On Israel, the Times columnist asks, “What happens if Jared and Ivanka divorce tomorrow?”

New York Times columnist Bret Stephens addressed the Times’s cartoon controversy and the U.S.-Israel relationship under President Trump during a conversation at the NYU Global Center on Monday. The panel, hosted by students groups TorchPAC and Realize Israel, had the title “Where Are We Now? American Jewry & Zionism in the Age of Trump.”

Stephens said that writing the op-ed in response to the antisemitic cartoon in the paper’s international print newspaper last week was an easy choice. “The moment I saw the cartoon, I realized, I’m either going to denounce it or feel ashamed of myself,” he said. “It was an emotional decision, it was easy. But most importantly it was easy because the senior leadership at the Times — the editorial page editor James Bennet, and people, in fact, more senior to him — were horrified by the publication of the cartoon. It took them by surprise. These things happen at newspapers, and even if they didn’t agree with every word that I wrote, they understood that it was essential that the paper of record also provide the most biting criticism of the cartoon.”

A frequent critic of Trump, Stephens cautioned pro-Israel Americans about Trump. “For people whose political affinities are entirely a function of their feelings about Israel, right, than Trump presents something of a conundrum,” Stephens said. “Because on the one hand there have been a set of policies, which I have supported — publicly — like moving the embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, getting out of the JCPOA, the Iran deal, which…in my opinion is good for Israel and the right thing to do. On the other hand, there are two more deeply worrying aspects of Trump’s policies. One is that he is in many ways an extension, his views are more of an extension of Obama’s views than most people acknowledge. Trump has a kind of ‘come home America’ idea of the world. Obama used to talk about ‘nation building at home,’ he was a very reluctant interventionist. He didn’t get involved in, for example, the Syria conflict, and he thought that United States should be sort of vacating parts of the world. And the consequences of that were visible.”

Stephens said of Trump, that “his transactional concept of foreign policy, his ‘what’s in it for us’ trademark approach — America First — is one that right now contains an exception for Israel, because for whatever reasons he’s pro-Israel. But what happens if Jared and Ivanka divorce tomorrow? Right? No, seriously, imagine Jared cheats on Ivanka and Trump is in a rage: ‘How come that Jared, that scoundrel son-in-law, is behaving the way I do?’ Well, then you’re in trouble because the philosophical concept through which Trump conducts foreign policy no longer necessarily makes an emotional exception for Israel. And what happens when you get Trump 2.0? That is to say the same kind of foreign policy, but on a more consistent basis. That’s what worries me about Trump.” Stephens later said that he’s worried about Trump because he gives “free rein to a set of ideas about immigration, about nationalism, about, we’ll call it globalism, which will eventually find their targets. In fact, already have found their targets in the Jewish people.”

By Jacob Kornbluh in New York, NY.

A new effort is underway to create a Jewish caucus in Congress, to more forcefully respond to a rise in antisemitic incidents and rhetoric.

Jewish House Democrats acknowledged to Jewish Insider that they regularly meet in an informal working group to discuss issues related to antisemitism, yet a public call is putting pressure on formalizing the group.

Jack Rosen, president of the American Jewish Congress and a longtime donor to Democratic candidates, called for such a group in an op-ed last week, and told Jewish Insider that he came forward following “Israel-bashing” from “ultra-left progressives” in Congress.

“What prompted me to come up with this idea was the vote on the anti-BDS bill, the Israel-bashing we are getting from some of the ultra-left progressives and understanding that we are now living in the new political climate,” Rosen explained in a phone interview.

On the state and municipal levels, the California legislature and the New York City Council each have a Jewish caucus.

In Congress, there are currently 34 Jewish lawmakers out of the body of 535 in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, including two Republican House members — Reps. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) and David Kustoff (R-TN).

The informal group among Jewish House Democrats has met for years, said Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL), who has attended meetings since she was first elected in 2013. “There has been an informal working group of Jewish congresspersons for as long as I’ve been here, I think it goes back way before I was in Congress,” she said.

