Four prominent villains appear in Trump’s closing ad – titled, “Donald Trump’s Argument for America,” released just before the November 2016 election: Three are Jewish; the fourth is the 2016 Democratic nominee for president:
George Soros, favorite Trump punching bag – “The establishment has trillions of dollars at stake in this election. For those who control the levers of power in Washington …”
Janet Yellen, then Chair of the Federal Reserve – “… and for the global special interests.”
Hillary Clinton – “They partner with these people who don’t have your good in mind.”
Lloyd Blankfein, then CEO of Goldman Sachs – “It’s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities.”
Josh Marshall, who posted this ad on November 5, 2016, commented at the time:
“These are standard anti-Semitic themes and storylines, using established anti-Semitic vocabulary lined up with high profile Jews as the only Americans other than Clinton who are apparently relevant to the story….
This is an anti-Semitic ad every bit as much as the infamous Jesse Helms ‘white hands’ ad or the Willie Horton ad were anti-African-American racist ads. Which is to say, really anti-Semitic…. This is an ad intended to appeal to anti-Semites and spread anti-Semitic ideas….
This is intentional and by design.”
Fast forward to today, in the aftermath of what is “likely the deadliest attack on the Jewish community in the history of the United States.” Julia Ioffe raises the question, “How much responsibility does Trump bear for the synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh?” and observes: “Culpability is a tricky thing, and politicians, especially of the demagogic variety, know this very well. Unless they go as far as organized, documented, state-implemented slaughter, they don’t give specific directions. They don’t have to. They simply set the tone. In the end, someone else does the dirty work, and they never have to lift a finger — let alone stain it with blood.”
She writes of Trump’s campaign:
Trump had so much to say about the Jews that his Jewish son-in-law has had to publicly defend him as “not an anti-Semite.”
But the anti-Semites have not been convinced. A month after he had ordered his trolls to attack me, white supremacist Andrew Anglin told the HuffPost what he thought of Trump’s refusal to denounce them. “We interpret that as an endorsement,” he said. To his readers, he wrote, “Glorious Leader Donald Trump Refuses to Denounce Stormer Troll Army.” When Trump blamed “both sides” for Charlottesville, his supporters heard him loud and clear: “I knew Trump was eventually going to be like, meh, whatever,” Anglin said. “Trump only disavowed us at the point of a Jewish weapon. So I’m not disavowing him.” Many others in the alt-right praised Trump’s statement as moral equivocation on Charlottesville. To them, this, rather than the forced, obligatory condemnation, was the important signal. (According to the Anti-Defamation League, the incidence of anti-Semitic hate crimes jumped nearly 60 percent in 2017, the biggest increase since it started keeping track in 1979. What made 2017 so different? It was Trump’s first year in office.)
Image of July 2016 Trump tweet (subsequently deleted) featuring Star of David.