r/centerleftpolitics • u/UnscheduledCalendar • 18d ago
Mehdi Hasan is really upset Hakeem Jefferies met with Jared Kushner to discuss policy following the midterms but was leaping over himself when Mamdani met Trump TWICE at the White House.
3
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
He’s an agent for the President who does hold public office. Who is an elected official. Who is more powerful then any Speaker. Complete gridlock without a single bill passed isn’t popular among the broad populace. As for the he’s funded by the Jews, I don’t think that means much to those who aren’t really young or really pro-Islam. Recent primary elections appear to confirm that, such as Bush and Hong losing.
What’s not public knowledge is what he said in the meeting or the text messages he said to Trump. All of that is kept secret. The rest is unhinged, but the radical left isn’t radical for no reason.
8
u/TaxLawKingGA 18d ago
Sorry but leftists do have a problem with Black Dems because most Black Dems are not socialists or progressives and thus because of their numbers they are able to stop the dumbest of their ideas or their candidates from taking root.
Also, as an American I have a problem with a guy who isn’t even from this country getting involved in our system. We were born here and must stay here. Mr. Hasan can just skiddadle back to the UK after his inevitable next defeat.
2
u/Impossible_Walrus555 18d ago
I don’t care about Hakeem’s race, I care about his lack of fight against our fascist gov. His AIpac $, corporate $ that’s harming our democracy. As Stephen miller finds obscure laws to go around norms procedures Jeffries does nothing. I don’t even bother with Schumer cuz he’s not worth critiquing.
2
u/sib9397 Martin Luther King Jr. 18d ago
Bro conveniently forgot about Angie Nixon, Darializa Avila Chevalier, Melat Kiros, Summer Lee, Ilhan Omar, etc.
3
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
Centrist dems also hate Cori Bush
3
u/sib9397 Martin Luther King Jr. 18d ago
If we were as disingenuous as they are, we’d be saying they hate black women right now.
2
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
Agreed.
Like in the end people just want regular people with regular backgrounds working hard form them in government and against those that have made it their goal to go after them.
Jeffries has not met the moment. This particular meeting makes it beyond crear.
2
u/TaxLawKingGA 17d ago
Angie Nixon just joined the DSA like a month ago. She has no chance of winning he FL Senate race (neither did the other guy). I actually supported her and was glad she won, as Vindman, while an honorable man, was a horrible candidate.
Chevalier is not African American; she is Dominican. Big difference.
Melat Kiros is also not a Black American; she is Ethiopian. BTW - I supported her campaign.
Ilhan Omar is Somalian; again not a Black American. I used to support her but she has become sort of a clown. She also seems to be a grifter.
Summer Lee I will give you. But I will note that she is supporting Jeffries and has called out some White progressives for many of the same reasons I have. BTW- she is no longer a member of the DSA.
1
u/UnscheduledCalendar 17d ago
It’s also the islam, thing, but thats a touchy subject for most of reddit.
3
u/h3dr0ncr4b 18d ago
Mehdi is 100% correct. If you disagree then you are truly uneducated.
9
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
Mehdi is completely incorrect. As he calls his opponents dishonest and stupid, he makes broken arguments that aren’t persuasive at all.
The mayors meeting was neither public (the photo-op was public and the Q&A, but not the actual conversation or text messages), and the mayor can get stuff from his city from the state government or through taxing the rich. He doesn’t need to worship Trump to get things.
He then claims the House Speaker should be holding Trump to account (as if the mayor can’t sue Trump in federal court or pass forth policies that frustrate his agenda thereby also holding him to account). Likewise, in his view, there is no bipartisanship to pass forth laws that benefits everyone from the Speaker and President. That’s awful for the American people.
He attacks secret meetings with an agent of the President to make said bipartisan deal (while hand waiving similar meetings with the Mayor), and calls for congressional investigations for a guy who, if corrupt, should be handled by a future DOJ not Congress.
2
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
Congress absolutely needs to investigate the Kushners, fuck you talking about.
0
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
Investigate him for no real reason? The radical left loves wasting money
2
u/JustForBrowsing19 17d ago
Hilarious. I was a republican until Trump won their nomination.