The informal group is led by Reps. Eliot Engel (D-NY) and Nita Lowey (D-NY), both senior Democratic members and respective leaders of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the House Committee on Appropriations.

Rep. Frankel said that discussions about formalizing the caucus have come up in recent weeks, particularly following the statements made by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN).

“There have been folks who have mentioned to me the idea of formalizing,”  said Rep. Frankel. “This sort of came up in response — we had this situation with one of our colleagues who made some, we thought, some offensive remarks. So there’s been some discussion about, should we be in the position where Jewish members make more of a formal statement together. That’s really been some of what I’ve heard. As far as I know there hasn’t been any action taken.”

Rosen, for his part, said the lack of congressional action against Rep. Omar is a driving force behind the public call for a formalized Jewish caucus, stressing that despite the fact that Jewish members serve in senior leadership positions, “they failed in passing a resolution specifically condemning antisemitism.”

After Jewish Insider reported that Rep. Omar had referred to Americans who support Israel as “pushing for allegiance to a foreign country,” House Democrats spent a week debating how to address her comments and, with pushback from progressives and the Congressional Black Caucus, downplayed Rep. Omar’s use of the language. The resulting resolution, therefore, broadly opposed hate and bigotry against all groups, with sections devoted to antisemitism.

“What played out was that the Progressive Caucus, the Black Caucus (CBC), wanted to see a resolution that represented attacks on more communities as opposed to pinpointing where the problem was,” Rosen noted. “And they prevailed. Had there been a Jewish Caucus, they would have walked into the Speaker’s office unified as the Black Caucus did and there could have been a different outcome.”

Rep. Dean Phillips (D-MN), who is part of the informal Jewish working group, called their meetings “as important now as ever,” and echoed Rep. Frankel that discussions are happening over whether to formalize.

Rep. Phillips said it would be a group decision whether to include Jewish Republican members. “I can tell you my personal mission is to broaden conversations and coalitions and that means extending invitations and I would certainly, personally, like to see such a caucus more broad, rather than less. Ultimately that’s going to be a decision of everybody at the table and I can’t speak to that yet.”

Halie Soifer, Executive Director of the Jewish Democratic Council of America (JDCA) told Jewish Insider that if the Jewish members of Congress “believe a Jewish Caucus is needed or would make their voice more effective, it is something that JDCA would certainly support.”

Rosen maintained that a bipartisan Jewish caucus could have prevented the stalling of Rep. Zeldin’s antisemitism resolution, which was introduced in January, that specifically mentions Rep. Omar’s comments and her 2012 tweet saying Israel had “hypnotized the world.”

The March resolution rejecting antisemitism and hate and bigotry, however, “provided a political opportunity for Trump to label the Dems as being anti-Jewish,” said Mr. Rosen. “We know that President Trump is probably the best brander in the world and he took advantage of the issue to brand the entire party as being anti-Jewish.”

Norm Coleman, Chairman of the Republican Jewish Coalition told Jewish Insider that he’s “not looking for a Congressional Jewish Caucus. I’m looking for members of Congress to call out [Rep.] Ilhan Omar for repetitive antisemitic tropes and to support her removal from the House Foreign Affairs Committee. I’m wary of members of Congress taking cover on the antisemitism issue by joining an American Jewish Caucus, rather than personally speaking out against Rep. Omar and others for antisemitic words and actions.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) commented on Benjamin Netanyahu’s reelection as Israel’s prime minister earlier this month during a live CNN town hall in New Hampshire on Monday.

Shelly Tsirulik, a student at Harvard University: You have been an outspoken critic of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Yet Israel is also one of America’s most important allies in the world. Given that Prime Minister Netanyahu just won another term in office, how do you plan to maintain the strong U.S.-Israel relationship despite those critiques?

