant serving as an eye-catching stand-in for the entire Israel lobby. The broad approach is intentional, said TrackAIPAC founders Kennedy and Cory Archibald, and their project is a work in progress.  

The group has made several changes to its methodology since its launch. Some of them are spelled out online, but others, such as how the group tracks individual donors, are not. At the beginning, TrackAIPAC relied on Federal Election Commission data compiled by the transparency organization OpenSecrets, which also groups the pro-Israel lobby as a whole. Last year, TrackAIPAC began to analyze the FEC data for itself and started adding individual expenditures, or money spent on campaign ads, which triggered jumps in some members’ totals. That was the case for Reps. Wesley Bell, D-Mo., and George Latimer, D-N.Y., who toppled progressive incumbents last cycle with massive amounts of AIPAC support. This year, the group began including bundlers and major donors ($200 or more) who have given to pro-Israel lobby groups and are donating directly to candidates, especially as AIPAC shields some of its spending. 

“They’re going underground, so we’re going to have to go underground too,” said Archibald, who worked as a consultant on the campaigns of former Reps. Cori Bush, D-Mo., and Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., who were respectively unseated by Bell and Latimer in 2024. 

The approach still seems to rile candidates who find themselves on TrackAIPAC’s bad side, like Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, who accused the group on Instagram of being “MAGA plants who are meant to disrupt and confuse” for giving her a red card listing more than $100,000 from “Israel Lobby” donors. TrackAIPAC told The Intercept that it stands by Crockett’s rating, and that it used FEC data to identify major donors who have given to pro-Israel lobby groups and gave directly to Crockett. (It also gave a red card to Texas state Rep. James Talarico, who beat Crockett in the state’s Democratic Senate primary.)

Related

Will James Talarico Really Fight for Justice in Texas?

The founders also said they have received a number of requests from members who want their red graphics taken down. TrackAIPAC is working on a new questionnaire that would give members a chance to get their cards changed if they make specific policy commitments, like committing to an arms embargo and opposing laws that would restrict BDS or promote a controversial definition of antisemitism that conflates the term with criticism of Israel. 

Some politicians have already had their cards changed. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who has received J Street funding, used to have a red card, but his photo now appears on TrackAIPAC’s website in its original coloring, earning neither the damning red backdrop nor the smooth green ring that indicates endorsement. Khanna, who last year exchanged kind words with TrackAIPAC on social media, is among the members of Congress who receive the label: “We encourage this representative to continue improving their legislative record on Israel-Palestine issues.”

Kennedy said those lawmakers exist in the “squishy middle,” calling it “the most ambiguous part of what we do.” He said they removed their red graphics to avoid the members “getting harangued as an AIPAC supporter,” while nudging them toward continuing to vote in favor of Palestinian rights. 

One of the group’s enduring questions is “how do we still apply the pressure without kind of souring our relationship?” Kennedy said. “So it’s definitely, you know, there’s some politicking that goes on there.”

Archibald interjected with more precise terms. “But it’s still very much rooted in their record — we’re not ever picking winners or losers,” she said. “It’s all based on the scorecard … on the facts that are present.”

To round out its rating system, TrackAIPAC relies heavily on the Congressional Democrat Palestine Tracker, a spreadsheet run by five volunteers who are members of Democratic Socialists of America. The spreadsheet uses a scorecard system the volunteers helped devise with the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights Action. (It has a separate tracking system for Republicans.) For candidates who do not have a federal voting record, TrackAIPAC looks to public statements, public policy positions, or associations with pro-Israel lobby groups. If a candidate has pro-Israel positions but campaign finance data is not yet available, TrackAIPAC issues a red graphic with a “warning” label. 

In some cases, J Street and TrackAIPAC have backed the same candidate. Progressive Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., for example, is J Street-supported but has TrackAIPAC’s endorsement because of her policy positions on the genocide in Gaza, BDS, and blocking weapons to Israel.

“The money alone is not enough to get you a red graphic,” Archibald said.

A Political Force

The question of how TrackAIPAC assesses its more subjective measures — and whether its targeting is even-handed — has spurred controversy, too.

Last week, TrackAIPAC drew criticism for deploying a red card for Mallory McMorrow, a Michigan state senator running for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate on a platform that includes backing Block the Bombs and calling for a two-state solution. McMorrow’s graphic stood out because of her two opponents for the nomination: Rep. Haley Stevens, a hard-line Israel supporter who has taken over $9 million from the pro-Israel lobby, by TrackAIPAC’s count, and appeared in an AIPAC promotional video earlier this month; and Abdul El-Sayed, a vocal supporter of Palestinian rights who earned the endorsement of TrackAIPAC’s campaign arm, Citizens Against AIPAC Corruption.

McMorrow’s most recently issued red graphic cites $100,439 from the general “pro-Israel lobby groups & their donors.” El-Sayed’s green endorsement card, meanwhile, lists only the amount he has received from AIPAC: $0. McMorrow’s campaign argued that this reflected an uneven treatment, pointing to El-Sayed donors listed in FEC filings who have previously given to J Street.

After previously staying out of the race, a J Street spokesperson told The Intercept on Thursday that the group was endorsing McMorrow.

“It remains unclear how Track AIPAC has arrived at their number, and we invite them to share their methodology so as to not mislead voters,” a spokesperson for McMorrow’s campaign told The Intercept, adding that she had not taken any money from AIPAC and had opposed its involvement in the race.

TrackAIPAC acknowledged that some J Street donors had given to El-Sayed and said the different treatment between the two candidates was decided only by their differing policy positions on Israel and Palestine. Circulating McMorrow’s red card, TrackAIPAC cited McMorrow’s admission of having “returned policy papers to at least one Democratic pro-Israel group,” as well as reporting from Drop Site News that she had drafted an AIPAC position paper, but critics noted that the group was harsh on a relatively untested candidate running as a progressive. 

Related

A New PAC Wants to Counter Israel’s Influence. It Also Welcomes Hitler Apologists.

DeGroot objected to a similar dynamic in Illinois’ 9th Congressional District, where the campaign side supported candidate and activist Kat Abughazaleh, who finished as the runner-up to Biss. To deGroot, the group’s dual work as a data project and a political action committee allows its “masquerading support for a chosen candidate – Kat – as journalism, as fact finding.”

Candidates in TrackAIPAC’s good graces, however, may have reason to appreciate the two-part approach. Angela Gonzalez-Torres, a Los Angeles community activist and congressional candidate in California, said Citizens Against AIPAC Corruption was among her earliest supporters, giving her campaign a boost months before the more established progressive group Justice Democrats got behind her. She said that she was initially drawn to challenge incumbent Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., because of his responses to local issues like the construction of a controversial housing project atop a toxic dump site and an adjoined trucking depot that posed health risks to neighboring residents, but when she dug into his campaign, she came across TrackAIPAC’s red graphics. 

“When we as a community saw those profiting off of our pain and contributing to the very issues hurting our district and other humans, I think we were immediately encouraged to find someone to challenge Jimmy Gomez,” Gonzalez-Torres said, citing his AIPAC connections.

In a statement to The Intercept, a Gomez campaign spokesperson called the congressman “a progressive champion and has delivered for working-class families on the Eastside, securing hundreds of millions in funding to address environmental injustice, expand parks and housing, improve transportation, and combat climate change. He takes local concern about cost of living and quality of life seriously.”

Gonzalez-Torres said some of her supporters told her they donated to her campaign after seeing her and Gomez in TrackAIPAC’s side-by-side graphics.

Update: March 26, 2026, 9:57 a.m. ET
This story has been updated with a statement from the Jimmy Gomez campaign, as well as the news that J Street is endorsing Mallory McMorrow.

Correction: March 26, 2026, 3:58 p.m. ET
The Congressional Democrat Palestine Tracker is operated by volunteers who are members of Democratic Socialists of America; a previous version of this story said the spreadsheet tracker was run by the New York City chapter of DSA. Cori Archibald’s role on Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman’s campaigns has also been corrected; she was a consultant, not a staffer.

The post How Does TrackAIPAC Actually Track AIPAC? appeared first on The Intercept.

The measure, sponsored by a young DNC member from Florida, could put party leaders on the spot about the pro-Israel lobbying group’s outsized role in Democratic primaries.

A lobbying behemoth that for decades courted lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, AIPAC has become an increasingly toxic brand in the Democratic Party.

In recent years, Israeli leaders and their backers in Washington have become more closely aligned with Republican politicians. At the same time, however, AIPAC’s super PAC has focused tens of millions in spending on Democratic primary races.

Allison Minnerly, the committee member sponsoring the resolution, said it is time for the party to formally distance itself from the group.

“At a time when Democratic voters might really not have felt represented or seen when it came to Gaza or seeing their party support Palestinian rights or stand against military conflict, this could be one step toward bringing those voters back into the party,” she said.

Neither AIPAC nor the DNC immediately responded to requests for comment.

Minnerly’s resolution follows on the heels of another measure she sponsored last August calling for an arms embargo on Israel. That resolution was defeated, but not before it sparked a high-profile debate on the party’s relationship with Israel.

Democrats have soured on Israel while becoming more sympathetic toward Palestinians, surveys show.

That has not stopped AIPAC, through a super PAC called the United Democracy Project and other campaign arms, from plowing cash into Democratic primaries to elect pro-Israel candidates. Most recently it spent at least $22 million on Democratic primaries in Illinois, where its preferred candidates won two of four contested races.

“Given the recent primaries in Illinois, but also what we’ve seen across the country, I think it’s important that we specify that AIPAC as a growing force in our primaries needs to be specifically addressed when we talk about dark money,” Minnerly said.

Related

DNC Votes Down “Overwhelming Popular Position” Calling for Arms Ban to Israel

Minnerly’s resolution notes that AIPAC has expended massive amounts on political campaigns, then adds that “corporate money PACs have concentrated spending in primary races to oppose candidates who have advocated for Palestinian human rights, ceasefire efforts, or changes to U.S. foreign policy, raising concerns about the role of large outside spending in shaping Democratic Party positions.”

It later adds, “Democratic elections should reflect grassroots participation and the will of voters, rather than the disproportionate influence of wealthy donors or special interests.”

While the resolution’s is couched as a condemnation of dark money spending, it could nevertheless open a tense debate over AIPAC’s role in the primaries that some party leaders would rather avoid.

Ahead of the debate over the Israel arms embargo resolution last year, Minnerly was pressured to withdraw her proposal. DNC Chair Ken Martin put forward a competing resolution.

The ultimate product of that debate was the creation of a working group that has yet to produce any public findings. Critics have derided the group as a stalling mechanism.

This time around, Minnerly fears that the timing of the DNC resolution committee meeting could curtail debate of the measure. Her measure is set for discussion on the morning of April 9, as many DNC members will still be arriving for the meeting in New Orleans.

As high-ranking Democrats distance themselves from AIPAC, the group is hiring a new director of political operations and trying to defend itself against the critiques.

Michael Sacks, a Democratic megadonor who helped bankroll two secretive dark-money groups affiliated with AIPAC in the Illinois primaries, alleged that the group’s critics are trying to “chase” Jewish people out of the party in a Chicago Tribune op-ed on Tuesday.

Related

Illinois Results: Daniel Biss Beats Kat Abughazaleh in Blow to Left and AIPAC Alike

“Let’s be clear: The campaign against AIPAC is not a policy discussion,” he wrote. “It’s a thinly disguised effort to make support for Israel politically toxic in the Democratic Party, to chase Jews and their allies out of our big tent coalition.”

AIPAC shared the op-ed on social media.

Jim Zogby, the president of the Arab American Institute, said the criticisms of AIPAC and its dark-money affiliates were about the group’s “hardball” tactics.

“Having been a witness to AIPAC handling of campaigns going back to the 1970s and ’80s,” he said, “it takes a certain degree of chutzpah to play victim, when in fact what they have done is victimize candidates and incumbents who didn’t fall in line behind their positions.”

The post DNC Resolution to Reject AIPAC Funding Puts Democratic Leaders in the Hot Seat appeared first on The Intercept.

But for the top of the ticket in Tuesday’s Democratic primary, more than two dozen donors to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee are quietly backing Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, The Intercept has found. 

At least 27 AIPAC donors have given to Stratton’s campaign to replace retiring Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., according to an analysis of federal campaign data. A former AIPAC president, Lee Rosenberg, is on her finance committee.

While public opinion sours on AIPAC’s brand, the group is backing a multimillion-dollar ad campaign run through other committees with palatable names like “Elect Chicago Women” in at least four Democratic House primaries. Its donors, meanwhile, have been funneling money to its preferred Illinois House candidates. The group has kept an even lower profile in the Senate race, where it’s been less clear how, if at all, the pro-Israel lobby is engaging.

Related

AIPAC Head Hosts Fundraiser for House Candidate Who Swears AIPAC Isn’t Backing Her

Neither of the top contenders for the safe Democratic seat have suggested they would champion the Palestinian cause if elected to the Senate. Both Stratton and Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, her leading opponent, have declined to call Israel’s destruction in Gaza a genocide or commit to stopping U.S. weapons transfers to Israel, and at least one of Stratton’s pro-Israel donors also gave to Krishnamoorthi’s campaign. AIPAC endorsed Krishnamoorthi, who has received more than $250,000 from the pro-Israel lobby during his decade in Congress, for his 2024 reelection.

Both are running to the right of Rep. Robin Kelly, a relatively progressive Illinois congresswoman currently in a distant third, but even she staked out a more critical position on Israel upon entering the race and has taken some pro-Israel money while in office, much of it from the centrist group J Street.

AIPAC donors have given more than $70,000 to Stratton’s campaign since August, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission — out of just over $4 million she’s raised in total. The 27 donors have collectively given just under $5 million to AIPAC, its super PAC United Democracy Project, and the group Democratic Majority for Israel, which has close ties to AIPAC. Only two of them live in Illinois.

Rosenberg, the former AIPAC president on Stratton’s finance committee, is a leading Democratic strategist in Illinois, longtime adviser to Gov. JB Pritzker, and former adviser to Barack Obama.

In response to questions from The Intercept, a Stratton campaign spokesperson said that AIPAC had not endorsed the lieutenant governor and was not spending in the Senate race. The spokesperson said Stratton has more than 28,000 individual donors and supports a two-state solution for peace between Israel and Palestine.

In the final days ahead of Tuesday’s primary, Stratton has begun to catch up in the polls to Krishnamoorthi, who has largely outperformed his Democratic opponents in fundraising and public opinion surveys. The two candidates’ allies and critics have pointed fingers over fundraising, accusing the other of drawing support from corporate donors.

Krishnamoorthi’s $30 million fundraising haul is supplied in part by a crypto PAC, donors to President Donald Trump, and Palantir’s chief technology officer, among others, the Chicago Tribune reported on Tuesday. Stratton, meanwhile, has said she’s not taking corporate PAC money and hit Krishnamoorthi’s campaign for accepting support from a “MAGA-backed crypto PAC,” but her opponents have also criticized her Senate campaign for still benefiting from corporate donors that fund PACs backing her.

Democrats in Illinois have criticized AIPAC’s efforts to elect pro-Israel Democrats in deep-blue seats in and around Chicago. Pritzker, one of Stratton’s top surrogates and funders (and her boss), is a former AIPAC donor who cut ties with the group and has since denounced it as a “pro-Trump organization” and “significantly MAGA-influenced.”

Related

AIPAC Is Flooding Illinois With Cash. Pro-Palestine Groups Are Backing Kat Abughazaleh.

Pro-Israel spending “is a moral issue,” said former Rep. Marie Newman, an Illinois Democrat who was ousted from Congress in 2022 after pro-Israel groups spent against her. “AIPAC must be stopped if you believe in democracy.” 

Stratton, who took a trip to Israel in 2019 to meet with an opposition leader, as Politico reported, has been critical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s destruction in Gaza. She has not said whether she would support legislation blocking U.S. weapons to Israel. 