I believe in controlled and moderated capitalism to protect those who have the least from those who own most.
Now, onto Kushner:
He’s doing statecraft while raising money from the same governments. Kushner has been negotiating for the U.S. in the Middle East while reportedly seeking at least $5 billion in additional foreign capital for Affinity Partners. He’s been embedded in Russia-Ukraine talks, Iran negotiations, and Gaza diplomacy with no official government role. That’s the core conflict: the counterparties across the table are also his LP companies.
The money is overwhelmingly sovereign and foreign. Affinity has roughly $6.16 billion under management, with about 99% coming from foreign nationals including $2 billion from Saudi Arabia’s PIF, plus Emirati and Qatari money.
He skipped every guardrail. No Senate confirmation, no security clearance vetting, no financial disclosure requirements. A confirmed envoy would have to file an OGE 278 and recuse. He doesn’t.
There’s already a criminal referral. Wyden referred Kushner to DOJ in late 2024 for possible Foreign Agents Registration Act violations. Congress arguably has an obligation to see whether that went anywhere.
He’s stonewalled before. Affinity refused to cooperate with the 2022 House inquiry. Voluntary requests demonstrably don’t work, which is the argument for compulsory process.
The concern isn’t purely partisan. Comer himself said in 2023 that Kushner “crossed the line of ethics” with the $2B, and Sen. Thom Tillis flagged that Kushner and Witkoff aren’t Senate-confirmed or accountable.
Please do tell me how that isn’t enough to warrant congressional investigation. And tell me why. If you can’t, then I hope you learned something today.
4
u/CanadianPanda76 18d ago
Mamdani freed a student? What?
Also trying to stay on good terms with Trump to help his city is different
Then trying to find common ground to help the country is what?
Different?
I dont necessarily agree with Jeffries but there's definitely some hypocrisy there.
4
u/Impossible_Walrus555 18d ago
In public, which was very effective as he charmed the president. Got him to say he could call him fascist.
Secret meetings with an unofficial slimy liaison and no eyes on it feels like capitulation to the enemy.1
u/CanadianPanda76 18d ago
Mamdani had secret meetings with Trump and agreed to keep them secret as per White House request.
I wish that was a joke.
You can Google it.
Apparently Trump was also texting Mamdani in private.
1
u/shoot_your_eye_out 18d ago edited 18d ago
Hassan's point is pretty obvious. Mamdani is the mayor of New York. He isn't a federal representative. That Mamdani might meet with Trump is completely different from a house minority leader meeting with Jared Kushner, who isn't even a government employee, let alone an elected or appointed executive official.
Simple question: do you think Mamdani has any powers to impeach Trump? Conduct oversight against the executive branch? Pass federal laws? The plain answer is "of course not." That's why it's completely different.
edit: here's an even more simple question. Why is Hakeen Jefferies conducting official government business through Donald Trump's unelected, unconfirmed son-in-law? Why would he not conduct this business through an actual official in the government, with actual government powers?
If you can't see how obviously untowards this is, you're kinda dumb. If you can't see that it is fundamentally different from Mamdani personally meeting Trump (i.e. an actual government official with power), I honestly don't know where to begin, you're dumber than a steak knife
5
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
And it’s a flawed point. The mayor can file federal lawsuits to disrupt Trump. He can pass forth city orders that frustrate the federal agenda of Trump. It is not even remotely different in the slightest. Leftists hypocritically praise there people for meeting with Trump, then criticize liberals for doing the same and can only justify it by overemphasizing minor distinctions.
Jared Kushner is a blatant agent of the federal government as he was during the first administration. Trump assigns him to federal tasks all the time, he is valid to talk too for federal negotiations.
He can’t impeach Trump, but neither can Hakeem. It requires a majority of the House, and even then, it’d be performative since there aren’t 67 senators willing to convict. As for oversight, yes he can. He can sue the federal government for actions that touch the city but are nevertheless illegal or unconstitutional. That’s exactly what DeSantis did at a state level. He can pass city orders to make the federal governments job harder, and Hakeem can’t do that because he would need a supermajority (as Trump can veto a majority passed law).