Sanders: “Look, what I have said over and over again, and I repeat to you: I happened to, as a young man your age, I spent a number of months in Israel. I worked on a kibbutz for a while. I have family in Israel. I am not anti-Israel. But the fact of the matter is that Netanyahu is a right-wing politician who, I think, is treating the Palestinian people extremely unfairly.” (applause)

“What I believe, you know, the U.S. gives billions of dollars in military aid to Israel — what I believe is not radical — I just believe that the U.S. should deal with the Middle East on a level-playing-field basis. In other words, the goal must be to try to bring people together and not just support one country, which is now run by a right-wing — dare I say — racist government.”

“I am 100 percent pro-Israel. Israel has every right in the world to exist and to exist in peace and security, and not be subjected to terrorist attacks. But the United States needs to deal not just with Israel but with the Palestinian people as well.”

Congresswoman Lois Frankel represents Florida’s 21st district, which includes communities along the south-eastern coast of the state. A long-time public servant, she spent 14 years in the Florida State House before becoming the Mayor of West Palm Beach and then elected to Congress in 2013. She is a member of the House Committee on Appropriations and the subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs subcommittee. Yesterday, she spoke with Jewish Insider about her support for and connection to Israel, her Jewish identity, and the danger of highly partisan politics. This interview has been edited for clarity.

Laura Kelly: Can you tell me about your connection to your Jewish identity, how you were raised or how it influences your life?

Rep. Lois Frankel: I was raised in New York, on Long Island, in a town which was probably 95 percent Jewish. My parents are Jewish, my grandparents are Jewish – my grandparents came to this country to get away from the looming Holocaust. I’ve known many people in my life who’ve fled Nazi Germany, some who were in Nazi Germany – unfortunately most of those people have passed on. I have many friends who are my contemporaries, whose parents or grandparents also fled the… Nazis in Europe.

…We belonged to a Conservative Temple. It was sort of a typical Jewish family, I’m going to say, we weren’t overly religious, we attended Temple [on] holidays, events — we had the long Passover dinners, we lit candles, I was married by a rabbi… I  grew up in a time where very few girls were bat mitzvah’d, so I was not bat mitzvah’d, I’m sort of resentful. But I grew up in a very Jewish community and… Judaism is part of my identity. More the culture, the Tzedakah [charity or justice], the values of the Jewish religion, is really what’s been most part of me. Not the davening [praying[, it is more the values that I learned growing up.

LK: Have you traveled to Israel?

LF: I’ve traveled with the Jewish Federation [of South Florida] a number of times and also as a member of Congress.

LK: With such a large freshman Democratic class, how important is it do you think members take a trip to Israel to understand the U.S.-Israel relationship?

LF: I think it’s very important and I think every one of them should do it. I would also say that travel is — not only to Israel, but to countries all over the world — it’s very important for members of Congress to really have an understanding of our place in the world. I think travel is very important, to Israel and to other countries, without a question.

LK: How do you feel connected to Israel through your Jewish identity, or does Israel strengthen your Jewish connection? What is your view on that?

LF: When I went with my congressional classmates, there were  50 of us in my class, we all went to Israel together with our families. I can tell you that — and most were not Jewish and many were going to Israel for the first time. It was incredibly spiritual and [a] bonding experience to be there and yes, I would say probably for any Jew, including myself — it does enhance your identity. I don’t consider myself — I am not a “religious” person, you’re not going to find me in Temple every Saturday morning, but I definitely identify myself as a Jew and I understand the struggle of the Jewish people.

This month, Republicans sought to stall a Yemen War Powers resolution by introducing a last-minute amendment condemning the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. Democrats voted down the measure but Republicans seized on perceived anti-Israel sentiment within the party. This builds on tension from comments by Democratic members like Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) who have questioned U.S. support for Israel.

LK: What are some of the discussions in the Democratic caucus to respond to these Republican efforts or to fight back over perceived divisions over Israel?

LF: I’m sorry to say this… I feel like the Republicans are using Israel and the Jews as a political football. I feel very strongly that the security of Israel, is not only the right thing for Israel, it’s the right thing for our country… When I first got to Congress, still the acrimony was pretty bad on most issues, but the one thing I would say, ‘Wow, at least when it comes to Israel, most of us are on the same page.’