Criticizing Netanyahu is at odds with taking support from AIPAC and its donors, Newman said.

“AIPAC vigorously supports Netanyahu, a right-wing dictator, best friend to Trump and his authoritarian inhumane government,” Newman told The Intercept. “Israel’s right-wing government has dragged us into multiple unnecessary wars, helped ruin the US’ reputation in the world and is committing genocide.”

While Krishnamoorthi holds the advantage in polling and fundraising, it’s not clear who will win on Tuesday as dueling PACs fight it out in the final days of the race. Another group that has run ads in support of Krishnamoorthi recently launched ads backing Kelly in an apparent effort to peel votes away from Stratton. Kelly, who has raised $3 million, has struggled to keep pace in the polls with Krishnamoorthi and Stratton, and their backers have labeled her a spoiler.

Kelly’s campaign argues that she’s the most principled of the three candidates, particularly on Israel and Gaza.

“Robin pledged not to accept contributions from AIPAC after deciding to sign onto the Block the Bombs bill and meeting with doctors who volunteered on the front lines in Gaza,” her campaign spokesperson Joe Bowen told The Intercept. “She is the only candidate who has pledged not to take their money, the only candidate to support Block the Bombs and the only candidate to call the genocide in Gaza what it is.”

Kelly, who has hit both Krishnamoorthi and Stratton for stopping short of calling Israel’s destruction in Gaza a genocide, adopted that stance shortly before she launched her Senate campaign. Previously endorsed by J Street, she received $14,000 from AIPAC in 2025 and took an AIPAC trip to Israel in 2016. Kelly, now the only major candidate in the race to reject AIPAC support, has said the contributions were from individual donors who gave through AIPAC’s portal. 

The post AIPAC Is Staying Out of Illinois Senate Race — But Its Donors Back Juliana Stratton appeared first on The Intercept.

AIPAC board president Michael Tuchin hosted a private fundraiser for Fine on Monday at his Los Angeles law office, where an Intercept reporter was turned away in the building’s front lobby. “The Intercept should not be here at all,” said a building security guard, relaying a message from fundraiser organizers.

Three people entering the Century City high-rise office, however, confirmed that they were there to attend the Fine fundraiser. An attendee wearing a pin with adjoining U.S. and Israeli flags said she was there for the event and was whisked away by building security when asked why she supported Fine.

Related

Meet the U.S. Donors Funding ELNET, the AIPAC of Europe

After spending years exerting largely unchecked influence over elected U.S. officials, AIPAC appears to be putting more distance between itself and several of its preferred candidates this midterm cycle amid public outrage over Israel’s genocide in Gaza — and as a growing slate of progressive candidates position themselves explicitly against the group. But AIPAC and the broader pro-Israel lobby are still working to shape the next Congress to preserve the U.S.’s diplomatic alliance with Israel and maintain the steady flow of weapons shipments.

The day Fine entered the race in May, Jewish Insider reported that she had met with pro-Israel lobbying groups including AIPAC and Democratic Majority for Israel. The groups did not support Schakowsky, who was instead backed by the more centrist pro-Israel group J Street during her career — meaning the 14-term congresswoman’s retirement represented an opportunity for the lobby to install a more hard-line supporter of Israel.

Fine’s campaign, AIPAC, and Tuchin did not respond to a request for comment.

Fine is running in a crowded Democratic primary field that includes Kat Abughazaleh, a Palestinian American activist who has made her opposition to AIPAC spending and Israel’s genocide a central plank of her campaign; Daniel Biss, the current mayor of Evanston, Illinois; and Bushra Amiwala, a local school board member and activist. Abughazaleh and Biss led the pack in fundraising as of September, according to Federal Election Commission filings, pulling in $1.5 million and $1.3 million respectively. Amiwala has raised $642,000.

Fine had raised just over $660,000 by the same deadline — about half of it from close to 300 donors who AIPAC appears to have directed to her campaign, as the local outlet Evanston Now reported in October. The group sent at least two fundraising emails urging donors in its network to support Fine, after which AIPAC donors poured more than $300,000 into her campaign.

It’s not the first time the group has taken such an approach this cycle, including in Illinois. In the state’s 7th Congressional District, where Democratic Rep. Danny Davis is retiring, AIPAC hasn’t endorsed a replacement — but its donors are funding real estate mogul Jason Friedman, The Intercept reported.

Related

Kat Abughazaleh on the Right to Protest

When asked about meeting with AIPAC prior to entering the race, Fine played down her support from the group, telling the university newspaper Loyola Phoenix in October that she was not pursuing its endorsement.

“Senator Fine has not received and is not seeking endorsement from J Street, AIPAC, or any Jewish organization,” her campaign said at the time. “She’s deeply aware of the diversity of political views in the Jewish community and in this district at large. The Senator’s priority is to represent all constituents, bridge divisions, continue standing up against antisemitism wherever it may appear, and continue to represent all members of her district.”

The post AIPAC Head Hosts Fundraiser for House Candidate Who Swears AIPAC Isn’t Backing Her appeared first on The Intercept.

Former Rep. Tom Malinowski conceded the race in New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District on Tuesday to Analilia Mejia, former political director for Sen. Bernie Sanders’s 2020 presidential campaign, after initial results showed a slim margin between the two candidates for several days.

Mejia won “despite being outspent essentially ten-to-one by not just AIPAC and outside groups but also the New Jersey political machine,” said Antoinette Miles, state director for the New Jersey Working Families Party. Mejia previously led the group, which backed her campaign and helped organize her field operation. 

Related

AIPAC Donors Fail to Elect Last-Minute New Jersey House Pick

“No one would really categorize this district as being a left district,” Miles said, pointing to the race as a sign progressive candidates can connect with voters in more moderate districts. A Republican represented the district until 2019, when former Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen retired and former Rep. Mikie Sherrill was elected. 

With the deck stacked against Mejia and little public polling in the three months since Sherrill vacated the seat to take office as New Jersey governor, there was no clear front-runner in the race. Internal polling in the final weeks of the race showed Malinowski and Mejia pulling ahead and almost equally matched, with New Jersey Lt. Gov. Tahesha Way further behind in third place, according to a source with knowledge of the data. 

Rather than targeting Mejia, the pro-Israel lobby spent more than $2 million against Malinowski, likely splitting moderate voters, while known pro-Israel donors directed funding in Way’s favor. United Democracy Project, the super PAC for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, spent on ads attacking Malinowski, and AIPAC donors flooded Way’s campaign with more than $50,000 in the final weeks of the race. The strategy, which UDP said was meant to help them elect the more pro-Israel candidate because Malinowski had previously questioned the provision of unconditional aid to Israel, appeared to backfire, as some observers predicted. 

“This election is a clear rejection of AIPAC by Democratic voters — AIPAC’s spending and support for candidates is becoming a kiss of death in Democratic primaries because of the work our movement has done to expose them,” said Justice Democrats spokesperson Usamah Andrabi. The group did not endorse in the race but said Mejia’s win was a positive sign for the left as midterms progress. 

“This is a clear sign that the Democratic electorate is desperate to elect new leaders — like the dozen of working-class champions we’re supporting in primaries this cycle — that aren’t bought by AIPAC, crypto, AI, or any other corporate lobby that has created the intentionally weak and ineffective Democratic Party failing us in Congress right now,” Andrabi added.

In a statement released on Tuesday, Malinowski pointed to AIPAC’s influence in the race.

“Analilia deserves unequivocal praise and credit for running a positive campaign and for inspiring so many voters on Election Day,” Malinowski wrote. “But the outcome of this race cannot be understood without also taking into account the massive flood of dark money that AIPAC spent on dishonest ads during the last three weeks. I wish I could say today that this effort, which was meant to intimidate Democrats across the country, failed in NJ-11.”

On Friday, United Democracy Project issued a statement signaling it’s still paying close attention to the race ahead of the general election in April. 

“The outcome in NJ-11 was an anticipated possibility, and our focus remains on who will serve the next full term in Congress. UDP will be closely monitoring dozens of primary races, including the June NJ-11 primary, to help ensure pro-Israel candidates are elected to Congress,” UDP said in a statement posted on X. 

Some corners of the Democratic establishment are also reeling from the results of the race. After spending close to $2 million to back Way, the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association has not made any public statements since results started rolling in on Thursday evening. DLGA did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

In an email to supporters on Thursday night, the Democratic National Committee prematurely congratulated Malinowski on winning the race. The release was later removed from the DNC website.

The Democratic establishment hasn’t recently had to run in competitive primaries in the district, Miles pointed out, while progressives had been preparing for this moment. 

“That says something about the shift that is happening in New Jersey right now,” Miles said. “This is the first race — at least at the congressional level — in which there is an open primary, the possibility for better candidates to run, the possibility for new ideas, and the machine is being tested.”

The post AIPAC Strategy Backfires as Progressive Underdog Wins Key House Race in New Jersey appeared first on The Intercept.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee waged a proud and public campaign to assert its dominance last cycle — sinking more than $100 million into the 2024 elections to oust critics of Israel from Congress. AIPAC spent more on elections that cycle than any other individual single-issue interest group; celebrated its super PAC, United Democracy Project, as “one of the largest bipartisan super PACs in America”; and took credit for endorsing 361 pro-Israel candidates who prevailed in hundreds of races.

That success met with public disgust with Israel’s genocide in Gaza and drove a massive backlash, fueling a growing movement to eradicate AIPAC’s influence and propel insurgent candidates to Congress on pledges to refuse the pro-Israel lobby’s support. Now, as the 2026 midterms approach, AIPAC and its preferred candidates have pulled back from the aggressive electoral strategy they pursued last time.

Related

AIPAC Head Hosts Fundraiser for House Candidate Who Swears AIPAC Isn’t Backing Her

None of this is to say that AIPAC is planning to let its influence slip away. While the group has not yet publicly endorsed any new candidates this cycle, there’s still time, and it’s working behind closed doors to boost its preferred candidates’ campaigns. Earlier this month, for example, AIPAC’s board president held a fundraiser for an Illinois House candidate who has said publicly that she isn’t seeking the group’s endorsement. In another district in the same state, AIPAC donors rallied around a real estate mogul’s congressional campaign.

The moves represent the latest in a series of strategic adaptations AIPAC has made in recent years while navigating a shifting political landscape on issues related to Israel.

“They are fully aware their brand is in the toilet,” said former Rep. Marie Newman, D-Ill., whom pro-Israel donors helped oust in 2022.

By this time last cycle, AIPAC had already endorsed most of its slate. But with a growing field of candidates running on rejecting AIPAC money and attacking those who take it, the group is returning to a quieter strategy that it used for years to build its influence.

“AIPAC is thought of toxically across the nation,” Newman said. “On doors, when you knock and go to canvasses and go to speaking engagements here, standard rank-and-file centrist Dems are like, ‘No, no more AIPAC and no more corporate PACs.’”

Merely rejecting AIPAC money will not be enough to serve as the new standard for progressive candidates for long, said Lara Friedman, president of the Foundation for Middle East Peace.

Swearing off the group’s cash “doesn’t mean anything,” on its own, Friedman said. “What is going to matter is where candidates, or incumbents who are trying to return to office, where they stand on issues. As it becomes clear that AIPAC is going to work around the ‘people don’t want to take our money’ and find other ways to support candidates, it’s really going to be a question of, where do people stand on what are in some ways litmus-test issues for AIPAC?”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom appears to have picked up on the anti-AIPAC trend. During a press tour as rumors swirl about a potential run for president, Newsom said earlier this month that he won’t take money from the group. In October, Newsom told the podcast Higher Learning, “I haven’t thought about AIPAC in — it’s interesting, you’re like the first to bring up AIPAC in years.”

Despite Newsom’s statements, his record on Israel policy leaves questions about how far he’d go to ally himself with the Palestinian cause. He’s celebrated accolades from far-right pro-Israel groups like the Anti-Defamation League, and his last two public statements on anniversaries of the October 7 attacks did not mention Palestinians killed. Newsom did not call for a ceasefire in Gaza until March 2024, after both President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris did so.

While some pro-Palestine advocates applauded Newsom for vetoing an online hate speech bill they said would have targeted politically protected speech, Newsom did not cite those concerns as part of his decision. California’s powerful tech industry had also hoped he would reject the bill.

Newsom is also facing criticism over a controversial bill he signed into law in October to address antisemitism in California schools, which a coalition of teachers associations, civil rights organizations, and interfaith groups argue would censor legitimate criticism of Israel and pro-Palestine voices. Opponents are suing to stop the law from going into effect on January 1.

Anticipating criticism, other candidates have kept their policy stances regarding Israel quiet. George Hornedo, who’s challenging Democratic Rep. André Carson in Indiana, had a secret pro-Israel policy page on his campaign website this summer that’s since been taken down. Hornedo has not said publicly whether or not he’ll take AIPAC money, but he told The Intercept that his campaign “rejects corporate PAC money.”

“I’m not coordinating with, nor am I relying on or seeking, financial intervention from national organizations in this race. This campaign is focused on building support directly here in Indianapolis, not inviting national groups to shape or define the race,” Hornedo said in a statement. “On Gaza, my position is straightforward. Gaza should be flooded with humanitarian aid and the U.S. should not provide offensive weapons to any country unless their use complies with international humanitarian law.”

“We’re seeing an uptick in Democrats who forswear AIPAC money because it’s become an electoral liability,” said Hamid Bendaas, communications director for the Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project. “But it’s unclear if they will keep that standard by rejecting support from other organizations — chiefly but not limited to Democratic Majority for Israel — who have similar policy agendas to AIPAC, especially regarding more weapons to Israel.”

In its current approach, AIPAC has returned to a strategy in previous races when it funneled money to candidates through other vehicles to keep its name — and the criticism it’s increasingly drawing — out of the race. AIPAC donors have supported its picks by giving to other dark-money groups that outwardly have nothing to do with Israel policy, like the political action committee 314 Action, which helps elects scientists and last cycle flooded the campaign of Rep. Maxine Dexter, D-Ore. — whom AIPAC never formally endorsed.

“We know AIPAC knows their brand is toxic,” Newman said. “So much so, they are taking their brand out of campaigns and funneling their money through other PACs and donors such as 314 science, DMFI, several small PACs, and of course individual AIPAC members who give as a donor because the candidates can say they received money from donors, not AIPAC, to avoid association with AIPAC.”

AIPAC isn’t necessarily backing off under fire — it’s returning to the way it operated before it started spending directly on elections in the 2022 cycle.

Prior to launching its super PAC and regular affiliated PAC, AIPAC was active in politics for more than half a century, working quietly in the halls of Congress and around Washington, D.C., to establish one of the most successful lobbying apparatuses in the country. First launched as a machine to counter negative press coverage of Israel, AIPAC quickly expanded its focus to influencing U.S. policy toward Israel. It positioned itself as a key source of information on Middle East issues for members of Congress and built out regional offices across the country, energizing a network of local pro-Israel activists. AIPAC has routinely lobbied presidents and congressional offices, funded trips to Israel for members of Congress and hosted members to address its annual policy conference, extending its reach into the halls of power without touching electoral politics.

Related

Progressives on AIPAC’s Defeat of Bowman: “Now We Know How Much It Costs to Buy an Election”

The approach was hugely successful, allowing AIPAC to maintain the bipartisan pro-Israel consensus on the hill for decades. The group had long said it would never launch a PAC — but that changed as a growing number of candidates began running on criticizing unconditional U.S. military support for Israel in the late 2010s. AIPAC then began spending on campaigns, starting with funding ads from Democratic Majority for Israel, attacking Bernie Sanders in Nevada during his 2020 presidential primary campaign.