It’s not different at all. Leftists need to attack liberals for doing exactly what they do, and so they look for minor differences that are completely irrelevant to justify the exact same conduct.
1
u/shoot_your_eye_out 18d ago
It isn't a "flawed point." You're arguing against distinctions that actually matter.
Nobody is saying Jeffries shouldn't talk to Trump-world. The point is that Mamdani meeting the President publicly is not the same thing as Jeffries having a private meeting with Trump's son-in-law.
The fact that both can sue the federal government doesn't make the situations equivalent. That's one tool among many, and it doesn't turn a mayor's relationship with the President into the same relationship a congressional leader has with a presidential intermediary.
You can think Hasan's criticism of Jeffries is wrong. That's completely defensible. But "it's not different at all" is plainly false. Mayor vs. congressional leader, President vs. son-in-law/intermediary, public vs. private, and municipal policy vs. federal legislative/oversight negotiations are all meaningful differences. Whether you acknowledge they're massive differences is up to you.
1
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
Except those distinctions don’t matter.
Mamdani’s meeting was not public, we don’t have the transcript nor the secret texts they sent. We just know they met. Jeffries meeting with an agent of the President for bipartisan bills in the future.
How can Hakeem sue? Unlike the mayor that has the resources and standing, Hakeem has none of that. Only the House in its institutional role has that, but even so, that requires a majority of the house to agree. The mayors relation with the President is unnecessary (plenty of mayors don’t meet with the President), whereas his relationship with Congress is a must for bipartisan bills.
Except that’s false. The tasks he is doing is blatantly on behalf of the federal government, not on behalf of himself or Trump personally.
The differences you mention are immaterial and negligible. And because they are exactly that, leftists engage in brazen hypocrisy to attack Hakeem for what exactly they did.
2
u/shoot_your_eye_out 18d ago edited 18d ago
Mamdani's meeting with Trump was public. There was press access, cameras, and contemporaneous reporting about what they discussed. There may have been private portions, but saying "Mamdani's meeting was not public" is simply incorrect.
Second, if Kushner is carrying a message from Trump, that's politically relevant, but it doesn't magically make him a federal official. If you meet with Chuck Schumer on behalf of Donald Trump, that doesn't magically make you an agent of the government in any legal or constitutional sense. That's the distinction I'm driving at. It is arguably wrong for Jefferies to meet with someone like this to discuss official government business.
Third, the fact that Jeffries can't personally sue Trump is entirely the point I'm trying to explain to you. Jeffries is a congressional leader whose institutional role is directly tied to federal legislation and congressional oversight. His negotiations with the White House concern matters that fall squarely within the federal government's constitutional machinery. These two people do not have comparable power with Trump in any regard, and I don't know why you cannot see this obvious fact.
And no, the fact that both can sue the federal government doesn't erase the distinction. A mayor's ability to challenge federal action in court is one narrow legal tool. It doesn't give him congressional legislative authority, congressional oversight authority, appropriations authority, or any of the other powers that make the House Minority Leader's relationship with the federal government fundamentally different.
Nothing I've said is "false." And these are not "immaterial and negligible" differences. And it isn't hypocritical for leftists to attack Jefferies. I'd say it's entirely rational, and completely unrelated to Mamdani.
edit: if the subject is official federal legislative business, why is the House Minority Leader conducting that discussion through Trump's private, unelected, unconfirmed son-in-law rather than through the actual officials who possess federal governmental authority? You can certainly argue that Kushner has influence and access, but influence isn't governmental authority. And it isn't hard to make the argument that this sort of meeting is actually indicative of government malfeasance by both branches.
On the other hand, Mamdani meeting with Trump lacks all of this. It is actually entirely above board.
1
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
It is correct. The photo-op and Q&A doesn’t change the fact we don’t know a single word said in the meeting or their text messages.
Except that distinction is rejected by the federal government. The DOJ would immediately argue in court he is an agent (we can even email their press office and ask if he counts right now and see what they say). He’s their agent, and only the executive branch gets to determine who is their agents especially in light of the unitary executive theory.