I still feel that way. I feel that most of us are still on the same page, there’s overwhelming support for Israel, for the security of Israel, by the majority of members. I’m not going to say every member because, listen, there’s always going to be some people who disagree, there are some who disagree with everything…

You never want to get to a situation where, let’s say, where we are with — the acrimony, I should say, the disagreements about our relationship with Saudi Arabia. You never want that situation, ever, to happen. In my opinion, the president of the United States is using Israel as a political football — not that I necessarily disagree with some of his positions, but when he states a position and then says the Democrats are against Israel, that is a really bad thing for Israel, for him to make that kind of statement. Because number one, it’s not true and number two, why foster that perception? Why would you want the resentment that so many people in this country have for this president… why would you want him to foster resentment towards Israel? Or towards Jews?

LK: We’re in a different era where a member’s popularity on social media [influences conversations], Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has millions of followers on Twitter, so when she says something on a Yahoo news radio program about the possibility of cutting military aid to Israel, that gets a lot more focus than what would probably be the majority view in the Democratic caucus. How is the Democratic caucus dealing with those kinds of conversations?

LF: My understanding, and this is just from reading, is I think she said something to the effect that ‘those conversations are on the table.’ I don’t think she said it with much conviction or knowledge. If you really want to know, she’s a very exciting new member, so I’m not trying to be disrespectful to her in any way: I have not heard or seen anything from her that would lead me to believe that she is leading any kind of effort to not fund Israel. This is speculation, because I don’t know exactly where she’s gotten her information, but she probably talked to some members who don’t agree with the support we give Israel and so she’s probably reporting that some people are discussing it. I’m on the foreign operations committee of the Appropriations committee, and I can tell you, there’s no discussion in that regard. None, zero, zippo, and there will not be… not in the House and I would guess there’s no discussion in the Senate either.

Last month, Rep. Frankel and Rep. Randy Weber (R-TX) introduced legislation that provides extra funding to joint U.S.-Israel development projects in under-developed nations.

LK: Why was it important for you to put that extra money into this development cooperation with Israel?

LF: For me, given the recent conversations in Congress and the rise of antisemitism in the world and in the United States, I’ve thought that we should highlight something really good that’s happening, not only between our country and Israel — I think it’s unfortunate that so much of the discussion of Israel, unfortunately, has to be about a bomb coming into one of the cities, or the indictment of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu. It gets so much negative news, just like in this country. The news is always negative, and yet Israel is doing so many good things, there’s so much innovation, especially in the area of energy and water. Israel is a generous country and it takes its knowledge and shares its knowledge and this is just really a way to highlight work that Israel is already doing and really to memorialize their work with USAID in [developing] countries… [working with public and private companies] to help countries become more economically successful and resources more sustainable.

The bill was included in Rep. Ted Deutch’s legislation broadening U.S.-Israel security cooperation, that was introduced around the same time. Also included in Rep. Deutch’s bill, is a provision of a proposed fix for the 2018 Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act, which – when it went into effect in February – had the consequence of ending all U.S. aid accepted by the Palestinian Authority. Rep. Frankel said she is interested in a solution to this “glitch,” where funding for humanitarian projects and security cooperation can be restored while preserving the rights of victims of terror that the law is meant to protect.

LK: To your position on the appropriations committee and the state foreign operations: With the expectation of a peace plan to be unveiled, do you feel there’s very little role for Congress to play since the Palestinian’s have rejected all U.S. aid?

LF: Well, I do think we have to fix — there’s a glitch, I would say a glitch — yes, we have to change that act [the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act]… We know that the president has cut off aid anyway right now, and… I have no idea what the peace plan is going to look like… Congress needs to take some action that would actually put the Palestinians in a position of being able to accept aid, should that be part of  [Trump’s] proposal. I don’t know what it will be.

LK: What’s the significance of having Congress involved in any peace proposal or any peace negotiation?