In 2021, the group launched AIPAC PAC, which allowed it to wade into congressional races; shortly after, it officially launched its super PAC, United Democracy Project. The group drew scrutiny in the 2022 cycle for endorsing 37 Republicans who voted to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

“Clearly, AIPAC knows exactly how toxic they are to Democratic Party voters who see them as a right-wing extremist lobby, championing a right-wing agenda, and funded by right-wing megadonors trying to buy our elections,” said Justice Democrats spokesperson Usamah Andrabi. “Voters are not interested in politicians who say one thing to their constituents and another to billionaire Republican donors, but AIPAC excels at finding candidates eager to reject authenticity and embrace moral cowardice if it means a seat in Congress.”

The post AIPAC Is Retreating From Endorsements and Election Spending. It Won’t Give Up Its Influence. appeared first on The Intercept.

As of Friday, the Democratic primary in New Jersey’s 11th district is too close to call between organizer Analilia Mejia and former Rep. Tom Malinowski. Former Lieutenant Governor Tahesha Way trails in a distant third. This story details pro-Israel contributions to Way’s campaign ahead of the election.

Former Lieutenant Governor Tahesha Way is not the clear front-runner in New Jersey’s special congressional election on Thursday. She’s seventh in fundraising out of 10 candidates as of last week’s Federal Election Commission deadline, and public polling has been sparse. But as the race drew close to the finish line, the Israel lobby made her the beneficiary of a last-minute push. 

In the final weeks before the election, an Intercept analysis has found, 30 donors to groups including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, its super PAC, and Democratic Majority for Israel have poured more than $50,000 into Way’s campaign. On Friday, amid the fundraising push and less than a week before the election, DMFI officially endorsed her. 

The lobby is known for spending against progressives and the most vocal critics of the state of Israel, but in New Jersey, it appears to be backing one moderate to pick off another. Yet more pro-Israel money in the race comes at the expense of Tom Malinowski, who is no progressive on Israel policy but nevertheless has become the subject of AIPAC ire — marking a reversal for the group, which supported him in 2022.

AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, has spent more $2.3 million on ads against Malinowski. The ads do not mention Israel but attack Malinowski on immigration, saying he helped fund “Trump’s deportation force” because he voted in favor of a 2019 bipartisan appropriations bill that funded the Department of Homeland Security. The majority of Democrats, including many supported by AIPAC, voted for the bill.

In a statement to The Intercept, UDP spokesperson Patrick Dorton made no mention of Malinowski’s DHS funding vote. He said Malinowski had fallen afoul of the group’s policy priorities by discussing the possibility of conditioning aid to Israel.

“It’s our goal to build the largest bipartisan pro-Israel majority in Congress. There are several candidates in this race far more pro-Israel than Tom Malinowski,” Dorton said.

Related

AIPAC Is Retreating From Endorsements and Election Spending. It Won’t Give Up Its Influence.

Way and Malinowski are competing in a crowded race in New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District to replace former Rep. Mikie Sherrill, who vacated the seat after she was elected governor. 

Way and Malinowski’s campaigns did not respond to The Intercept’s requests for comment.

Also running are Analilia Mejia, the former political director for Sen. Bernie Sanders’s 2020 presidential campaign; veteran Zach Beecher; Passaic County commissioner and election lawyer John Bartlett; former Morris Township Mayor Jeff Grayzel; and Essex County Commissioner Brendan Gill. 

Way already had substantial support from the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association, which endorsed her and has spent more than $1.7 million backing her campaign, almost half of what it spent in total last cycle. But even with close to $4 million in outside spending on her side, she has lagged behind her opponents in fundraising. She’s raised just over $400,000 — compared to Malinowski’s over $1.1 million, more than $800,000 for Gill, and over half a million for Beecher. Bartlett has raised more than $460,000, Grayzel has raised $428,000, and Mejia has raised just over $420,000. 

Now, pro-Israel donors who have given to AIPAC to boost other pro-Israel candidates are trying to help Way close the gap. They include retired investor Peter Langerman, who has given $75,000 to AIPAC’s United Democracy Project since 2023 and $12,000 to AIPAC since 2022. Another Way donor, Florida loan executive Joel Edelstein, has given $25,000 to UDP since 2023 and $3,500 to AIPAC since 2022.

Among Way’s other donors are Bennett Greenspan, founder of the genealogy company Family Tree DNA, who has given $40,000 to United Democracy Project, $4,000 to DMFI PAC, and $1,250 to AIPAC PAC since 2022. Way donor and New Jersey real estate developer Michael Gottlieb gave $25,000 to UDP in 2023. Another Way donor, founder and former president of Microsoft partner HSO, Jack Ades, has given $10,750 to AIPAC since 2024. Gottlieb and Ades have given to Republican candidates including Reps. Mike Lawler and Elise Stefanik in New York; Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La.; Nikki Haley’s presidential campaign; and the Republican group WinRed. 

More than half of the contributions to Way — $33,000 of the $53,000 in total — all landed on January 14, a common sign that outside groups have sent out a fundraising push to their network.

Another donor to Way’s campaign is Joseph Korn, a New Jersey real estate developer who served on the New Jersey board of the Jewish National Fund, a controversial national organization that has funded settler groups in the West Bank. 

Way is campaigning on a relatively centrist platform that primarily includes fighting against President Donald Trump’s agenda. She’s also running on strengthening the Affordable Care Act, ensuring access to reproductive care, protecting democracy and voting rights, and lowering costs without raising taxes, including raising the cap on state and local tax deductions, or SALT. Her website does not mention foreign policy or Israel. 

Way is also endorsed by the Congressional Black Caucus PAC; the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State; IVYPAC, which backs candidates who are members of the historically Black Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority; and several other New Jersey organizations. 

The Israel lobby’s support for Way may not ultimately help its policy priorities. As a recent column in the Forward points out, by pitting Way and Malinowski against each other, AIPAC donors might help a more progressive candidate get elected.

The post AIPAC Donors Fail to Elect Last-Minute New Jersey House Pick appeared first on The Intercept.

Biss’s victory came amid mixed results for outside spending groups representing pro-Israel, artificial intelligence, and cryptocurrency interests — with crypto regulation supporter and state Rep. La Shawn Ford winning in the 7th Congressional District while the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s favored candidates, Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller and former Rep. Melissa Bean, won in the 2nd and 8th. In the closely watched Senate race, Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton received AIPAC’s congratulations for her win over Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi and Robin Kelly.

With five open House seats and one open Senate seat heavily favored for Democrats, the Illinois primaries presented a test for the future of the party — and became a top target for outside groups that poured more than $50 million into races throughout the state. The infusion of outside cash included more than $35 million in spending from groups linked to the AIPAC and the cryptocurrency and AI industries. 

Dozens of super PACs in Illinois sought to influence the competitive Democratic primaries, often while concealing both their donors and broader intentions. In the 9th District, AIPAC used groups with uncontroversial titles like “Elect Chicago Women” and “Chicago Progressive Partnership” to boost its pick, Fine, and pit progressive candidates against one another. The spending appeared to come up short Tuesday night, when Fine finished in third.

The groups’ competing ads at times inflamed and at times distracted from voter concerns over civil liberties, the economy, bipartisan fealty to corporations and wealthy donors, and now the unfolding war in Iran.

The Illinois primaries presented a test for AIPAC in particular, which with its affiliated groups spent more than $22 million in races in and around deep-blue Chicago while obscuring the pro-Israel lobby’s involvement amid growing criticism. In several races, AIPAC donors have funneled money to candidates where it did not officially endorse, including in the U.S. Senate race, The Intercept reported. 

The crypto industry spent more than $13 million in Illinois races through the super PAC Fairshake, including close to $10 million against Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton in the Senate race and more than $3 million in two races attacking candidates who have voted for consumer protection regulations on cryptocurrency. The AI industry poured in another $2.5 million into two House races.

Detailed results from the Senate race and the 2nd, 7th, 8th, and 9th districts are below.

Senate: After Laying Low, AIPAC Congratulates Stratton

Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton defeated Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi and Robin Kelly in the highly anticipated Democratic primary to replace retiring Sen. Dick Durbin. The often bitter race was defined by debates over dark money, establishment endorsements, and race and identity. 

Stratton won just shy of 40 percent of the vote in the crowded 10-way race. While AIPAC publicly stayed out of the contest, suggesting that the group had become politically toxic with Democratic primary voters, reporting from The Intercept found that at least 27 AIPAC donors gave to Stratton’s campaign.

On Tuesday night, AIPAC publicly congratulated Stratton for her primary win over Kelly, writing on X that Kelly’s “most recent actions have undermined the U.S.-Israel alliance,” and that the group looks “forward to continuing our long-standing partnership” with Stratton.

Related

AIPAC Is Staying Out of Illinois Senate Race — But Its Donors Back Juliana Stratton

Neither Stratton nor Krishnamoorthi have called Israel’s actions in Gaza a genocide or said they would push to condition aid to Israel, as Kelly repeatedly pointed out in her attempts to carve out a lane to their left. 

Stratton’s victory does represent an early defeat for the crypto industry, which spent millions against her candidacy. The industry’s main PAC, Fairshake, spent nearly $10 million against Stratton, in a move that likely favored Krishnamoorthi. The Illinois congressman is known as a top fundraiser, with a massive $30 million war chest. 

In addition to concerns over the influence of money in politics, the race was also plagued by questions over the role of establishment endorsements. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker endorsed Stratton, his longtime running mate, and donated $5 million to Stratton’s super PAC, spurring controversy about the perception of establishment Democrats throwing around their political weight. 

But Stratton’s most controversial endorsement of the cycle was an alleged posthumous endorsement from the late Rev. Jesse Jackson, whose family later said he did not come to a decision about the race before his death.

The fight for support from Black voters was already a highly contentious issue within the primary, with concerns that Kelly and Stratton, who are both Black, would split the Black electorate in Illinois. Kelly took offense to those comments, arguing at a recent campaign event that “no one talks” about spoilers “when two white men are running.” 

Illinois has not sent a Republican to the Senate since the 1990s, and Stratton is expected to easily win her general election in November. 

2nd District: AIPAC Beats AI PAC

Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller fended off a comeback attempt from former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. in a race that pitted AIPAC against the artificial intelligence industry.

Miller was backed heavily by a PAC affiliated with the pro-Israel group, while Jackson drew support from an AI PAC funded by tech leaders.

Jackson had the star power of his civil rights activist father’s name but was tarnished by a federal fraud conviction for misusing campaign funds over a decade ago during his previous stint as a U.S. representative.

AIPAC’s role in the race made headlines in February, when retiring U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, vacating her 9th Congressional District seat, withdrew her endorsement of Miller over the group’s support for her.

Meanwhile, the progressive standardbearer in the race — state Sen. Robert Peters — was trailing far behind on Tuesday night, despite endorsements from Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Peters made the involvement of outside groups ranging from AIPAC to cryptocurrency to artificial intelligence PACs a theme of his campaign, blasting his opponents for relying on their support.

7th District: AIPAC and Crypto Lose Despite Heavy Spending

State Rep. La Shawn Ford beat Chicago City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin the primary to succeed retiring longtime Rep. Danny Davis Tuesday night, despite the nearly $5 million AIPAC spent to boost her and nearly $2.5 million a crypto PAC spent against him.

Conyears-Ervin conceded early in the night, before the Associated Press called the race for Ford.

Related

Crypto Spends Big in Illinois House Races to Say Consumer Rights Supporters Are Corrupt

Ford was the target of heavy spending from the cryptocurrency industry PAC Fairshake because of his support for state-level consumer protections. Ford told The Intercept earlier this month that the money spent against him underlined the need for campaign finance reform.

“We are a grassroots campaign that is struggling to get our message out and make sure that people know that our experience and our platform is out there,” he said. “We don’t have a budget to counter lies.”

The crowded race made polling difficult, and the heavily Democratic nature of the district, which stretches from Chicago’s Loop and South Side to leafy suburbs to the west, meant that several candidates were competing for the progressive lane.

AIPAC donors backed former real estate mogul Jason Friedman early in the race, but the pro-Israel group’s campaign arm later spent nearly $60,000 opposing him and $4.8 million boosting Conyears-Ervin, according to a tally by political consultant Frank Calabrese.

Ford and Conyears-Ervin both brought ethical baggage to the race: He successfully fought off a raft of federal bank fraud charges more than a decade ago, pleading to a single misdemeanor count, while she was forced to pay a $30,000 fine to settle two ethics cases, including one involving the firing of two whistleblowers who warned her not to use city resources to organize prayer events on Facebook, according to WTTW Chicago.

Anthony Driver, executive director of the Service Employees International Union Illinois State Council, drew heavy spending support from his union and an endorsement from the Congressional Progressive Caucus. He finished well behind the leading candidates.

8th District: Former Blue Dog Beats Would-Be Squad Member

Former U.S. Rep. Melissa Bean took a big step closer to a comeback Tuesday night by defeating Junaid Ahmed, a progressive backed by the group Justice Democrats.

Bean, a previous member of the moderate Blue Dog Coalition, drew a big assist from more than $4 million in spending from AIPAC-affiliated PACs, as well as spending from crypto and AI PACs.

Both candidates were vying to replace Krishnamoorthi.

9th District: Anti-AIPAC Candidates in Top Slots

Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss prevailed in a crowded Democratic primary race largely defined by outside spending from groups associated with AIPAC, which spent millions targeting Biss and Palestinian American activist and journalist Kat Abughazaleh, who came in second. 

Biss, a former math professor who stressed his anti-war bonafides on the campaign trail, sought to define himself as the tested progressive favorite while Abughazaleh’s campaign gained steam.

Initially, AIPAC-affiliated groups focused their attacks on Biss, who is Jewish, because of his support for conditions on aid to Israel. The AIPAC-affiliated group Elect Chicago Women spent nearly $1.5 million to oppose Biss and over $4 million to boost state Sen. Laura Fine, who came in third. But as the race heated up, Abughazaleh, who drew a harder line on Israel, surged forward in the polls and became their central target. 

In his victory speech Tuesday night, Biss said he had been pressured to move away from what he called a nuanced view on Israel and Palestine. He also took a direct swipe at AIPAC.

“This district understands nuance and wants someone who accepts the reality of competing, even contradictory-sounding priorities and values and realities,” Biss said. “Now, that point of view is not the point of view of AIPAC. AIPAC spent an unbelievable amount of money — over $7 million — to try to buy this seat, to support the idea that we can’t accept nuance.”

The district is deep blue, and Biss is expected to handily win his general election. He becomes the Democratic nominee on the heels of a scandal that broke in the final hours of the race, after his former student, Megan Wachspress, went public about a past relationship with Biss on Monday in a Bluesky post. 

“If he’s going to get a national profile on the strength of a younger woman’s campaign,” wrote Wachspress, who is now a lecturer at Stanford Law School, referring to Abughazaleh, “I’m going to come out and say it: during his short-lived tenure as a math professor, Biss had an inappropriate romantic relationship with one of his undergraduate students. I was that student.” 

Biss acknowledged the relationship on Tuesday, calling it “ill-advised.”

Related

Kat Abughazaleh on the Right to Protest

Though Abughazaleh earned key progressive endorsements, including from the group Justice Democrats and Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, Biss pulled Schakowsky’s support, as well as that of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

The Chicago Progressive Partnership, another AIPAC-affiliated group, spent roughly $1.2 million in the latter half of the race to counter Abughazaleh. The former journalist also faced alleged “dark money” spending from the PAC Democracy Unmuted, which she claimed was paying influencers $1,500 to push negative rhetoric about her on social media. 

AIPAC also spent money boosting Bushra Amiwala, a progressive Muslim activist, who was seen as a potential spoiler for Abughazaleh. When the race was called, Amiwala was in sixth place and had received just over 5 percent of the vote — a share larger than the difference between Biss, at just shy of 30 percent, and Abughazaleh, slightly under 26.

AIPAC, for its part, put a positive spin on the results Tuesday night.

“While disappointed that Laura Fine did not prevail, voters rejected two anti-Israel candidates in this race,” the group posted on X. “We were especially proud to help defeat Abughazaleh.”

