I'll never forget the fact that when @BarackObama published his first written statement about Hamas's 10/7 massacre of Jews, he felt the need to say the words, "Nobody's hands are clean." I'll never forget it, and I'll never forgive it. And, yes -- he actually said that.
Correction: Obama’s “Nobody’s hands are clean” statement may have been his second statement, following an initial statement several days after 10/7 (on 10/9) in which he apparently felt the need to include a remark about “Israelis and Palestinians alike.”
The point stands: Obama chose not to express sympathy for the actual victims — Jews and Israelis — and had to “All Lives Matter”* the bloodiest day for Jews since the Holocaust.
His statement “Nobody’s hands are clean,” in his subsequent statement, never should have been made — and that was indeed his first long-form statement, published on Medium.
*If you think that “All Lives Matter”-style statements are appropriate in general, that is fine. I actually do not care. That is not the point. The point is that when people in any other minority group were targeted or even just felt targeted, Barack Obama made specific, focused statements in defense and support of the particular ethnic, racial, religious, cultural or national origin group in question.
But when Hamas butchered over 1,000 Jews, Obama refused to make a statement focused solely on Jews and Israelis. That was a calculated choice — and it made clear that he didn’t think Jews or Israelis were entitled to the same level of defense and support as all other ethnic, racial, religious, cultural, and national origin groups.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Sometimes, I still can’t believe all of this actually happened (see quoted tweet, and quoted tweet thread within it), but it did. A rather unusual experience, but I handled it well, and the matter ended in the right way. (He was convicted a few weeks ago.)
And before you ask, no, I did not get (or even seek) any kind of whistleblower / human source compensation or award related to my findings / disclosures about the company’s use of, and payments to, “third party” service providers — which actually turned out to be entities owned and operated by the same fraudster, as mentioned in the March 2023 Washington Post article about the fraudster’s arrest.
Just did what was right, and moved on.
I’m not sure what happened to all of the $3 million seized, or to the other tens of millions held in the name of the company by other entities that were also seized as part of the $630 million seizure mentioned in the initial charging documents (which, according to a superseding indictment, may actually have been many tens or hundreds of millions more). Fortunately, some of the money was returned to the victims of the wider fraud / racketeering scheme of which the company was just one part.
Life is crazy, folks. But you’ve always got to do the right thing.
Something I never mentioned publicly before, but can now. Six months after I left the company in 2022, a platform user who had used the platform to make numerous explicit threats to kill or grievously harm people (including to kill @Mike_Pence) was on trial in state court for making those threats.
Even though I no longer worked at the company, I had been its Director of Trust and Safety at the time the threats were made (and at the time that law enforcement reached out to us about it), and I remembered the situation very well, including the user’s handle, real name, the subpoena for his registration information, and his dangerous posts.
The company had never bothered to hire a new Director of Trust and Safety, which wasn’t surprising given their disturbing approach to platform safety (see quoted tweet thread). The prosecutors reached out to me to ask me to be a prosecution witness at the trial. They didn’t force me to do so, but they needed me, so I did. I flew to that state courthouse a few days later, got on the witness stand with the defendant and jury in the courthouse looking at me listening to me, and testified.
He was convicted, too. As a result, he can’t own a firearm. Which, given the dozens of violent threats and death threats he made, is probably a good thing.
Like I said, life is crazy.
@Mike_Pence (I know this story is crazy. But the threat against Pence was mentioned in that same March 2023 Washington Post article too. Yes, it was that same user I testified against. Yes, this actually happened.)
I don’t speak on behalf of AIPAC or work for AIPAC, but for two years, I and other young Americans who care about the U.S.-Israel relationship served on its Young Leadership Council in New York, advancing its mission to support America’s relationship with our ally Israel. 🧵
In the wake of Jamaal Bowman’s primary congressional campaign loss to Democrat George Latimer last night, Bowman’s campaign, supporters, and fellow-travelers have begun demonizing the critical work that AIPAC’s PAC is doing to support Democrats who support our diverse and democratic ally Israel.
Jamaal Bowman and his friends have lied that AIPAC is right-wing. It is not. It is bipartisan and non-partisan, and anyone who has volunteered with, worked with, or attended events hosted by AIPAC can confirm that. Virtually all of the friends I made through AIPAC are Democrats.