LF: Candidly I have no idea what Trump, what they’re doing or what they’re proposing… I guess if it was a treaty, I think the Senate would have to approve that… I don’t know whether we would be involved. But if it involves any kind of funding, yes, Congress would be involved… But if there was any kind of funding, the administration would have to depend on Congress to appropriate money.
Laura Kelly is the Capitol Hill reporter for Jewish Insider. Follow her @HelloLauraKelly

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced Monday the official designation of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist organization, placing sanctions on the military body embedded within the Iranian regime.

The official designation is expected to take effect next week, Secretary Pompeo said, and foreign governments and individuals are on notice that any dealings with the Iranian government are expected to be under threat because of the IRGC’s deep involvement and can be prosecuted under U.S. penal codes.

“If you’re the general council for a European financial institution today, there’s more risk,” Sec. Pompeo said of doing business in Iran. “It is absolutely the case that the IRGC amounts to a significant piece of the Iranian economy through pure kleptocracy and it is also the case that it is sometimes difficult to know whether the IRGC is involved. That is, the diligence effort is an enormous undertaking.”

The announcement builds on the Administration’s efforts to increase sanctions Iran after leaving the Iran nuclear deal. It also makes it more difficult for any future U.S. administration to re-enter such a deal, says Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.“You can’t just push this away, wipe this way with a reentry into the nuclear deal. It’s going to create a higher bar for anyone trying to provide some financial relief to Iran if that day comes to pass,” he said.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif called the announcement an election gift to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and said that Israel is “dragging the U.S. into a quagmire on its behalf.”

A(nother) misguided election-eve gift to Netanyahu. A(nother) dangerous U.S. misadventure in the region.— Javad Zarif (@JZarif) April 8, 2019

#NetanyahuFirsters who have long agitated for FTO designation of the IRGC fully understand its consequences for US forces in the region. In fact, they seek to drag US into a quagmire on his behalf.@realDonaldTrump should know better than to be conned into another US disaster. pic.twitter.com/i4bcfgxybT— Javad Zarif (@JZarif) April 7, 2019

The move also comes before a May 2 deadline on whether to renew waivers for countries currently buying Iranian oil. Sec. Pompeo declined to comment on the status of waiver renewals during a press briefing at the State Department.

Nathan Sales, the head of the Bureau of Counterterrorism and Countering Violent Extremism, said the announcement is the next step in the Administration’s “maximum pressure campaign” and adds criminal charges to any organization or individual that does business with the IRGC.

“It’s not just that the IRGC supports terrorism that its proxies undertake. Today the IRGC stands accused and convicted of directly engaging in terrorism itself,” he said.

Material support to a designated foriegn terrorist organization can carry a maximum penalty of 20 years, Mr. Sales said. Outstanding cases include the deaths or injuries of an estimated 603 U.S. troops serving in Iraq, as concluded by the Department of Defense.

Iran threatened reciprocal action against the U.S. over the announcement, Reuters reported, IRGC commander Mohammad Ali Jafari threatened an end to calm in the West Asia region.

Secretary Pompeo said Monday that “we have made clear, both privately and publicly, that an attack on the United States of America is something they ought to think more than twice about.”

Republican lawmakers praised the move.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) offered complete support of the Administration’s new designation, writing on Twitter, “The IRGC has been wreaking havoc throughout the Middle East and is a direct arm of the Ayatollah’s hateful policies. Secretary Pompeo and President Trump have rightfully put enormous pressure on Iran.”

Congressman David Kustoff (R-TN) said the President is sending a clear message that the United States does not do business with a country that terrorizes people in and outside its borders.

“We must remain vigilant against those who wish to bring Americans harm and continue to stand with our greatest ally in the Middle East, Israel,” Rep. Kustoff said.

Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon said his country thanks the U.S. for recognizing “Middle East realities”, writing on Twitter, “The IRGC is the main exporter of Iran’s regional terrorism. The world should follow this example & increase the pressure on Iran! [sic]”

Mr. Schanzer, speaking from Israel ahead of their national elections on Tuesday, said the announcement has had little airtime in the country’s political debate.