In his victory speech, Biss said he would fight for self-determination and justice for everyone in the Middle East and beyond. “AIPAC found out the hard way: The 9th District is not for sale,” he said in his closing remarks.

Biss also thanked J Street, which was founded as a liberal counterweight to AIPAC, for wading into the race to back him. J Street’s President, Jeremy Ben-Ami, said in a statement that the group had bundled more than $200,000 for Biss’s campaign while an affiliated super PAC spent $150,000.

“AIPAC and its affiliates poured more than $7 million into a Democratic primary to stamp out opposition to Netanyahu’s policies — using shell PACs to obscure their involvement — and the voters rejected that effort,” Ben-Ami said. “Tonight’s results should send a clear message to candidates across the country: you do not have to fear AIPAC’s spending or intimidation.”

This developing story has been updated.

The post Illinois Results: Daniel Biss Beats Kat Abughazaleh in Blow to Left and AIPAC Alike appeared first on The Intercept.

Jason Friedman, one of 18 candidates vying to replace Davis in the March Democratic primary next year, has pulled ahead of the pack in fundraising. His campaign reported donations totaling over $1.5 million in its October filing with the Federal Election Commission.

About $140,000 of that money comes from major funders of pro-Israel groups, including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee PAC and its super PAC, United Democracy Project. The two groups spent more than $100 million on elections last year and ousted two leading critics of Israel from Congress. The pro-Israel donors’ support this year is an early sign that Friedman’s race is on AIPAC’s radar.

A former Chicago real estate mogul, Friedman launched his campaign in April, before Davis announced his retirement. From 2019 to 2024, he was chair of government affairs for the Jewish United Fund, a charitable organization that promotes pro-Israel narratives, noting on its website that “Israel does not intentionally target civilians,” “Israel does not occupy Gaza,” and “There is no Israeli ‘apartheid.’” Friedman has not made Israel a part of his campaign platform, but last month, the Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, a pro-Israel PAC, held an event for its members to meet him.

AIPAC has not said publicly whether it’s backing a candidate in the race, but more than 35 of its donors have given money to Friedman’s campaign. Among them, 17 have donated to the United Democracy Project, and eight have donated to both. Together, the Friedman donors have contributed just under $2 million to AIPAC and UDP since 2021.

That includes more than $1.6 million to UDP and more than $327,000 to AIPAC, with several donors giving six or five-figure contributions to the PACs. Friedman’s donors have also given $85,500 to DMFI PAC, the political action committee for the AIPAC offshoot Democratic Majority for Israel, and another $115,000 to the pro-Israel group To Protect Our Heritage PAC, which endorsed another candidate in the race, Chicago City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin. The Conyears-Ervin campaign and To Protect Our Heritage PAC did not respond to a request for comment.

Friedman is running largely on taking on President Donald Trump on issues from health care to education and the economy. His campaign website says he supports strong unions, access to education, reducing gun violence, and job training and support. Prior to his tenure leading his family real estate empire, Friedman worked in politics under former President Bill Clinton and for Sen. Dick Durbin on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Reached by phone, the pro-Israel donor Larry Hochberg told The Intercept that he was supporting Friedman because he thought he’d be a good candidate. “I’ll leave it at that,” Hochberg said.

Related

U.S. Nonprofits Funnel Millions to Israeli Army Volunteers

A former AIPAC national director, Hochberg sits on the board of Friends of the Israel Defense Forces and co-founded the pro-Israel advocacy group ELNET, which has described itself as the AIPAC of Europe. Hochberg has given $10,000 to AIPAC, $5,000 to DMFI PAC, and just under $30,000 to To Protect Our Heritage PAC. In September, he gave $1,000 to Friedman’s campaign. Asked about his support for AIPAC and DMFI, he told The Intercept: “I don’t think I want to say any more than that.”

Former Rep. Marie Newman, a former target of pro-Israel donors who represented Illinois’s nearby 3rd District and was ousted from Congress in 2022, criticized Friedman for the influx in cash.

“If you receive money from AIPAC donors who believe in genocide and are funding genocide, then in fact, you believe in genocide,” Newman told The Intercept. She’s backing another candidate in the race, gun violence activist Kina Collins, who ran against Davis three times and came within 7 percentage points of unseating him in 2022.

Friedman is running against 17 other Democratic candidates, including Collins and Conyears-Ervin. During Collins’s third run against Davis last year, United Democracy Project spent just under half a million dollars against her. Davis, who received support from a dark-money group aligned with Democratic leaders in his 2022 race, has endorsed state Rep. La Shawn Ford to replace him. Other candidates include former Cook County Commissioner Richard Boykin, Forest Park Mayor Rory Hoskins, immigrant advocate Anabel Mendoza, organizer Anthony Driver Jr., emergency room doctor Thomas Fisher, and former antitrust attorney Reed Showalter, who has pledged not to accept money from AIPAC.

Friedman’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

The genocide in Gaza has aggravated fault lines among Democrats in Chicago. Last year, the Chicago City Council narrowly passed a resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, with Mayor Brandon Johnson casting the tie-breaking vote. As chair of government affairs for the Jewish United Fund, Friedman signed a letter to Johnson last year from the group and leaders of Chicago’s Jewish community, saying they were “appalled” at the result. Friedman’s campaign did not respond to questions about his position on U.S. military funding for Israel or the war on Gaza.

At least 17 Friedman donors have given to the United Democracy Project, with contributions totaling over $1.6 million. That includes nine people who gave six-figure contributions to UDP and seven who gave five-figures. Twenty-nine Friedman donors have given to AIPAC PAC, including eight of the same UDP donors.

Related

Even Former AIPAC Democrats Are Signing On to Block Arms Sales to Israel

Among those supporters are gaming executive Greg Carlin, who has given $255,000 to UDP and gave $3,500 to Friedman’s campaign in April; investor Tony Davis, who has given $250,000 to UDP and also gave $3,500 to Friedman’s campaign in April; and attorney Steven Lavin, who has given $125,000 to UDP and gave $7,000 to Friedman’s campaign in June. Carlin, Davis, and Lavin did not respond to a request for comment.

Attorneys Douglas Gessner and Sanford Perl, who work at Friedman’s previous law firm, Kirkland & Ellis, have given $105,000 and $100,000 to UDP. Both have also given to AIPAC PAC: Gessner over $50,000 and Perl over $44,000. Gessner gave $3,000 to Friedman’s campaign in September, and Perl gave $3,400 in April. Gessner and Perl did not respond to requests for comment.

Three other donors who have each given $1 million to UDP have given to Friedman’s campaign: Miami Beach biotech executive Jeff Aronin, Chicago marketing founder Ilan Shalit, and Jerry Bednyak, a co-founder of Vivid Seats who runs a private equity company focused on e-commerce.

“You could be the nicest person in the world,” said Newman, the former Illinois congresswoman. “But if you’re taking money from people who are supporting a far right-wing government that believes in genocide and is executing a genocide, what does that say about you?”

Friedman’s campaign coffers saw six-figure boosts on three days in June and September — vast outliers compared to most days in his first quarter. Those kinds of fundraising boosts are often associated with a blast email from a supportive political group to its network of donors, according to a Democratic strategist with knowledge of the race. AIPAC did not respond to a request for comment about whether the group had sent such an email encouraging supporters to contribute to Friedman’s campaign.

Friedman’s fundraising boost has also come largely from the finance and real estate industries, where just under a quarter of his donors work. He has also given $36,750 of his own money to his campaign.

Correction: February 17, 2026
This story previously identified Rory Hoskins as the former mayor of Forest Park, Illinois. He is currently the mayor.

The post AIPAC Donors Back Real Estate Tycoon Who Opposed Gaza Ceasefire for Deep-Blue Chicago Seat appeared first on The Intercept.

Ross, a moderate member of the House of Representatives, is the latest lawmaker to swear off the lobby amid sustained pressure and protest from voters who oppose Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. Her pledge closely follows that of fellow North Carolina Democrat Rep. Valerie Foushee, who vowed not to take money from AIPAC. Foushee was among AIPAC’s biggest recipients, having taken more than $800,000 in direct giving from AIPAC and individual donations it bundled.

“Congresswoman Ross is not currently accepting AIPAC contributions,” said a spokesperson for Ross’s office in a statement to The Intercept. She further clarified that the pledge covers AIPAC contributions throughout the 2026 cycle.

Anti-genocide organizers viewed Ross and Foushee’s anti-AIPAC pledges as evidence of a sea change within the Democratic Party.

“It is always good to hear someone is willing to have the courage of their convictions and not support organizations that they believe do not fully represent the interests of the U.S.” said Dr. Paul McAllister, a reverend and chair of the Interfaith Caucus of the North Carolina Democratic Party who has been organizing to oppose Israel’s assault on Gaza. “AIPAC uses the muscle of their resources to oust anyone who disagrees with them regarding Israel, the conduct of Israel and the atrocities that may be committed by the government of Israel — so it is good that Deborah Ross is willing to recognize and acknowledge that.”

Ross was first elected to the House in 2020 and began taking AIPAC money in 2022. She received $41,900 from AIPAC in that cycle and an additional $97,876 for her 2024 campaign, according to campaign finance records. 

Her pledge comes at a time when Democratic politics in North Carolina have been divided around the issue of Israel and Palestine. 

In late June, the North Carolina Democratic Party passed a resolution calling for a complete arms embargo on all military aid to Israel until it ends its apartheid rule of Palestinians. The resolution won by a narrow margin — 161 to 151 — and withstood pushback from the state’s centrist Jewish Democrats who argued it would direct voters’ attention to the party’s foreign policy platform, while they wanted to focus on the economy.

McAllister and a broad coalition within the North Carolina Democratic Party — which includes the party’s Arab, African American, LGBTQ, interfaith, Muslim, and progressive caucuses; the Jewish Democrats; and the NC Association of Teen Democrats — supported the resolution. 

McAllister was among five members of the coalition who met with members of Ross’s office on August 19, when her staff confirmed her anti-AIPAC pledge, McAllister told The Intercept. The group also urged her office to co-sponsor the Block the Bombs to Israel Act, a bill working its way through the House of Representatives that aims to end some weapons shipments to Israel. 

Related

Even Former AIPAC Democrats Are Signing On to Block Arms Sales to Israel

The bill, which had drawn 40 co-sponsors as of Thursday, would prohibit the Trump administration from providing Israel with specific U.S.-made weapons that the Israeli military has used in documented war crimes against Palestinians.

Ross’s spokesperson declined to comment on whether she would support the legislation.

IfNotNow, a Jewish-led progressive organization backing Block the Bombs and helping lead the Reject AIPAC coalition, praised Ross for rejecting the Israel lobby’s dollars and called on her to co-sponsor the bill.

“It’s great to see Rep. Ross join the growing number of Democrats who have previously welcomed AIPAC’s support and are now accepting the fact that aligning with right-wing billionaires only empowers fascists like Netanyahu and Trump,” said Lauren Maunus, the political director for IfNotNow. “Now, we look forward to her signing on to the Block the Bombs Act.”

Foushee is co-sponsoring the bill, as are at least two other lawmakers who previously received AIPAC money: Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, who received $46,000 from AIPAC in 2022, and Rep. Jonathan Jackson, D-Ill., who took $15,000 in 2022 and 2024. 

At least three other representatives who are also AIPAC recipients have made statements in support of blocking arms to Israel in recent weeks, but have yet to sign on to the Block the Bombs bill. That list now includes Oregon Democrats Maxine Dexter and Suzanne Bonamici and, most recently, Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, a leading moderate Democrat in Congress and ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Related

“A Purely Manmade Famine”: How Israel Is Starving Gaza

On Tuesday, Smith said he supported blocking “the sale of some weapons now” to Israel to compel the country to enact a ceasefire, allow a flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and halt its expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank. 

Smith has received more than $700,000 in contributions from AIPAC since 2022, including $46,900 in 2025, finance records said.

After decades of lobbying on the Hill, AIPAC, which includes Republican billionaires within its donor stream, began directly funding congressional elections in 2021. It spent millions last cycle unseating Democrats who have been critical of Israel, most notably progressive former lawmakers Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York and Rep. Cori Bush of Missouri. 

Correction: Aug. 29, 2025, 12:16 p.m. ET

This story has been updated to remove a reference to IfNotNow as an anti-Zionist organization after a spokesperson clarified that the group does not identify with the term.

The post Facing Voter Pressure, Swing-State Democrat Swears Off AIPAC Cash appeared first on The Intercept.

Members of a resolutions committee meeting in New Orleans rejected one symbolic resolution that would have condemned AIPAC’s role in party primaries and tabled a pair of resolutions that called for conditioning military aid to Israel.

Polls show that Democratic Party members are increasingly skeptical of Israel and supportive of Palestinians — a shift that hasn’t been reflected in the party’s official position.

Related

The Democrats Don’t Know Who They’ll Be in 2028. Michigan May Offer an Answer.

Instead, party leaders rejected the AIPAC resolution and referred the hot-button issue of arms transfers to Israel to a task force created by DNC Chair Ken Martin, which has yet to produce concrete results since it was created in August.

Allison Minnerly, the DNC member from Florida who sponsored the AIPAC resolution, said the votes exposed serious shortcomings on the part of leadership.

“It says that the Democratic Party just isn’t willing to have a hard conversation, isn’t willing to stand up, and just misses the mark when voters need it the most,” she said. “It is an embarrassing display of cowardice.”

The DNC member chairing the meeting, Ron Harris, said the arms transfers resolutions would be better handled by the task force, whose work he defended.

“Just for the record, this isn’t one of those things where you kick it down the line, and a committee where things go to die. These are people working really hard over a very thorny issue, and taking the time that it takes,” he said.

The proposals before the DNC committee on Thursday once again put party leaders in the hot spot after an earlier resolution from Minnerly last August called for a ban on arms sales to Israel.

Minnerly’s latest resolution highlighted the millions of dollars AIPAC spent to influence recent Democratic primaries in Illinois before reaffirming the party’s commitment to “reducing the role of corporate money and large-scale outside spending in Democratic primaries and general elections.”

Related

AIPAC Is Retreating From Endorsements and Election Spending. It Won’t Give Up Its Influence.

AIPAC in recent years has dumped tens of millions of dollars into Democratic primaries via a super PAC called the United Democracy Fund. It has taken an increasingly aggressive stance against anyone who questions U.S. support for Israel — including one pro-Israel congressional candidate who said he was open to conditioning military aid on respect for human rights.

The group’s heavy-handed role in recent Illinois campaigns drew fire from Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss, who blasted AIPAC when he won the Democratic Party primary for the 9th Congressional District.

In response to the growing backlash, AIPAC’s supporters have called its critics “antisemitic,” a charge echoed during the Thursday meeting when one member said that to single out AIPAC would be to “pick on the Jews.”

Separately, another resolution called for pausing weapons transfers to Israeli military units accused of human rights violations and recognizing Palestinian statehood, and a third called for conditioning military aid to Israel in compliance with international law in light of the U.S.–Israeli war on Iran.

Those resolutions were referred to the task force.

The post DNC Shoots Down Resolutions Calling Out AIPAC and Limiting Arms to Israel appeared first on The Intercept.

The national progressive outfit Justice Democrats and the Peace, Accountability, and Leadership PAC, a new group that launched Wednesday to support candidates advocating for Palestine in the upcoming midterms, are endorsing activist Kat Abughazaleh for Congress in Illinois’s 9th District. 

The endorsement comes as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee has made its biggest investment so far this cycle in electing pro-Israel Democrats in and around deep-blue Chicago, which is home to one of the nation’s largest populations of Palestinian residents. 

Abughazaleh is one of over a dozen candidates running in the Democratic primary to replace retiring Rep. Jan Schakowsky. Also running are state Sen. Laura Fine, Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss, local school board member and activist Bushra Amiwala, former hostage negotiator and agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation Phil Andrew, and state Rep. Hoan Huynh. 