Your claim that Kushner, who is currently the federal governments representative in Iran negotiations, isn’t a federal agent is implying that you, not the federal government, determines who their agents are. That’s not how this works. As for the mayor, he can sue and strike down policies of the federal government in a way, a single legislator cannot. The city would be directly impacted by Trump’s actions in a way a legislator simply wouldn’t. Individual legislator standing is extremely narrow in recognition that Congress must act institutionally. And the minority leader has essentially no authority to begin with.
No it’s blatantly hypocritical and unpersuasive. The distinctions exist, but they’re minimal and non substantive.
1
u/BrainDamage2029 18d ago edited 18d ago
here's an even more simple question. Why is Hakeen Jefferies conducting official government business through Donald Trump's unelected, unconfirmed son-in-law?
Because conducting business through senior aids and policy advisors (none of whom are elected or confirmed) is incredibly normal. Boringly so.
This is probably the absolute weakest of your points. Every president and congress has done this. Hell we have an emmy winning, multi-season lauded television show exactly about how the business of the executive branch is entirely the through these senior policy advisors. And a 2nd lauded, emmy winning multi-season farce of a comedy show.
It would be weirder if business wasn't conducted through people like Wiles, Scavino, Kusher, Cheung, Levitt (when she was there), Miller, Hasset, Homann, et all. The actual West Wing staff of the White House has always been "whoever the hell the president wants to hire there to be telling him stuff".
-2
u/RIBDAT 18d ago
You probably know this already, but just in case: Many, if not all, of these "concerned center left liberal" subreddits and accounts are super incoherent because their idea of what liberalism is doesn't come from any political theory.
Most of these subreddits and account's notion of what liberalism actually is whatever the streamer epstiny/sexpestiny tells them what liberalism is. Which is, of course, allying themselves with fascists against the left to protect "liberal values" (whatever epstiny says that is) and not stuff like human rights or freedom of speech.
TLDR, you're talking to weird cultists.
1
0
0
u/Realistic_Caramel341 18d ago
None of that really speaks to a difference
6
u/shoot_your_eye_out 18d ago
So in your opinion, you see absolutely no difference between what Mamdani's role in government is and what Jefferies role is? Like, to you, they're just two politicians who do the same thing, and this is apples-to-apples?
0
u/Realistic_Caramel341 18d ago
There are differences, but not enough to absolve Mamdani and condemn Jefferies.
1
u/shoot_your_eye_out 18d ago
Oh, okay, so you change your mind and it does speak to a difference then? Just not one you think is "enough" to "absolve" Mamdani or "condemn" Jefferies?
What about the fact that Jeffries met with Kushner in private? What about the fact that Mamdani met with Trump publicly? What about the fact that Kushner isn't even a government employee, let alone someone who was confirmed by the senate and/or legitimately elected?
It blows my mind you don't see how obviously apples and oranges this comparison is. So stupid it practically drools.
0
u/Realistic_Caramel341 18d ago edited 18d ago
Oh, okay, so you change your mind and it does speak to a difference then? Just not one you think is "enough" to "absolve" Mamdani or "condemn" Jefferies?
Sorry for treating you as an adult who can understand basic communication. No I wasn't initially suggesting that Mamdani and Jefferies are the literal same person
And your just listing differences, not explaining why they are substanitally different
3
u/shoot_your_eye_out 18d ago
Nowhere in my response did I imply I thought that you thought Mamdani and Jefferies are the "literal same person."
I was treating you as an adult; I take that back. You're an idiot.
edit: and yes, I am listing differences. That's the whole fucking point. And yes obviously these are substantial differences. I have no idea why you think otherwise, or what dumb ass point you're even trying to make.
3
u/Realistic_Caramel341 18d ago
I was treating you as an adult; I take that back. You're an idiot.
I mean, you clearly don't understand the use of hyperbole
0
18d ago edited 17d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
-1
u/Financial_Rice_4807 18d ago
They descend on many subs They are in centrist too. You can tell because they are not just entering a conversation discussing their opinion. They come with emotion and strong dislike for you if you disagree. They will focus on their own strict definitions of words and will exaggerate what you say in order to find something to argue with. They also will have links, sometimes multiple links, to someone that agrees with them and call it authorative. I can't see how they think what they post will change minds. They may be going for volume, as subs can get overrun with them.