“When you look at sanctions designations and announcements, it really resonates among a certain group of wonks in Washington as well as Jerusalem. It rarely resonates outside the kind of expected audience.”

This post has been updated.

Laura Kelly is the Capitol Hill reporter for Jewish Insider. Follow her @HelloLauraKelly

Earlier this week, Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, revealed in an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour that the Trump peace plan has been completed and will likely be rolled out soon after Israel’s elections on April 9th.

The Key Questions: What? When? And How? — While Danon shed some light on the question of timing, key questions remain about what’s actually in the plan (which, we’re told, is likely to include land swaps involving the cooperation of neighboring countries Egypt and Jordan) and how it will be released.

Kushner’s playbook — Many real estate deal analogies have been made given the professional backgrounds of Trump, his son-in-law Jared Kushner and White House Middle East envoy Jason Greenblatt. Trump himself has called Middle East peace “like a real estate deal.” While the comparisons have often focused on the contents of a possible deal, there’s another real estate technique that, according to sources who’ve been briefed, Kushner is likely to deploy: marketing films.

Flashback — On a late afternoon in the spring of 2014, Jared Kushner walked up to the podium at a Brooklyn real estate gathering to deliver a rare public presentation. Kushner kept his remarks brief and instead let a slickly produced two-minute film — featuring a deep voice over and futuristic renderings of his company’s Dumbo Heights development — do the talking. “That really gives you a flavor of what we’re trying to create,” Kushner concluded following the video. You can watch Kushner’s remarks here, along with the film.

‘Has to be the best’ — Kushner Companies later used the same marketing firm, Creative Soldier, founded by self-described ‘real estate ad genius’ Joshua Abehsera, to create a film promoting the penthouse residences of the Puck Building. In the video, Jared Kushner can be seen explaining, “we started with the premise that this project can’t be good, this project can’t be great, this project has to be the best.”

From Brooklyn to Bethlehem — Economic incentives are expected to be the centerpiece of the Trump peace proposal. Kushner toured the region last month in an effort to secure financial pledges from gulf countries and Turkey. As we previously reported, according to former U.S. Ambassador Martin Indyk, the number Kushner has in mind is $65 billion. Starting with showcasing what life in the region could look like with peace and financial prosperity, and painting a picture for ordinary Palestinians, appears to be one of the ‘unique’ approaches that Kushner plans to introduce to the peace process.

Whether the futuristic renderings bringing the Dumbo spirit to Gaza and the West Bank will win support for the overall plan remains to be seen. We’re living in the age of the Fyre Festival, which famously sold tickets for thousands of dollars entirely on a flashy promo video featuring Instagram models in the Bahamas. Producing teaser films to sell Middle East peace might not be such a stretch…

Democrats succeeded in passing a resolution Thursday directing the removal of U.S. troops in Yemen despite an effort by Republicans to insert language on Israel and BDS that would stoke divisions in the Democratic Party.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) called into question the motivations of Republicans who sought to introduce an amendment regarding U.S. support for Israel, and was a “cynical and dishonest tactic” to block their bill opposing the Saudi-led war in Yemen.

The Yemen bill, which passed the House 247 to 175, directs the removal of all U.S. troops from hostilities in Yemen unless authorized by Congress. The bill heads to President Trump’s desk where it will likely be vetoed, marking the second time the president has used such authority.

The Republicans attempted to block passage of the Yemen bill by invoking the motion to recommit (MTR), a last opportunity to amend and debate a measure before a final vote on an overall bill. Republicans had succeeded in passing two previous MTR’s, one on antisemitism and another on immigration.

House Democrats met the Republican move with harsh condemnation.

“The American people will not be fooled or misled by this tactic,” Leader Hoyer said during floor debate of the measure. “No one can accuse me of failing to defend the U.S.-Israel partnership and strongly opposing B.D.S. and I will be voting against this motion and I urge all my colleagues to do so as well.”