Related

AIPAC Strategy Backfires as Progressive Underdog Wins Key House Race in New Jersey

Schakowsky was a longtime recipient of support from J Street, a moderate pro-Israel group, and AIPAC appears to view the race as an opportunity to replace her with a more hardline supporter of Israel. The pro-Israel lobby has already taken one opportunity to go after a centrist who strayed from its party line, when it ran attack ads against former New Jersey Democratic Rep. Tom Malinowski — a strategy that appeared to backfire and ultimately help get the progressive in the race elected.

Now, pro-Palestine groups see an opening in Chicago amid mounting public criticism of the pro-Israel lobby.

Both groups said the endorsement was a reflection of a historic level of public support for Palestinian human rights and cutting U.S. funding to Israel. Abughazaleh is the 12th candidate Justice Democrats has endorsed this cycle as it looks to more aggressively counter the pro-Israel lobby and come back from major losses in 2024.

Abughazaleh told The Intercept she’s running to hold Democrats to a higher standard.

Related

Kat Abughazaleh on the Right to Protest

“There’s been this idea of ‘vote blue no matter who’ for a long time that has gotten us to the moment that we’re in, because we haven’t held our party accountable,” she said. She added that she was the first candidate to launch her campaign in the race before Schakowsky announced her retirement. 

“I didn’t wait in line or ask for permission,” Abughazaleh said. “I think a big part of that is because I felt a sense of urgency that many establishment politicians just don’t because they’re not facing the consequences that we are.”

“Kat has spent her career doing what so many voters are desperate to see the Democratic Party do right now: fight back against Republican extremism and fight for everyday people,” Justice Democrats spokesperson Usamah Andrabi said in a statement to The Intercept. “At a time when so many career politicians in the Party have to be convinced to condemn genocide, we are proud to support a first-time candidate with the moral clarity to oppose bottomless budgets for Israel’s ethnic cleansing, abolish ICE and fight for every person to afford the life they deserve.”

While AIPAC hasn’t officially endorsed in the race, its donors have made their pick clear. AIPAC donors have flooded Fine’s campaign and sent fundraising emails on her behalf. AIPAC is also reportedly behind just under half a million dollars in ads launched last week for Fine by the Super PAC Elect Chicago Women. Fine has distanced herself from AIPAC and said she isn’t seeking its support — despite fundraising with AIPAC’s board president.

Related

AIPAC Head Hosts Fundraiser for House Candidate Who Swears AIPAC Isn’t Backing Her

Abughazaleh, a Palestinian American activist, has made her criticism of the genocide in Gaza and U.S. military support for Israel a central piece of her campaign. She’s also facing a federal indictment on felony conspiracy charges stemming from protest actions against Immigration and Customs Enforcement. She turned her congressional office into a mutual aid hub and is running on Medicare for All, fixing the affordable housing crisis, and fighting authoritarianism. 

“AIPAC is so toxic that they have been doing everything they can to pretend that they are not in our race when they very clearly are,” Abughazaleh said. She said voters “understand the stakes, and they’re sick of their tax dollars being used to commit crimes against humanity.”

Abughazaleh said she’s the only one of the top three Democratic candidates — counting herself, Fine, and Biss — who’s never met with AIPAC. Biss previously met with local AIPAC representatives, but he said he did not share the group’s “hardline views” and had never sought their support. 

Both Abughazaleh and Biss have been vocal in criticizing AIPAC’s efforts to boost their opponent, Fine. During a candidate forum last week, Biss directly criticized Fine’s support from AIPAC donors and said voters should be troubled by her support for unconditional U.S. military aid.

“That is deeply problematic,” Biss said. “That is a right-wing policy that is bad for Palestinians, Jews, Israelis, America, and the world.”

Meanwhile, United Democracy Project and AIPAC are spreading their resources around the state. UDP is also reportedly backing ads from a PAC that calls itself Affordable Chicago Now!, which is teaming up with Elect Chicago Women to back Fine, Melissa Bean in the 8th District, and Donna Miller in the 2nd District.

UDP is also planning to spend close to $3 million backing Chicago City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin in the 7th District and bought its first $500,000 in ads for her on Tuesday. The move by the pro-Israel lobby has raised talk about what AIPAC donors who originally backed another candidate, real estate mogul Jason Friedman, will do now. 

The post AIPAC Is Flooding Illinois With Cash. Pro-Palestine Groups Are Backing Kat Abughazaleh. appeared first on The Intercept.

The European Leadership Network, or ELNET, takes elected officials on networking trips to Israel, hosts events with members of European parliaments, and lobbies on foreign policy issues — much like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee operates in the U.S. Its co-founder, Raanan Eliaz, is a former AIPAC consultant and alumnus of the Israeli prime minister’s office. The group credits itself for key pro-Israel foreign policy decisions, including getting Germany to approve a $3.5 billion deal to purchase Israeli drones and rockets, the largest in Israel’s history. Since the October 7 attacks in Israel — and amid two years of genocide in Gaza — ELNET has broken fundraising records.

Funding ELNET’s work are more than 100 U.S. foundations, nonprofits, trusts, and charitable giving organizations that have poured at least $11 million into the group’s U.S. arm since 2022, an analysis by The Intercept found. This is the first major analysis of how U.S. donors are fueling the pro-Israel machine in Europe, exporting the same tactics that have for years helped AIPAC crush concern for Palestinians in the halls of power and advance unchecked support for Israel.

ELNET is smaller than AIPAC, but it operates in a smaller market, feeding a steady stream of pro-Israel material to European parliamentarians. While the U.S. gives more financial and military support to Israel than any country in the world, the European Union is Israel’s biggest trading partner — and holds critical sway over whether global political consensus stays on Israel’s side. Amid public outcry and cracks in European support over Israel’s genocide in Gaza, ELNET sees its work as more essential than ever.

“ELNET states clearly that their role is to legitimize and deepen economic ties with Israel, at a time when international law tells us we should be sanctioning Israel and sever trade ties,” said European Parliament member Lynn Boylan, an Irish representative from the Sinn Féin party. “As an EU lawmaker, I am very concerned that U.S. groups are seemingly successfully able to determine EU policy on Israel.”

Friends of ELNET, the group’s U.S. nonprofit arm, transfers almost all of its revenue to ELNET’s chapters around the globe. It raised more than $9.1 million in 2023, the last year for which its tax forms are publicly available, up from $7 million in 2022 and more than double its revenue from 2018.

The U.S. arm is chaired by Larry Hochberg, a Chicago philanthropist and former AIPAC national director who sits on the board of the nonprofit group Friends of the Israel Defense Forces. Its president is David Siegel, previously an Israeli diplomat, an AIPAC legislative writer, and an IDF officer. ELNET’s U.S. board members include donors who have given more than $170,000 to AIPAC; its super PAC, United Democracy Project; and the related pro-Israel group DMFI PAC since 2021. One of those board members, Jerry Rosenberg, is a member of AIPAC’s exclusive major-donor Minyan Club, according to his ELNET bio. European media have also reported on a handful of ELNET donors who have also supported President Donald Trump.

Top U.S. donors to Friends of ELNET include the William Davidson Foundation, founded by the late Michigan businessman, which has given $800,000 to the group since 2022; the Newton and Rochelle Becker Charitable Trust, founded by the couple to work toward “ensuring the future of the Jewish people and the State of Israel,” which gave just under half a million dollars in 2023; and the Ocean State Job Lot Charitable Foundation, the philanthropic arm of the northeastern chain of discount retail stores, which gave $445,000 in 2022. Representatives for the foundations did not respond to requests for comment.

Other major donors include the Joseph and Bessie Feinberg Foundation, the family foundation for ELNET U.S. board member Joseph Feinberg; the National Philanthropic Trust; and the Diane and Guilford Glazer Foundation, each of which have given $675,000, $560,000, and $430,000 respectively since 2022. Jewish Federations in Palm Beach, Miami, Chicago, Atlanta, and San Francisco have given $443,000 altogether since 2022.

Those dollars have powered ELNET in its advocacy to transfer two drones to the IDF, cut off funding to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, and push a EU resolution affirming Israel’s right to self-defense and calling for the eradication of Hamas.

Boylan, who chairs the European Parliament Delegation for relations with Palestine, told The Intercept that she was alarmed by the role U.S. donors are playing in lobbying European governments to back Israel.

“While it is not surprising that U.S. donors are funneling millions to influence EU policy on Israel, this demonstrates just how much European institutions are out of touch with their own citizens on the genocide in Gaza,” Boylan said.

“As more U.S. politicians refuse to accept money from warmongering groups like AIPAC, U.S donors appear to be increasingly sending more donations abroad in an attempt to curry support for the Israeli military across Europe,” said Beth Miller, political director for Jewish Voice for Peace Action. “It’s shameful that so many here in the U.S. play a key role in the ongoing apartheid and genocide against Palestinians.”

Many of the U.S. institutions directed funds to Friends of ELNET through donor-advised funds, or DAFs, which let donors make tax-exempt contributions through an intermediary and give them the choice to remain anonymous. DAFs aren’t allowed to contribute to lobbying efforts, but there are many ways around that prohibition, said Bella DeVaan, associate director of the charity reform initiative at the progressive think tank Institute for Policy Studies.

“It’s a way to rinse your name off of any kind of donation that could be perceived as controversial or something that you just want to keep anonymous publicly,” DeVaan said. DAFs also confer significant benefits for donors looking to reduce their tax burden.

The National Philanthropic Trust, the Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego, and the Jewish Federation of Atlanta all directed money to ELNET through DAFs. That’s not uncommon: A July report from the Institute for Policy Studies found that donors disproportionately use DAFs more than other funding sources for political giving.

“When you involve the sort of shell-game capacity of DAFs, it can become really difficult to trace direct impact,” DeVaan said. “That can really manifest in a lot of political consequences that I think the average taxpayer would not like to know that they’re subsidizing, because of the tax breaks that charitable givers get for their gifts.”

DeVaan said it was concerning that donors are using DAFs to support international lobbying efforts. Critics of Israel’s genocide in Gaza have called on institutions to clarify ethical guidelines around DAF distributions amid concerns about funding groups linked to the Israeli military. Pro-Israel advocates have also criticized DAF distributions to Palestine solidarity groups.

“No matter what kind of lobbying it is, at home or abroad, these implications are really concerning. For every gift an ultra-rich person gives to charity, the average taxpayer is chipping in an estimated 74 cents on the dollar,” said DeVaan. “Do we want to give people a tax break to amplify their influence around the world? I don’t think most people would agree with that.”

Related

How Does AIPAC Shape Washington? We Tracked Every Dollar.

Many of the same groups funneling money to ELNET’s U.S. nonprofit arm have also given to other pro-Israel organizations. Six foundations that have given more than $570,000 to Friends of ELNET since 2022 have given $344,800 to AIPAC over the same period. Donors to Friends of ELNET have also given more than $37.8 million to AIPAC’s educational arm, the American Israel Education Foundation, which sponsors trips to Israel for members of Congress. Michael Leffell, an investment firm founder and AIPAC donor whose foundation gave $50,000 to Friends of ELNET in 2017, has given $1.5 million to United Democracy Project since 2022. More than 50 ELNET donors have given $11.6 million to the Central Fund of Israel and $8.9 million to the Jewish National Fund since 2022 — both of which fund Israeli settler groups in the West Bank, where settlers have ramped up attacks on Palestinians since the October 7 attacks.

Friends of ELNET did not respond to a request for comment.

Thousands of Europeans protest each week to pressure their officials to stop the genocide in Gaza. “Their concerns are ignored in favour of organisations specifically established to defend Israel at all costs,” said Boylan.

“Aligning With the U.S. in Support of Israel”

After October 7, ELNET set to work arranging screenings of the attacks in European parliaments and embarking on a campaign that would rapidly elevate the group’s profile in the next two years. The group has arranged meetings between members and families of Israeli hostages, taken some 300 policymakers and opinion leaders on trips to Israel, and celebrated what it describes as its successful influence on European policy.

“Europe aligning with the U.S. in support of Israel is a monumental achievement and a reflection of ELNET’s critical work,” the group wrote in an October 2023 fundraising appeal to support “emergency solidarity missions” to Israel from European countries including France, Germany, the U.K., and Italy. “ELNET’s priority is to ensure that the unprecedented European military and diplomatic support for Israel remains strong for the duration of the war until Hamas is eradicated.”

Among its accomplishments since October 7, ELNET has pointed to its work to get European countries to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, which defines criticisms of Israel as antisemitic, push European states to crack down on pro-Palestine protesters and ban certain protests, and secure the historic defense deal between Israel and Germany.

In its latest annual report from 2023, ELNET highlighted its work to pass the defense deal for Germany to purchase the Arrow 3 missile defense system, developed by Israel and the U.S. “ELNET arranged for German political leaders and officials to meet with Israeli officials and thus advance the requisite research and dialogue to consummate this historic deal,” the group wrote.

Eleven days after the October 7 attacks, ELNET brought a group of survivors to speak to members of the European Parliament, a lawmaking body for the EU. The next day, the European Parliament passed a resolution that called for a “humanitarian pause” in Gaza and for Hamas to be “eliminated.”

“Each ELNET office served as a conduit of factual and credible information to parliamentarians and policymakers across Europe by providing firsthand information about what happened on October 7,” the report read. “The day after ELNET brought Israeli survivors to speak at the European Parliament, an unprecedented resolution was passed backing Israel’s right to self-defense and calling for the elimination of Hamas.”

The group boasts a network of thousands of European and Israeli officials in its orbit and has chapters around the world including the U.K., Germany, France, Italy, and offices for Central and Eastern Europe and the EU & NATO. Friends of ELNET sends millions to ELNET’s global chapters each year — climbing from $2.4 million in 2020 to more than $6 million in 2023.

Varying financial reporting requirements across Europe make it difficult to account completely for ELNET’s global financial portfolio. Friends of ELNET conducts much of the fundraising for the group’s global chapters, but it’s not clear how much funding those chapters raise on their own. ELNET Germany recently announced it was launching its own Friends of ELNET Germany chapter. A 2023 filing with the transparency body for the EU lists Friends of ELNET as the only source of funding for ELNET’s chapter registered in Brussels. ELNET’s chapters for the EU & NATO and Germany did not respond to requests for comment.

Speaking to The Intercept, Boylan raised concerns about ELNET’s work to expand Israel’s arms industry ties to the Israeli military.

“It is also concerning that an organization who holds ‘strategic dialogues’ chaired by individuals formerly in IDF leadership positions are allowed to have any role in determining EU policy,” Boylan said, referring to former chairs of an ELNET forum that organizes “high-level strategic dialogues” between Europe and Israel. She said she would follow up with the European Commission, the executive branch of the European Parliament, about U.S. donors backing ELNET’s work pushing pro-Israel policies in Europe.

Related

EU Leader Calls to Sanction Israel as U.S. Progressives Push to End Arms Sales

Critics and journalists have also raised questions about how much money ELNET has received from the Israeli government, which reimbursed ELNET for a lobbying event last month at the French Parliament, the French outlet Mediapart reported. Elnet’s leadership and board members also have ties to the Israeli government and include two former advisers to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Before Friends of ELNET launched in 2012, ELNET received funding from the pro-Israel advocacy group StandWithUs, which has long been active in policing criticism of Israel on college campuses. StandWithUs transferred just under $1 million in assets to Friends of ELNET to launch the nonprofit in 2012.

While ELNET leaders have pointed to AIPAC as a model, Eliaz, Elnet’s co-founder, envisioned something with a much lower profile that didn’t carry strings attached to well-known U.S. donors. Since he left the group in 2017, ELNET’s U.S. support has almost doubled.

ELNET’s policy goals from its last annual report include continuing to expand the IHRA definition of antisemitism, working to “counter Israel’s delegitimization at the UN,” opposing the International Criminal Court investigation of Israel, and continuing its campaign against UNRWA, which Israel shut down in January.