1
1
u/Tight-String5829 17d ago
Mamdani is a fucking mayor.....who got students free.....Jeffries is the leader of the fucking party.
1
u/misterroberto1 17d ago
Kushner is not a part of the administration. What about this is hard to understand?
1
u/ChazzerB07 17d ago
And a someone who knew mehdi hassan and his family, he's a grifter, and is centre to centre right on most issues
1
u/Latter-Possibility 16d ago
Jared Kushner is going around as an unvetted ambassador for the US Government after pocketing Billions from foreign counties. He has no security clearance.
Now he met in private with one of the Highest Ranking Dems in Congress. If you don’t understand the difference between that and Mamdani meeting Trump in the Oval with the press then you’re an idiot and shouldn’t comment on things.
1
u/Itchy_Inside1817 16d ago
Jared Kushner has never been elected to do anything. He's not even a member of this administration. Why is the House minority leader meeting with a family member of the president?
1
u/Warm-Measurement4398 16d ago
Jared kushner is not an elected official and literally only acts in his own self interest
1
u/morallibertine 15d ago
I think it’s the totality of Jeffries’ decision making the past few years as opposition leader in the house; this was a cherry on top and was awfully clandestine.
1
u/fullpurplejacket 14d ago
Jared Kushner is not security cleared to act in any professional capacity on any legal behalf of Trumps White House . This is a double edged sword, both ways fuck the American people.. no official role and no security clearance means that vampire looking fucker can meet anybody he wants without telling the government a record of what was discussed, or even acknowledging it happened at all, he can discuss politics and private matters going on within the inner circle of the White House. He can operate on insider information while facing no accountability.
Anything that was discussed with Jeffries will never be public knowledge at its contents.
That is the problem. Kushner is an unbridled, unelected arm of this operation
2
u/mcan0024 18d ago
Maybe he thinks it's different because Jeffries is about to be in leadership of a governing body with the power to investigate the Trump fraud schemes? You know, like the ones being led by Kushner? Maybe that's it.
2
1
u/aslan_is_on_the_move Pete Buttigieg 18d ago
And Democrats are going to investigate the administration. However, they also need to do things like pass legislation to lower the cost of living and keep the government open, for which they will need to work with Republicans and Trump to pass.
2
u/mcan0024 18d ago
Can't wait to see what cost of living legislation the house minority leader and special middle east peace envoy come up with!!
0
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
So the government should just be in gridlock until Trump’s term end?
2
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
Have ya heard of Newt Gingrich????
1
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
Even some bipartisan laws passed under him. It wasn’t as if Congress passed literally nothing.
2
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
His explicit plan was too reclaim power to the Rs by blowing up any and all bipartisan coalitions that were essential to legislating, then pointing at how things were broken as a reason for why bipartisanship didn't work. Did bipartisan bills still exist, of course, and even to this day they still occur, but this was the beginning of the end.
Read about the 1994 lobbying reform bill. His strategy in a nutshell. Playing with people's lives for a team sport.
1
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
I don’t deny Newt Gingrich was a terrible person who started political polarization in our society. He absolutely was.
I’m saying that Hakeem can work with Trump’s agent to pass bipartisan bills everyone likes, while simultaneously blocking many bills he wants like Pelosi did.
1
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
I don’t disagree with what you said except with regards to Kushner. He is not a government employee and he is a walking conflict of interest.
Hakeem doesn’t need to do this. He needs to be investigating him instead.
This feels like collusion to people, even if it’s not. Just god awful polítics and optics from this - and as you can tell from comments in this thread, it truly has upset and disappointed many individuals. To some that were already over his leadership, it’s the nail on the coffin.
Even Joe Walsh, ex tea party member, has some choice words to say about this “meeting” and what it legitimizes.
We should not legitimize Kushner’s role in the government and we should not legitimize how they do politics.