Representative Ted Deutch (D-FL), chair of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on the Middle East, North Africa and Internatinoal Terrorism, took to the House floor to say that he  carries “the legacy of the history of the Jewish people.” “There is no one in this chamber, no one, who would question my commitment to opposing B.D.S. or fighting antisemitism or supporting our ally Israel,” Rep. Deutch said to loud applause from the Democrats. “But I also strongly reject – I strongly reject – I strongly reject what my colleagues are doing here today.”

Rep. Susan Wild (D-PA) said the move by Republicans is an effort to paint the party as divided over Israel. “I have not seen any sign of division in the Democratic caucus about support for Israel. But, I think that’s what they’re trying to create an appearance of division,” Rep. Wild said.

The Republican motion failed by a vote of 228 to 194, although at least seven members broke ranks with their parties. Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Justin Amash (R-MI) voted no on the motion to recommit and five Semocrats voted in favor, including Reps. Jefferson Van Drew (D-NJ), Anthony Brindisi (D-NY), Joe Cunningham (D-SC), Elaine Luria (D-VA) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ).

“This is a matter of principle for me,” Rep. Gottheimer told Jewish Insider. “I have always stood strong against antisemitism and always will.”

Rep. John Curtis (R-UT), speaking before seeing the vote on the MTR, told JI, “I would just emphasize how important it is that we figure out how to keep this a bipartisan issue,” he said regarding antisemitism. “One of my worries is that I’m seeing this kind of being fractured into a Republican issue and we really need to keep it a bipartisan issue and I’m hoping we can do that.”

“I think for the most part we’re not seeing in committee meetings its more on the outside of committee meetings where you’re really starting to see this friction. I’m worried that Democrats are leaving this issue a little bit and we really need them to stay with us on this antisemitism and make it a bipartisan issue,” Rep. Curtis said.

Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA), a member of the Democratic Israel Working Group caucus, told JI, that the majority of Republicans voting against the Yemen bill showed their motion to recommit was disingenuous.

“I listened to the Republican [Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX)] make his case about B.D.S. and it’s exactly why I do oppose B.D.S. But this was about trying to undermine a bill about Yemen and the starving, hungry children in a war torn part of the world.”

Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL) further condemned Republicans of using Israel as “a political ploy.”

“The war in Yemen is one of the worst humanitarian crises… Republicans tried to defeat the resolution by adding language about B.D.S., using Israel as a political ploy. I stand strong in my support for Israel, which can never become a political football. I strongly oppose B.D.S. and have voted for resolutions condemning it on multiple occasions,” she said.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), speaking at a press conference following the vote, called the defeat of the GOP’s BDS. motion, a “turning moment for America” and called on the House leadership to introduce S.1 – the senate-passed bill which includes a provision barring the government from doing business with individuals or organizations that boycott Israel.

“Today was a day in history I didn’t want to see in America. Today, every Democrat but five voted against an amendment to reject the B.D.S. movement. Every democrat but five would not stand with Israel today. This is a turning moment for America.”

Laura Kelly is the Capitol Hill reporter for Jewish Insider. Follow her @HelloLauraKelly

Former President Barack Obama will host a reception for freshman House Democrats on Monday evening at the home of Ambassador Esther Coopersmith in Washington, D.C, Jewish Insider has learned. Coopersmith, known as “one of the best at playing the Washington ‘networking’ game,” was appointed by Obama as a UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador in 2009.

On Monday night, AIPAC will also hold its leadership reception, perhaps AIPAC’s most-significant annual gathering, which typically puts the vast majority of members of Congress, AIPAC’s leadership, board and national council all in one room, during the same block of time.

Several progressive 2020 presidential hopefuls, including Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, have already announced they won’t be attending AIPAC’s policy conference this year. However, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio is scheduled to speak at the conference on Monday.

On any given night in D.C. while Congress is in session, members typically attend several receptions, but this conspicuous scheduling conflict has caught the attention of D.C. insiders. Obama’s reception is called for 7:15PM, while the AIPAC gathering is from 6:45PM until 10PM.