UPDATE: I filed a Title VI antisemitism complaint against @Harvard and @Harvard_Law with @usedgov @EDcivilrights ("OCR") in mid-November 2023. OCR still has not opened it for investigation. (This is separate from a different OCR complaint about *other* instances of antisemitism, at Harvard College, that OCR did open.) OCR has neither rejected my complaint nor opened it for investigation, but rather has continued stating to me, via written correspondence from the OCR attorney assigned to the case, that the complaint is still "under evaluation."
After I initially filed the complaint, the OCR attorney asked me for additional materials and evidence, and I satisfied those requests in full. But the case is still "under evaluation," even though I filed it over three months ago. Meanwhile, OCR quickly opened an investigation into a complaint alleging anti-Palestinian harassment at Harvard -- a mere eight days after it was filed.
It turns out that the OCR attorney assigned to the case, Emma Kim Milligan, is a Harvard College and @Harvard_Law graduate who (according to LinkedIn) was a research assistant for Professor Jon Hanson -- the very same @Harvard_Law professor who called Jews and Israelis "bigoted" "colonizers" who "blow up babies" and called the @EdWorkforceCmte hearing on antisemitism "bullshit." (See quoted tweet below.)
This is a terrible conflict of interest -- a Harvard double-alumnus is in charge of deciding if OCR opens an investigation in response to my complaint against Harvard University and Harvard Law School, and she used to be a research assistant for a Harvard Law professor who, as it turns out, is openly antisemitic. No wonder my complaint has not yet been opened for investigation.
I think it's about time that OCR opened my complaint for investigation -- and going forward, OCR should not have its evaluations of antisemitism complaints managed by OCR attorneys with obvious conflicts of interest.
If you can believe it, my OCR complaint that is still "under evaluation," the OCR complaint that *was* already opened (filed by a different complainant), and the civil suit against Harvard that mentions HLS Professor Jon Hanson, are about *different* situations and circumstances. There's so much insanity that has occurred at Harvard to Jewish students that these two OCR complaints, and the separate civil lawsuit, don't even overlap.
@Harvard @Harvard_Law @usedgov @EDcivilrights I can’t believe I filed an antisemitism complaint against Harvard with the government and the government actually assigned it to an antisemitic Harvard professor’s former research assistant, who also went to Harvard.
Folks, it’s very simple. It is ILLEGAL for schools to ignore anti-semitic chants and protests. It is a violation of Title VI for ANY school (including private schools) that receives federal funds (including federal student loan dollars) to ignore hostile environment harassment.
Constant on-campus chanting of “from the river to the sea” creates a hostile environment for Jews, just as chanting “pick cotton, boy” creates a hostile environment for African-American students. It is ILLEGAL for schools to fail to take corrective action against such protestors.
At a minimum, no aspect of the academic, extracurricular, or on-campus housing opportunities offered by the school can involve any student having to endure these chants. If they are forced to endure it, the school is violating the law. Period. That is the law.
The @Harvard_Law administration continues to ignore my requests for it to fill out this basic and required paperwork, thus preventing me from enrolling at any other law school (or other graduate or professional school) toward a degree for nearly FIVE years now. This is insanity.
For the record, all current and former students are entitled to this, without exception. Not providing this makes it impossible for me to transfer or restart my studies elsewhere, as it is a required document for application/enrollment, from all previous schools attended.
Meanwhile, prospective employers don’t understand why I haven’t completed my degree, whether from Harvard Law or elsewhere. They don’t believe that the Harvard Law administration would keep me from getting my law degree (or other graduate/professional degree) from any school.
So based that in May 2018, the Dean of Students at @Harvard_Law tried to disappear me by lying on letterhead to the administration that I had told the registrar that I didn’t want to take finals.🙄
Over two years later, *a wild audio file appeared*, proving that she lied. (1/10)
A YouTube link to the audio was sent to 100+ full-time HLS faculty, 50+ admins, and Harvard’s president; several clicked on it. The HLS dean of students, caught in her lie, quit two months later to became a diversity officer at the opera. @ConceptualJames @realchrisrufo (2/10)
In the three years that I was on this absurd and wrongful “academic leave,” that dean of students sent me letters and emails demanding that I not discuss my leave of absence “with others, including other Harvard administrators, faculty, or staff” if I wished to return…(3/10)