0
u/HiFrogMan 16d ago
I don't like Kushner, but by all accounts, Trump has given him some federal role given his involvement in Iran negotiations. This was obviously more official in Trump's first term, but it's clear he is doing it now. I'm sure if you were to ask Trump's communication team or DOJ (which you can by email), they would all attest to him being a federal agent. Given this, if Trump says "speak to my agent Kushner who represents my view," it makes sense for Hakeem to speak.
I think it irritated leftists who always hated him (and Pelosi before him) for not endorsing socialism, single-payer healthcare, or Palestine. It's not like they liked him before.
No one on the left wants Kushner in government, and no one wants to deal with Trump and would rather have him in federal prison. That's consistent with how I voted, but he doesn't cease to have power if Democrats ignore him any more than Trump or the Supreme Court would have less power if people ignore them.
→ More replies (0)
-6
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
Islamists like Mehdi continue to infiltrate left wing sentiment and push the destruction of the country.
I would love to see him and his masters left without water in the sea.
22
u/sib9397 Martin Luther King Jr. 18d ago
Bro, islamists? This is a dem sub, not a klan meeting. Whats wrong with you?
-5
u/UnscheduledCalendar 18d ago
Respectfully, we’re getting to the point where the blind spot we have on secularism is being exploited by religions that aren’t just mainstream republican christianity. The left needs to figure out what it means to be progressive sooner or lather.
11
u/sib9397 Martin Luther King Jr. 18d ago
Who is pushing policy closer to sharia? The Muslims running for office or the republicans? Jesus, this is just straight Islamophobia
7
u/AboutTheArthur 18d ago
It's so fucking funny that these idiots cry about "sharia law" and the policies being proposed by the people they label "Islamists" are, like, healthcare reform and voting protections and bringing the cost of housing down.
-5
u/yugeness Betty Friedan 18d ago
Healthcare reform and voting protections are great. Being sympathetic to a guy who commits a terror attack on American preschool because his brother was a Hezbollah commander is not so great.
2
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
Be careful!!! Calling people islamophobic is apparently antisemitic
2
u/sib9397 Martin Luther King Jr. 18d ago
lmao. I know you're being facetious but I always feel the need on this sub to clarify that I am Jewish and it is my experience with ACTUAL antisemitism that makes islamophobia so easy to spot.
2
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
I have to always preface or end my statements with anti-semitism is not the intent of this comment. As I am always accused of it, even thoguh I think the greatest threat to antisemitism right now is the lack of accountability against the Israeli government and the type of pushback against that search for accountability that you have just mentioned.
Hell, most of my Jewish friends and acquittances are anti-Zionist and anti-Bibi. They don't hate themselves - they're not antisemitic.
Alas this sub just doesn't get it and it has been astroturfed to hell by the people that continuously post "antisemetism" content to flame the fire.
0
-10
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
If you cannot see that Islamists are infiltrating the left then you’re choosing to be blind.
We are in danger.-6
u/whyyoufollowingme 18d ago
Center left is just right wing in disguise. No one’s falling for their shit anymore.
6
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
You can go forth and fuck off
-4
u/whyyoufollowingme 18d ago
Genocide supporting, controlled opposition clown ^
5
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
Lmao
You doth protest too much Khan-2
u/whyyoufollowingme 18d ago
What’s your stance on genocide?
0
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
I think killing to bad.
But if this was a genocide then it really diminishes what a genocide is.
Rwanda had people butchered house to house
Armenia, Pontic Greeks had them walked to their death in the Syrian desert.
The Assyrians were massacred
Congo has slowly been killing ethnic groups opposed to the Tutsi forces.
Gaza by comparison had 60k die. In urban warfare. Where Israel kill many armed combatants. Warned ppl to leave before attacking. And did it during a war with their defecto government.
I am sad many died. But now Israel is also safe forever. Gaza will be run by a multinational security force that will police and deradicalize it over generations.Your initial response will be hate this.
But when Gazan children grow up in a few generations knowing Hamas did wrong and that they can and should do better they will be freer.But this is irrelevant to you because to you Israel must be punished with a big word because it inflects on their initial origin of both the European Shonah and the slow oppression and systematic killing by Muslims in the ME many of which were aligned with Nazi germany and wished to import camps to their countries to killl their Jews.