“Judeo-Christian Civilization”

ELNET’s communications signal that it’s looking for ways to exploit a growing rift between the U.S. and Europe under Trump to Israel’s advantage, including seizing on the wave of anti-immigrant political parties in Europe.

In a February newsletter, a truncated version of which was posted to the Times of Israel as a blog, ELNET-Israel CEO Emmanuel Navon, previously a senior fellow at a right-wing Israeli think tank, wrote that a “widening gap” between the U.S. and Europe on Israel made ELNET’s job harder. But it wasn’t all bad news: The tension also afforded a new “diplomatic opportunity for Israel in Europe” amid the rise of “European parties with Trumpian sympathies and pro-Israel credentials.” Navon stepped down as ELNET-Israel CEO in March, but he still works closely with the group and supports Elnet’s work in France. He did not respond to a request for comment.

In his newsletter, Navon referenced a February speech by Vice President JD Vance to the Munich Security Conference in which the latter lambasted European leaders on issues from free speech to migration.

“As a non-partisan and apolitical NGO, ELNET cannot and must not take a public stance on government policies. But it should be aware of the current Zeitgeist and of its potential for Israel’s relations with Europe,” Navon wrote, including expanding markets for Israel’s defense industry. Then, he quoted Vance, who had asked: “What is the positive vision that animates this shared security compact that we all believe is so important?”

“This is a question to which Israel has a clear answer,” Navon wrote. “The core values of the Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian civilization, of which Israel is a pillar. It turns out that more and more European voters agree with that answer.”

The production of this investigation was supported by a grant from the Investigative Journalism for Europe (IJ4EU) fund.

The post Meet the U.S. Donors Funding ELNET, the AIPAC of Europe appeared first on The Intercept.

A survey sent earlier this month to people living in Pittsburgh and its suburbs asked for respondents’ opinion on two possible candidates to challenge Lee. The survey included a question on people’s opinions about the candidates being backed by “a right-wing organization that supports Trump and is funded by MAGA millionaires and billionaires.”

The survey question appears set up to test whether voters would oppose one of the candidates because of backing from groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee — which is funded by billionaire donors to Donald Trump and, in 2020, endorsed more than 100 Republican members of Congress who voted to overturn the results of that year’s presidential election.

Related

How Does AIPAC Shape Washington? We Tracked Every Dollar.

The wording was identical to another survey sent in May to constituents in the district of Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., The Intercept reported. That survey was the first this year to indicate that AIPAC was considering a primary challenge against Omar.

With the latest poll, it appears that AIPAC and possibly other pro-Israel groups are setting their sights on another challenge against Lee.

“As usual, AIPAC sees the Democratic electorate begging for more progressive leadership that takes on the corporate elite, and they are desperate to force corporate shills down our throats instead,” said Usamah Andrabi, the communications director for Justice Democrats, a group backing Lee. (AIPAC did not respond to a request for comment.)

The survey in Lee’s district also said both potential candidates, Pittsburgh City Controller Rachael Heisler and former Pennsylvania Auditor General Eugene DePasquale, were backed by “pro-Israel groups that lobby Congress to provide billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars in aid and weapons to Israel each year.”

Lee and Omar are two of a handful of progressive members of Congress who have drawn the ire of AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups for calling to end U.S. military funding to Israel and criticizing Israel’s genocide in Gaza. AIPAC spent more than $100 million on primaries last cycle, including more than $25 million to unseat Reps. Cori Bush, D-Mo., and Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y.

Lee, Omar, and other progressives have also been vocal critics of AIPAC. Lee introduced a bill earlier this year to ban super PACs like AIPAC’s United Democracy Project, which spent millions of dollars against her when she first ran for Congress in 2022.

Lee won reelection last year against another Republican-backed pro-Israel primary challenger. In that race, The Intercept reported. AIPAC tried and failed to recruit two candidates to run against her.

“Every cycle, corporate lobbies, special interest groups and Trump megadonors look to buy this Congressional seat,” Lee said in a statement. “My constituents want leaders who fight for their interests against the wealthy & well-connected, not politicians that can be bought with a corporate PAC check.”

The survey asked a series of questions about positions taken by candidates that aligned more closely with Republicans than liberal Democrats.

“It’s no mistake that they’re polling the viability of candidates that evidently oppose the Affordable Care Act, Medicare for All, same-sex marriage, the Green New Deal, abortion rights, Medicare, and Social Security,” said Andrabi. “AIPAC’s favorite type of Democrat is one you can most easily mistake for a Republican and most easily buy with a few bucks from Donald Trump’s donors.”

Testing Candidates’ Positions

The survey in Pittsburgh asked people to rate their level of concern in response to pro-Israel groups supporting both Heisler and DePasquale, and whether they would support either candidate in a Democratic primary election against Lee.

“Rachael Heisler is supported by pro-Israel groups that lobby Congress to provide billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars in aid and weapons to Israel each year,” the survey said. “Please indicate whether it raises very serious concerns, serious concerns, minor concerns, or no real concerns for you about Rachael Heisler.” The survey posed the same question about DePasquale.

The poll also asked respondents to rate their level of concern about potential criticisms of Lee, DePasquale, and Heisler. Criticisms of Lee included her vote against former President Joe Biden’s debt deal, her support for the Uncommitted movement in 2024, and the claim that “Lee is more interested in dividing Democrats” than fighting Trump’s agenda.

“Summer Lee is too extreme,” read another prompt. “She has long associated herself with the Democratic Socialists of America which supports defunding the police, eliminating prisons and releasing all criminals, opening our borders, getting rid of individually-owned cars, abolishing U-S-A-I-D, and withdrawing from NATO. Summer Lee’s radical positions do not reflect our community.” (Lee is no longer a member of DSA.)

Respondents were asked to rate their concerns about the statement.

In a section asking about possible criticism of DePasquale, the survey asked respondents how they felt about him taking corporate PAC money and opposing progressive policy efforts like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal.

“While progressive Democrats have called for getting corporate money out of politics, Eugene DePasquale has taken tens of thousands of dollars from corporate PACs, including from major corporations like AT&T, Comcast, Pfizer and PNC Bank,” the survey said.

It added that DePasquale “calls himself a progressive” but opposed Medicare for All, rejected the Green New Deal, opposed same sex marriage, praised parts of Trump’s agenda, and supported expanding the state’s natural gas industry. (DePasquale did not respond to a request for comment.)

DePasquale has supported gay marriage publicly since at least 2012. In 2020, He said he did not support the Green New Deal or Medicare for All, and favored a public option and improvements to the Affordable Care Act. On the environment, DePasquale has a mixed record. During a race for Pennsylvania attorney general and as state auditor, he came down on the side with energy interests and climate activists, respectively.

Posing potential criticisms of Heisler, the survey asked respondents how concerned they were about the claim that Heisler had “a record of standing with the wealthy and powerful” and worked with groups advancing policies to benefit billionaires, including gutting Social Security and Medicare.

The survey also asked respondents how they felt about Heisler donating to the 2018 campaign of anti-abortion Democrat Dan Lipinski in Illinois. It also asked them to rate their concerns about Heisler working for former Rep. Jason Altmire, a Pennsylvania Democrat who voted against the ACA in 2010. (Heisler did not respond to a request for comment.)

Israel in Pennsylvania

Respondents were also asked to rate their opinion of other officials and groups including Altmire; Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.; Democratic Socialists of America; Allegheny County Executive Sara Innamorato; Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro; and Sen. John Fetterman.

Both Heisler and DePasquale have expressed support for Israel and efforts by pro-Israel groups to influence policy in Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania. DePasquale was endorsed last year by two groups that also backed Lee’s primary challenger, Bhavini Patel.

Earlier this year, Heisler fought a referendum petition organized by anti-genocide activists to push Pittsburgh to divest from governments engaged in genocide — namely Israel. (Not On Our Dime did not respond to a request for comment.)

Last year, Heisler went on a $15,000 trip paid for by AIPAC’s educational arm, which it uses to send politicians to Israel, a typical step in the group’s efforts to recruit a candidate. George Latimer, the AIPAC-funded candidate who unseated Bowman, the New York representative, took a trip to Israel shortly before he announced his primary challenge.

“My constituents want leaders who fight for their interests against the wealthy and well-connected, not politicians that can be bought with a corporate PAC check,” Lee said. “They can keep polling and we’re going to keep fighting back against the Trump administration to protect and deliver for our constituents.”

The post Is AIPAC Testing the Waters to Primary Rep. Summer Lee? appeared first on The Intercept.

The Block the Bombs to Israel Act would prohibit the Trump administration from providing Israel with specific U.S.-made weapons that the Israeli military has used in documented war crimes against Palestinians. As the 2026 midterm elections near, the bill’s backers are seeking to frame it as a litmus test for Democratic voters, who have long expressed support for such restrictions.

Rep. Valerie Foushee, D-N.C., who was first elected to the House in 2022 while riding more than $800,00 in campaign donations from AIPAC, signed on to the bill on August 6. The next day, she pledged her campaign would not take AIPAC money during the 2026 midterms, as first reported by Indy Week.

Other AIPAC recipients who are co-sponsoring the bill include Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, who received $46,000 from AIPAC in 2022 and Rep. Jonathan Jackson, D-Ill., who took $15,000 in 2022 and 2024, according to campaign finance data. 

During a town hall meeting held at a high school gym in her district in El Paso on Saturday, Escobar acknowledged that she had taken AIPAC money “early on” but said she no longer accepts the lobbying group’s donations. 

Related

How Does AIPAC Shape Washington? We Tracked Every Dollar.

“I had AIPAC support early on in my elected life — I do not receive AIPAC support, it’s been years,” she said when an attendee drew applause asking her about her ties to AIPAC and what she is doing to halt the genocide in Gaza. She pointed out that she was among the first co-sponsors of the Block the Bombs bill. 

The bill’s lead sponsor, Democratic Rep. Delia Ramirez of Illinois, praised her colleagues for supporting the bill and expressed hope that their stances signaled a loosening of AIPAC’s powerful grip on the Democratic Party in Congress. 

“I think it’s incredibly courageous and I think so much of the leadership of folks like Val and Veronica to say, ‘Look, you may have given money to my campaign, but I am taking a stance that is correct, and the stance as a leader and representative I must take, and the stance my constituents call on me to take,” said Ramirez, who was elected in 2022 and has not taken AIPAC funding.

The shift is likely to be politically expedient for many Democrats: A poll from January showed that a third of voters who cast ballots for Joe Biden in 2020 but not for Kamala Harris in 2024 said “ending Israel’s violence in Gaza” was the main issue deciding their vote. 

The Block the Bombs bill had 12 co-sponsors when it was rolled out in June, including the band of progressives known as the Squad and some prominent Jewish lawmakers, like Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill. It has since swelled to 37, with four representatives signing on on Friday, including ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., and Rep. Robin Kelly, D-Ill., who is running for Senate to fill outgoing Democratic Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin’s seat.

Related

Trying to Block Arms to Israel, Bernie Sanders Denounces AIPAC’s Massive Election Spending

Most of the recent momentum behind the bill coincided with Congress’s summer recess, when lawmakers leave D.C. and return to their home districts. It’s at home where lawmakers have felt the most pressure from their constituents around Israel’s war in Gaza, said Beth Miller, political director of Jewish Voice for Peace Action, one of the groups backing Block the Bombs. She pointed to a pair of votes Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., forced on two resolutions to block some weapons transfers to Israel. Both failed — blocking military aid to Israel is still far from a mainstream position in D.C. — but, with margins of 27-70 and 24-73, still drew record-high Democratic support.

“When senators went home, if they voted the wrong way, they were getting angry outreach from their constituents about ‘Why would you have tried to continue sending bombs to Israel?’” Miller said. 

She also noted the frosty reception Rep. Wesley Bell received last week at a St. Louis, Missouri, town hall, where Bell’s constituents grilled him over his support for Israel and relationship with AIPAC. St. Louis Magazine reported that protesters yelled “Wesley Bell loves killing children,” and “Wesley Bell loves bombs and rockets.” The town hall ended with security guards and police officers forcing attendees out of the building, and video of the incident showed a security guard grabbing an attendee by their hair and other officers tackling people to the ground.

Bell was elected to the House last year, when he unseated incumbent Israel critic Rep. Cori Bush in an election heavily influenced by AIPAC. The group poured $8 million into Bell’s campaign, on top of contributions from the Democratic Majority for Israel PAC.

In late July, as images of starving Palestinian children in Gaza circulated in the mainstream news, Bell made a statement uncharacteristically critical statement of Israel. “I’ve always supported Israel’s right to exist and defend itself,” he wrote on social media. “But supporting this government’s actions—allowing children to starve and firing on civilians seeking food—is something I can’t stand by. This isn’t self-defense. It must stop.”

Yet at his town hall, Bell defended AIPAC, dismissing criticism against them as “propaganda.” He likened the conservative pro-Israel lobby to interest groups focused on reproductive rights or clean energy and said that “everyone should be able to participate” in the electoral process. 

Bell did not respond to The Intercept’s request for comment.

Block the Bombs has also faced some criticism from voters who stand for Palestinian human rights and liberation. During a town hall in San Diego, Jacobs’s constituents pressed her over why the bill only focuses on cutting off offensive weapons, which leaves out so-called “defensive” systems like the Iron Dome. Jacobs, for her part, said she still supports the transfer of weapons that arm Israel’s missile defense systems.

Asked to respond to the criticism, Ramirez said she had aimed to craft language that would hold Israel accountable for its atrocities but also appeal to a broader base within the party. She and her bill’s coalition of backers, including Iman Abid-Thompson of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, said the bill is only one tool for achieving their ultimate goal: an end to all U.S. military support and complicity with Israel’s apartheid and genocide of Palestinians.  

“The pro-Israel lobbying institution is being dismantled a bit at a time — it’s not as powerful as it once was,” said Abid-Thompson. “I think that’s clear especially in the fact that those who have taken these pro-Israel dollars are actually taking on pro-Palestinian stances that they haven’t taken on before. And I think that’s because people are afraid.”

At least four other representatives — Oregon Democrats Maxine Dexter and Suzanne Bonamici, both AIPAC recipients, as well as Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico and John Garamendi of California — have made statements in support of blocking arms to Israel in recent weeks, but have yet to sign on to the Block the Bombs bill.

Ramirez said her office is also trying to court the support of the pro-Israel lobbying group J Street, which was founded in 2008 as a more progressive counterweight to AIPAC. J Street has received considerable criticism, including from its own staffers, over its support for pro-war resolutions in Congress that left out consideration for Palestinian human rights. Even so, the Jewish-led lobby group, which advocates for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine, threw its weight behind Sanders’s recent resolutions blocking some weapons to Israel.

J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami said that when moderate groups like his join with constituents and progressive coalitions, it can provide cover for politicians to vote in favor of limiting arms to Israel despite getting support from AIPAC. 

“You can see a whole host of members of the House who did in fact get significant support from AIPAC in the last two elections who are beginning to take much more principled positions now,” Ben-Ami said. 

Ben-Ami declined to comment on why the organization hasn’t signed on to Ramirez’s bill, despite its similarities to Sanders’s joint resolutions.

Lauren Maunus, the political director for IfNotNow, another group backing the bill and encouraging lawmakers to reject AIPAC money, said blocking arms sales is becoming an animating issue as the Democratic Party attempts to shore up support from its disillusioned base.

“In the 2024 cycle, it was first, do you support a ceasefire, then an arms embargo, and now we actually have a legislative vehicle that’s stronger than just the notion of an arms embargo,” Maunus said. “Block the Bombs is very evidently becoming the litmus test for the 2026 midterm.”

AIPAC, of course, will also get involved in the midterms, and it remains to be seen where the Trump-aligned and billionaire-backed lobby will spend its resources in 2026.

The obvious targets include members of the Squad like Reps. Ilhan Omar and Summer Lee, both longtime advocates for Palestinians and co-sponsors of Block the Bombs. AIPAC appears to be testing the waters in their respective districts for possibly running its own candidates.

Because of AIPAC’s massive spending capabilities, Maunus said, some Democratic lawmakers may agree with their base on the issue of Gaza but remain fearful of “punching first” at AIPAC.

“What it takes to beat their money, or what it takes to beat any right-wing-billionaire-backed money is a massive turnout,” Maunus said. “And to win massive turnout, you actually need to like fight for things and not just be running a middle-of-the-ground, tepid, scared campaign.”

The post Even Former AIPAC Democrats Are Signing On to Block Arms Sales to Israel appeared first on The Intercept.

The poll, sent earlier this month, first ran through the kinds of questions typical for a campaign testing the waters. The survey started by posing positive and negative questions about Omar and Ryan Winkler, a Democrat and former Minnesota state representative, on run-of-the-mill political grounds: how would voters rate Omar’s job performance based on her voting record on affordable housing and healthcare, or Winkler’s record on minimum wage and private prison legislation?

Then the poll tipped its hand. In a series of questions about “statements critics might make about Ilhan Omar,” the survey described Omar as “one of the most anti-Israel members of Congress,” cited her voting record against a resolution that condemned the October 7 attacks without mentioning Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians, and outlined her opposition to arms sales to Israel, then asked respondents to indicate how concerned this information makes them feel.

Then it asked respondents whether Winkler being backed by “a right-wing, pro-Israel group that is funded by Trump-supporting billionaires and has endorsed dozens of Republican members of Congress who support Trump and his MAGA agenda” raises any concerns. 

Screenshots of the survey viewed by the Intercept showed no clear indication of who paid for the poll. Political operators familiar with AIPAC tacitcs, however, see the poll as a sign that AIPAC is laying the groundwork for challenging Omar in the midterm elections next year.

The group typically tests the waters by fielding polls before they commit to a race. By asking voters how they feel about Winkler even after getting the negative message that he is backed by a “right-wing, pro-Israel group” — a group like AIPAC — the group can learn whether backing him would do more harm than good in the district, and how much ground it would have to make up if voters viewed such a fact negatively.

“This is absolutely what they do,” said Usamah Andrabi, communications director for Justice Democrats, which has backed candidates who are critical of U.S. military support for Israel, including Omar. 

“They come into these districts early and poll the candidates they’ve already been talking to, that they’re already interested in, which in this case is seemingly Ryan Winkler, so they can take it back to their donors and ask for millions of dollars,” he said. “This is absolutely their playbook.”

A source familiar with the race who agreed to speak on condition of anonymity confirmed from multiple sources that AIPAC is planning to be active in targeting Omar this cycle and has been in talks with Winkler who was reportedly waiting on the results of an AIPAC poll to make his decision.

Winkler, AIPAC, and United Democracy Project, AIPAC’s super PAC, did not respond to a request for comment.

Related

How Does AIPAC Shape Washington? We Tracked Every Dollar.

The survey is the first public sign that AIPAC still has its eye on ousting progressive members of Congress who criticize U.S. military funding for Israel and Israeli human rights abuses in Palestine. AIPAC spent more than $100 million on primaries last cycle, including more than $25 million to oust Squad members Reps. Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman. The spending came from United Democracy Project and AIPAC’s regular political action committee, AIPAC PAC. In the 2020 cycle, AIPAC, endorsed more than 100 Republican members of Congress who voted to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. 

“Our district has never been for sale. Special interest groups, including AIPAC, have spent millions trying to unseat me,” Omar said in a statement to The Intercept.

“If what AIPAC was lobbying for was truly popular, they wouldn’t need to spend millions to smear those they disagree with. Voters in my district want to see leaders who are fighting to get big money out of politics, not leaders who want to see our elections turned into auctions. I have proudly earned the support of my constituents every election and plan to do so again by fighting for the people I represent, not special interests backed by Republican money.”

After its victories last cycle, AIPAC is revamping its efforts to remove every member of Congress who is critical of Israel, Andrabi of Justice Democrats said. 

“That’s the Congress that Citizens United has been building for a decade and a half now,” Andrabi said.

“A spineless Congress that only does the bidding of billionaires and corporate super PACs. I think we are seeing this cycle especially just how fed up voters are with that sort of Congress,” he said. “Democrats are more unpopular in Congress than they ever have been, and it’s because people see them as more dedicated to the bottom lines of their billionaire donors than to the livelihoods and liberties of their constituents — that’s because they see how much money is being spent in these primaries.”

“This is not just about Israel and Palestine,” Andrabi continued. “It’s really about being able to control politicians and make them do what you want. We should be opposing any lobby from being able to do that.” 

AIPAC typically runs polling in districts before it jumps into a race. Last cycle, the group officially stayed out of the Democratic primary challenge against Rep. Summer Lee, but The Intercept reported that AIPAC had tried and failed to recruit two candidates to challenge Lee. AIPAC was reportedly in contact with Bhavini Patel, who eventually decided to run against Lee, but did not officially back her. 

Part of AIPAC’s strategy is to attack candidates who are critical of Israel on other points — like claiming that Omar is antisemitic or criticizing her for calling to dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd. Both of those claims appeared in the survey.

None of the survey questions specifically asked about voters’ own support for Israel’s war on Gaza, a ceasefire, or U.S. military support for Israel, both of which a growing number of Democratic voters oppose. 

There’s a reason those questions weren’t in the survey, Andrabi said. The survey described Omar as “one of the most anti-Israel members of Congress” and criticized her for voting against a resolution that condemned the October 7 attacks without mentioning Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians. 

“AIPAC’s number-one requirement for endorsing a candidate is how empty of a vessel can this empty suit really be?” Andrabi said. “One consistency we can see amongst recruited primary challengers from AIPAC is they are people who don’t stand for anything, don’t believe in anything, and are most willing to be bought and sold by corporate lobbies and right-wing super PACs.” 

Other questions in the survey that nodded to AIPAC’s potential involvement painted Omar as antisemitic and asked how constituents felt about Omar’s “extreme positions.” 

“Even after being rebuked by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic leaders for her antisemitic language, Ilhan Omar has continued to take extreme positions and opposed legislation that aims to right growing anti-semitism in this country,” the survey said. (The question referred to Democrats who attacked Omar after she criticized spending by the pro-Israel lobby in U.S. elections.) Then, the survey asked respondents to rate how concerned they were about Omar as a candidate.

This is not the first time AIPAC has explored a primary challenge against Omar. During her primary challenge in 2022, AIPAC funneled $350,000 to a group backing her challenger, Don Samuels. The money was not reported until after the race. Pro-Israel donors backed Samuels in another challenge against Omar last cycle, The Intercept reported. 

The post Is AIPAC Coming After Ilhan Omar? appeared first on The Intercept.

Street is walking a fine line on Israel policy, articulating views that range from moderate to evasive. That has rankled some of Philadelphia’s progressive Muslim organizers, but it may well reflect an effort to appease the city’s diverse voting blocs. Philadelphia’s large Muslim and Jewish populations don’t fall neatly on either side of issues related to Israel and Gaza. If elected, Street would be the first Muslim congressman from Pennsylvania, but his supporters and detractors alike argue that they don’t want identity politics to overshadow substantive policy debates.

Many Muslim Philadelphians “may like Street personally,” said Yusuf Abdul Hameed, a supporter of the Philadelphia chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, “but they’re upset because of his lack of courage to really condemn Israel for what clearly was a genocide.” Hameed counted himself among those who like Street, but he said he’s backing his opponent, Pennsylvania state Rep. Chris Rabb, a progressive who has carved out a lane on the left by being openly critical of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. 

Their competition now stands to turn Philadelphia into a testing ground, where voters have a chance to signal how much Israel and Palestine still matter to them as the Trump administration’s barrage of constant scandals, crackdowns, and excesses dominates the midterms cycle.

Street doesn’t have Israel policies on his campaign website. His stance on the issue has largely come to light through public statements he made in his former role as chair of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party after the October 7, 2023, attacks and over the course of the campaign. His current vagueness has raised questions about whether he would accept campaign funding from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or other factions of the pro-Israel lobby.

“I recognize that there won’t be peace for the state of Israel without peace for the Palestinian people, but there won’t be peace for the Palestinian people unless there’s peace for the state of Israel at some point,” Street told the Philadelphia Inquirer last month.

Related

She Lost Her Job for Speaking Out About Gaza. Can It Power Her to Congress?

Street supporter Salima Suswell, an organizer in Philadelphia’s Black Muslim community, said Street had been a leader for Muslims in the city and in the district and also spoke out on Gaza. She said Street and other Black Muslim officials can face a greater pressure to choose sides between Israel and Gaza but that she was confident in Street’s ability to listen to and act on the needs of residents in the district. 

“That said, the Black Muslim community stands in solidarity with our sisters and brothers in Gaza. I fully trust that Senator Street will be a force for good in Congress, and he will fight for our communities both domestically and abroad,” she said. 

Home to one of the largest Muslim populations in the country, Philadelphia has a sizable community of Black residents who converted to Islam in the 1960s, during the rise of Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam. The city is also home to many Jewish voters, including younger ones who are more likely to be critical of Israel than the older generation, as well as moderate, pro-Israel Jewish Democrats who make up a large portion of the voting bloc.  

The political complexities of Philadelphia’s religious electorate could make things difficult for AIPAC, which has been searching for ways to shape midterm races this cycle without drawing too much negative attention to itself. 

AIPAC has not publicly endorsed in the 3rd Congressional District race. But Street was the beneficiary of a short-lived, secret fundraising page hosted by a little-known pro-Israel group — one that AIPAC has used to direct donors to at least one other candidate this cycle. 

The fundraising page, hosted by the Pro-Israel Network, urged donors to contribute to Street’s campaign. The page was live until late last year, when it came to the attention of Philadelphia’s progressive circles and suddenly vanished. The Pro-Israel Network is not officially affiliated with AIPAC. But as AIPAC has adopted a quieter role in elections this cycle, the Pro-Israel Network is one of several proxies the more prominent group has used to highlight preferred candidates for its donors. 

Street’s campaign said in a statement to The Intercept that they weren’t aware of the page until it was brought to their attention and that they didn’t seek the group’s endorsement or receive any campaign contributions through the page. 

“Sharif is not seeking AIPAC’s endorsement, and we weren’t aware of the Pro-Israel Network page until folks showed it to us. We didn’t coordinate with that group and haven’t received any funding from it,” Street’s campaign spokesperson Anthony Campisi said. 

Beth Miller, the political director for Jewish Voice for Peace Action, said she hopes the Street campaign will keep it that way.

“Pro-genocide groups like AIPAC are directly at odds with what Democratic voters want. The overwhelming majority of Democratic voters have made it clear that they want the U.S. to stop funding Israel’s atrocities against Palestinians,” Miller said. “No Democratic candidate should be taking a dollar — or any other kind of support — from groups that are so at odds with the party’s own base.”

According to Ahmet Selim Tekelioglu, the executive director of CAIR-Philadelphia, many in the Philadelphia community view the issue of Israel and Palestine as a window into broader debates, and they see reason to be wary of politicians who waver from moral stances. 

“The Israel–Palestine issue is not only important as a foreign policy matter, but also as an issue that intersects with rights, with freedoms, with how we stand up for oppressed people in our own communities in the U.S.,” Tekelioglu said. He said Philadelphians “are now asking for more, and are coming closer to an accountability politics point of view.”

As a nonprofit, CAIR-Philadelphia cannot endorse a candidate, but Tekelioglu said he’s volunteering for Rabb in his personal capacity. The national political arm, CAIR Action, plans to endorse in the race but has not yet announced its pick.

Hameed, who has been a member of the Nation of Islam since the 1980s, said it would be nice to have a Muslim representative in Congress, but sharing race or religion with a candidate wasn’t enough to earn his vote. He criticized attempts to make excuses for Black Democrats who have taken support from AIPAC, like Reps. Hakeem Jeffries and Ritchie Torres of New York and Glenn Ivey of Maryland. 

“These people support Israel, and they’re getting money from AIPAC, and they’re complicit with genocide,” Hameed said. “They would turn on them in a dime.”

During a candidate forum in December, Street was asked whether he would support legislation to block arms sales to Israel. He said peace and security relied on getting humanitarian aid into Gaza and rebuilding, but that his allotted response time wasn’t enough to answer the question or address such a complicated issue. 

“If we’re gonna do this topic justice, talking about peace in the Middle East is not really a one-minute answer,” Street said. “Catchy soundbites sound good, but they don’t save lives.” 

While several candidates criticized Israel’s destruction in Gaza, Rabb was the only one of the five candidates present to state specifically that he would support such legislation. During another forum in January, Rabb was also clear on his stance on the leading pro-Israel lobbying group, saying, “Fuck AIPAC.” 

Street and Rabb are running in a crowded field of more than 10 candidates vying to replace Evans in the May 19 primary. Among them are state Rep. Morgan Cephas, Dr. David Oxman, Dr. Ala Stanford, climate adviser under former President Joe Biden Pablo McConnie-Saad, and real estate developer and nonprofit leader Isaiah Martin. Street is leading the pack in fundraising, with more than $700,000 raised so far. Oxman has raised $497,000 — including $175,000 he gave to his own campaign. Stanford has raised $467,000, and Rabb has raised $384,000, ahead of Cephas, who’s raised $241,000. 

Muslims United PAC, a national political action committee that has endorsed candidates including Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Summer Lee, endorsed Rabb over Street, mainly because of Rabb’s explicit criticism of the genocide in Gaza. The group declined to comment on the race.

In a statement to The Intercept, Rabb said he couldn’t speculate on who was backing his opponents but that he would never take money from AIPAC. “I have not nor would I even consider meeting with AIPAC because I view them as a racist, extremist organization,” Rabb said. 

“Israel and Gaza — and Palestine, more broadly — deserve the opportunity to engage in peaceful self-determination without U.S. military domination preempting that fundamental right. I support a permanent and immediate ceasefire including release of hostages, recognition that a genocide has occurred in Gaza, and oppose export or use of U.S. weapons in ways that violate U.S. or international law,” he said. Rabb is also running on rejecting corporate PAC money, fighting the influence of billionaires in politics, and abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Related

AIPAC Is Retreating From Endorsements and Election Spending. It Won’t Give Up Its Influence.

The Pro-Israel network funding page, a sign that the lobby has its eyes on the race, is a point of contention among critics who say AIPAC shouldn’t be getting involved in races at all, let alone one in a district which Democrats are largely to the group’s left on policy toward Israel and Gaza. 

“AIPAC is a red line,” said Saleem Holbrook, executive director of Straight Ahead, an abolitionist activist group in Philadelphia. The group’s affiliated public interest law firm, the Abolitionist Law Center, advocates for criminal justice reform has worked with Street on state reform efforts in Pennsylvania and cannot endorse in the race due to its nonprofit status. 

“There’s no way that our organization or many progressive organizations are going to back any candidate that takes AIPAC support,” Holbrook said. “Because when you look at AIPAC’s track record, all AIPAC has done has taken out Black progressive politicians or candidates that had the interest of the Black community in their heart.”

Suswell, the Street supporter, agreed that the race should be about policies that support the community, pointing to affordable housing, quality education, and public safety. “This should not be about identity politics,” she said. “This is about track record. Senator Street has an impeccable track record in his district and across the Muslim community.”

Progressive groups have been slowly endorsing Rabb, and two sources with knowledge of the race said it’s only a matter of time before they consolidate behind him. Rabb has been endorsed by Philadelphia’s chapter of Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise Movement’s national and Philadelphia chapters, One PA, and Mt. Airy Democrats.

Both Street and Rabb are actively seeking the endorsement from the Working Families Party, which is planning to announce its pick in the next few weeks. So are CAIR Action and A New Policy.

While Street may not have the backing of leading progressive groups in Pennsylvania, he does have good relationships with their members. That dynamic is one reason progressive groups have taken their time to make endorsements in a race pitting their allies against one another, according to one source close to the race.

Street is endorsed by the Philadelphia Democratic Party, the Muslim League of Voters of the Delaware Valley, and several of Philadelphia’s powerful labor unions including Philadelphia’s powerful Building and Construction Trades Council, which encompasses several local shops. He’s also backed by former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, Philadelphia Sheriff Rochelle Bilal, advocates for gun violence prevention and several prominent leaders for LGBTQ rights.

Street’s campaign pointed to his work advancing religious rights for Muslims in the district, helping to expand healthcare for Pennsylvanians, leading the fight to legalize recreational cannabis and reform the criminal justice system, and protect voting rights. “He’s going to bring that same drive to Washington, where he will be relentlessly focused on lowering costs, expanding health care access, reforming our criminal justice system, and holding Trump accountable,” said Campisi, his spokesperson. 

Update: February 18, 2026, 11:54 a.m. ET

This story has been updated to note that as a nonprofit, the Abolitionist Law Center cannot endorse in the race.

The post Philadelphia Could Elect Its First Muslim Congressman. He’s Not Sure Where He Stands on Israel. appeared first on The Intercept.

Today, in the 2026 race, another challenger is trying their hand against Gomez — and they have the backing of progressive outfit Justice Democrats. 

Supporters of Angela Gonzales-Torres think she’ll be able to fight off spending from the pro-Israel and cryptocurrency lobby groups that dominated Gomez’s last primary. Justice Democrats said it will help Gonzales-Torres raise money through its grassroots, digital funding network.

Gonzales-Torres, a former Highland Park neighborhood council president, launched her campaign against Gomez in April, saying the incumbent had sold out the congressional district thanks to the influx of special interest money.

“I didn’t move to this district to become a politician funded by corporate super PACs,” said Gonzales-Torres, who was born and raised in North East LA. “We need to recognize that being deemed progressive isn’t the same as delivering real change.”

Gonzales-Torres criticized Gomez for not signing onto progressive bills that would have conditioned arms sales to Israel, stanched the flow of corporate cash in politics, and tackled price gouging.

“It isn’t just about calling for someone’s resignation,” she told The Intercept. “It’s about answering for our calls as Angelenos.”

Justice Democrats said Gomez’s leadership isn’t meeting the moment in a city that President Donald Trump has flooded with ICE agents and National Guard troops. 

“Jimmy Gomez got to Washington and closed the door on his community behind him to embrace the same corporate PACs and right-wing lobbies that are raising costs for Angelenos and demanding their tax dollars fund genocide,” said Justice Democrats spokesperson Usamah Andrabi. “In a city that has become ground zero for Donald Trump’s war on immigrant families, Angelenos deserve a leader whose donors will never dictate how hard they fight back.”

Defended by AIPAC

Gonzales-Torres is the second challenger Gomez has faced in recent years from his left. In office since 2017, Gomez easily beat a challenge during his first term from Kenneth Mejia, now the Los Angeles city controller. In each of the last three elections, Gomez fended off more credible challenges from Democrat David Kim.

Kim came within 6 percent points of beating Gomez during the general election in 2020 — where they faced off thanks to California’s “jungle primary” system — and 3 points in the 2022 general election. 

In the 2024 race, Kim called for cutting off U.S. military funding to Israel and drew fire from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, and its super PAC, United Democracy Project. Kim also supported the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement and called for an international court to prosecute illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Kim endorsed Gonzales-Torres, who previously volunteered for his campaign.

After AIPAC, the nation’s flagship Israel lobby, spent more than half a million dollars against Kim last year, Gomez won by 11 points.

Related

Facing Voter Pressure, Swing-State Democrat Swears Off AIPAC Cash

AIPAC has been among Gomez’s top campaign contributors over the last decade. AIPAC’s candidate page for Gomez praises him for supporting pro-Israel legislation, including co-sponsoring a resolution affirming U.S. support for Israel after the October 7 attacks.

The group also touted his support for legislation for supplemental security assistance to Israel, condemning BDS and traveling twice to Israel on trips paid for by AIPAC’s educational arm. The lobby group congratulated Gomez in November for beating Kim, who they described as running on an “overtly anti-Israel platform.” (AIPAC and its super PAC did not respond to a request for comment.)

Still, Gomez’s record on Israel has not agreed with AIPAC’s every position.

In the wake of the October 7 attack, he signed on quickly to measures affirming unconditional U.S. support for Israel and a harshly worded resolution on escalating campus protest movements against the war.

In November 2023, though, Gomez called for a “cessation of hostilities” in Gaza, even as AIAPC raged against any call for an end to the violence.

When progressives, responding to spiking Palestinian deaths in the early days of the war, pushed a ceasefire resolution, Gomez did not sign on. (Gomez’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)

He has voted both for and against U.S. funding for Israel and called on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resign. Unlike many other pro-Israel Democrats, Gomez did not vote for a measure to condemn the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” as antisemitic; instead, he abstained. He was also absent for a vote to adopt a definition of antisemitism that includes any criticism of Israel. And he voted present on a resolution to condemn antisemitism on college campuses.

Crypto Cash

Gomez also received support in his last race from the cryptocurrency industry. Putting in more than half a million dollars to back Gomez, crypto was the second-largest outside spender in the race after AIPAC. The political action committee Fairshake, whose subsidiary PACs back candidates in both parties, spent $511,000 to support Gomez.

Gomez has an A rating from a leading pro-cryptocurrency group and has voted for at least four bills in the last two years that were supported by the industry, including Trump’s bill to accelerate deregulation. (FairShake did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

More recently, however, Gomez criticized Trump for profiting from crypto. Replying to a story earlier this week about the Trump family making billions of dollars from its crypto venture, Gomez tweeted that Trump and the billionaire establishment are profiting as “everyone else gets screwed.”

Related

DNC Votes Down “Overwhelming Popular Position” Calling for Arms Ban to Israel

Gomez has enjoyed steady support from constituents since he was first elected in 2016. Gomez has been a vocal critic of Trump. He made national headlines in June for being denied entry to a federal immigration detention facility and, in July, sued U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for blocking him and three other Democrats from visiting detention facilities.

The money Gomez gets from corporate PACs is what Gonzales-Torres is focusing on. After pro-Israel groups, Gomez’s top donors throughout his career include real estate and insurance groups, law firms, and securities and investment outfits. He has also received support from labor unions and progressives including another Justice Democrats candidate, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. 

Gonzales-Torres, for her part, is rejecting corporate PAC money. Instead, she is running on affordable housing, access to mental health support, and ending mass incarceration. And she supports protecting immigrants’ rights, Medicare for All, and a Green New Deal — all things Gomez supports too. 

Gonzales-Torres said she’s not focused on whether AIPAC will spend against her campaign. She’s betting small-dollar donors and a student-led campaign can overcome the big money. She said her campaign is focusing on mobilizing students in the district.

She said, “That means that we are not selling out our communities to corporate PACs.”

The post She’s Challenging an AIPAC Democrat. A National Progressive Group Wants In. appeared first on The Intercept.

Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam is preparing for a rematch against Rep. Valerie Foushee, D-N.C., for the 4th Congressional District seat she lost by nine points in 2022. This time, the Israel lobby’s potential influence has shifted: Feeling the pressure from activists and constituents, Foushee has said she won’t accept money from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Allam, who launched her campaign Thursday with the backing of the progressive group Justice Democrats, told The Intercept that wouldn’t be a shift for her.

“I’ve never accepted corporate PAC or dark money, special interest group money, or pro Israel lobby group money,” said Allam, whose 2020 election to the county commission made her the first Muslim woman elected to public office in North Carolina.

The country’s top pro-Israel lobbying groups and the crypto industry spent heavily to help Foushee beat Allam in 2022, when they competed in the race for the seat vacated by former Rep. David Price, D-N.C. AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, and DMFI PAC, another pro-Israel group with ties to AIPAC, spent just under $2.5 million backing Foushee that year. The PAC funded by convicted crypto fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried also spent more than $1 million backing Foushee.

Related

Facing Voter Pressure, Swing-State Democrat Swears Off AIPAC Cash

After nearly two years of pressure from activists in North Carolina enraged by Israel’s genocide in Gaza, Foushee announced in August that she would not accept AIPAC money in 2026, joining a growing list of candidates swearing off AIPAC money in the face of a new wave of progressive challengers.

This time, if pro-Israel and crypto groups spend in the race, it’s on Foushee to respond, Allam said.

“If they decide to spend in this, then it comes down to Valerie Foushee to answer, is she going to stand by the promise and commitment she made to not accept accept AIPAC and pro-Israel lobby money?” Allam said. “This district deserves someone who is going to be a champion for working families, and you can’t be that when you’re taking the money from the same corporate PAC donors that are funding Republicans who are killing Medicare for all, who are killing an increased minimum wage.”

“You can look at my record to show that I am not just paying lip service to our shared progressive values but instead working to advance legislation like the ICE Badge Visibility Act, the Dignity for Detained Immigrants Act, and the Block the Bombs Act,” Foushee said in a statement to The Intercept, noting that she had been endorsed by North Carolina governor Josh Stein and former governor Roy Cooper. “I am ensuring the people of NC-04 have a voice in Washington by voting against the National Defense Authorization Act, the Republican Continuing Resolution, and the Big Ugly Bill that prioritized tax breaks for the wealthy over the needs of working families.”

Allam, who helped lead Bernie Sanders’s 2016 presidential campaign in North Carolina, is the seventh candidate Justice Democrats are backing so far this cycle. The group — which previously recruited progressive stars including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn. — is endorsing candidates challenging incumbents next year in Michigan, California, New York, Tennessee, Missouri, and Colorado. Justice Democrats is taking a more aggressive approach to primaries this cycle after only endorsing its incumbents last year and losing two major seats to pro-Israel spending. The group plans to launch at least nine more candidates by January, The Intercept reported.

Related

She Lost Her Job for Speaking Out About Gaza. Can It Power Her to Congress?

Allam unveiled her campaign with other endorsements from independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sunrise Movement, the Working Families Party, and Leaders We Deserve, a PAC launched by progressive organizers David Hogg and Kevin Lata in 2023 to back congressional candidates under the age of 35. She said she sees the local impacts of the Trump administration on working families every day in her work as a Durham County commissioner.

“What I’m hearing from our residents every single day is that they don’t feel that they have a champion or someone who is standing up and fighting for them at the federal level, and someone who is advocating for working families,” she said. “This is the safest blue district in North Carolina and this is an opportunity for us as a Democratic Party to have someone elected who is going to be championing the issues for working families — like Medicare for All, a Green New Deal — and has a track record of getting things done at the local level.”

Allam is rejecting corporate PAC money and running on taking on billionaires and fighting Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which has been carrying out raids and arresting residents in the district. She’s also supporting a Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and ending military aid to Israel. She began considering a run for office after a man murdered her friends in the 2015 Chapel Hill shootings.

Small dollar donors powered Allam’s 2022 campaign, when she raised $1.2 million with an average donation of $30. She’s aiming to replicate that strategy this cycle, she said.

“Trump is testing the waters in every way possible,” Allam said. “The only way that we’re going to be able to effectively fight back against Trump is by passing the Voting Rights Act, is by taking big corporate money out of our elections, by ending Citizens United. Because they’re the same ones who are fighting against our democracy.”

In its release announcing Allam’s campaign on Thursday, Justice Democrats criticized Foushee for taking money from corporate interests, including defense contractors who have profited from the genocides in Gaza and Sudan. “In the face of rising healthcare costs, creeping authoritarianism, and ICE raids, and the highest number of federal funding cuts of any district in the country, leadership that only shows up to make excuses won’t cut it anymore,” the group wrote.

Foushee served in the North Carolina state legislature for more than two decades before being elected to Congress in 2022. She first campaigned for Congress on expanding the Affordable Care Act and moving toward Medicare for All, passing public campaign financing and the Voting Rights Act, and a $15 minimum wage. Since entering Congress in 2023, Foushee has sponsored bills to conduct research on gun violence prevention, to expand diversity in research for artificial intelligence, establish a rebate for environmental roof installations, and support historically Black colleges and universities.

“I am proud of the legislation I have supported, the votes I have taken, and the services my office has provided to constituents,” Foushee said.

Foushee’s evolving stance on some Israel issues reflects a broader shift among Democrats under pressure from organizers and constituents.

Amid rising public outrage over the influence of AIPAC in congressional elections in recent years, Foushee faced growing criticism and protests in the district over her refusal to call for a ceasefire in Gaza and her support from the lobbying group. After organizers tried to meet with her and held a demonstration blocking traffic on a freeway in the district, she signed onto a 2023 letter calling for a ceasefire but did not publicize her support for the letter or comment on it publicly, The News & Observer reported.

Related

Trying to Block Arms to Israel, Bernie Sanders Denounces AIPAC’s Massive Election Spending

At a town hall in August, an attendee asked Foushee if she regretted taking AIPAC money. In response, she said she would no longer accept money from the group. Three days later, she co-sponsored Illinois Rep. Delia Ramirez’s Block the Bombs to Israel Act to limit the transfer of defensive weapons to Israel.

“We cannot allow AIPAC and these corporate billionaires to scare us into silence,” Allam said. “It’s actually our mandate to take them on directly, especially now as they’re losing their sway in the Democratic Party.”

Update: December 11, 2025, 1:06 p.m. ET
This story has been updated with a statement from Rep. Valerie Foushee.

The post AIPAC Spent Millions to Keep Her Out of Congress. Now, She Sees an Opening.  appeared first on The Intercept.

On Monday, Justice Democrats endorsed Michigan state Rep. Donavan McKinney in the 2026 Democratic primary against Detroit’s Rep. Shri Thanedar, D-Mich. — the group’s first primary challenge since AIPAC’s onslaught. 

Thanedar, first elected to Congress in 2022, is a multimillionaire with support from two of the biggest sources of outside spending on U.S. elections: pro-Israel lobby groups and the cryptocurrency industry. 

Three political action committees linked to the AIPAC spent $2.3 million against Thanedar’s challenger in the Democratic primary last year. AIPAC previously opposed Thanedar in 2022, but their relationship grew closer after he went on one of the group’s congressional junkets to Israel. 

As part of his campaign launch, McKinney has said he is running on bringing working-class representation to Congress, criticizing Thanedar for using taxpayer money to fund his campaign expenses and neglecting his constituents.

“I’m not running for Congress because I’m a millionaire or a billionaire. I’m running because I’m not,” the 32-year-old McKinney said in a press release announcing his campaign launch. “I’m running because our community deserves to have someone fighting back against the Trump-Musk administration who knows our struggles.”

In a campaign video accompanying the launch, McKinney said constituents in the 13th Congressional District deserved a Democratic Party that leads the fight against billionaire elites and corporate PACs. McKinney attacked Thanedar for buying his seat in Congress and “having more in common with Donald Trump and Elon Musk than people like us.” (Thanedar did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

The primary campaign is the first primary challenge against a party incumbent launched by Justice Democrats since 2021, and its first efforts since losing Reps. Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., and Cori Bush, D-Mo., after AIPAC and other outside groups spent close to $50 million against the Squad members in last year’s election.

In a statement, Justice Democrats noted that support for Democrats in Congress is lagging while voters are looking for candidates who will fight harder than the people they see in office. 

“Last election cycle, Justice Democrats focused their resources on protecting our incumbents against the threat of AIPAC and other right-wing lobbies promising — and delivering — on spending $100 million in our elections,” spokesperson Usamah Andrabi said in the Monday press release. 

“As a result of their outsized spending, we lost two of the most working class members of Congress in the most expensive Democratic primaries ever, but out-organized and beat them in every other Squad seat,” he said. “Those losses have only fueled our mission to expand our bloc in Congress and elect more working class champions to Washington.”

The post Down Two Squad Members, Progressives Come for an AIPAC Democrat appeared first on The Intercept.