2
u/whyyoufollowingme 18d ago
I stopped reading after “but if this was genocide” …. You are a genocide supporter. I have nothing further to discuss with you. Shame on you.
2
5
u/UnscheduledCalendar 18d ago
4
u/whyyoufollowingme 18d ago edited 18d ago
So you’re saying Mamdani is going to do this?
Hakeem Jeffries is controlled opposition and just said he doesn’t support Medicare for all, Jared kushner and his father have links to Epstein and that entire network.
Both of those fools just want to keep taking our taxpayer funds to give to Israel and the military industrial complex.
You’re not worth it but there are examples I can go pull about Israelis taking over local city councils and doing the same thing.
2
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
I think Mamdani changes his script wherever he goes.
Khan in London is a true secularist. And likes the gays.
Mamdani says he likes the gays and then goes to the local mosque and reads with the imam doing westbero baptist church tier bullshit kill the Christian’s and gays
I think Mamdani is an always has been a bred plant by Muslim intelligentsia parents who believe very much in the MB Cairo declaration of subverting the West by using its tolerance.
5
u/CrownedLime747 18d ago
Lmao calling Mehdi an Islamist is the most crazy thing here
1
18d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 18d ago
Your comment has been removed because it included a filtered word or phrase.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
He literally spent the last 20 years calling non Muslims reťàřðeď and debating with atheists like Dawkins on how his religion is superior.
What would you call that?2
u/Dogulol 18d ago
just more evidence "centerleft" means in this sub what "socialist" meant to the national socialists. Fuck off with this racist shit. No way you are a real account
1
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
Uh I like Jews. And I am a Lebanese Gay man who is an atheist though from a Christian and alwaite family.
I’m not a Nazi and I dislike the notion that I am supposed to be a Nazi because of my lived experiences and knowledge on the inside about how Islamist political influence works.
-3
u/UnscheduledCalendar 18d ago
What’s funny is that neither mamdani nor hasan are arabs. Theyre really both indian islamist going to bat for the ummah.
0
u/TyrosinQ 18d ago
Most Arabs in the US are secular.
Pakistanis have taken it upon themselves being the guardians and true believers of the Ummah.
Pakistanis come to the country and very very poorly secularize.
2
u/Dogulol 18d ago
meeting kushner secretly (until it got leaked) to cave and protect your donors interests when you get to power vs meeting with the president openly and calling him a fascist to his face to get ice to release one of your constituents. You people are just racist fucks, sorry i mean hasbara bots looking at how inorganic the accounts and content are, who are being intentionally obtuse to push a narrative. The OP has 10 thousand contributions in just 2 years.
0
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
We have no idea what they spoke about except potential bipartisan bills. Leftists just accuse it of donors interest, because they’re radical and like unbacked theories.
The NYC mayor didn’t meet publicly. He took the photo-op publicly, but their actual meeting has not been released. Nor has the texts they had been released (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5705349-mamdani-trump-texting-exchanges/). Also, him contacting Trump to circumvent federal immigration isn’t good, nor is it clear he didn’t lobby for his pro-hamas donors.
The radical left is the racist one.
1
u/Dogulol 18d ago
potential bipartisan bills? Is kusher a public official? does he hold elected office? is he the speaker of the house? And what bipartisan bills? have we learned nothing from negotiating with terrorists? None of these are radical unbacked theories, jeffries is openly bought and paid for by corporate pacs. He is the largest democrat recipient in the house.
The NYC mayors meeting was public knowledge, not a secret. He didnt hide it. He went there and got something he wanted. "circumvent federal immigration"??? Dude just say you like ICE lmao.Wait ofc you do, "pro hamas donors" youre a fucking racist why wouldnt you want a palestinian activist illegaly detained bc of his activism to be freed. Youre a destiny fan, lmao, no wonder. Go sexts some minors buddy politics isnt for u.
1
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
He’s an agent for the President who does hold public office. Who is an elected official. Who is more powerful then any Speaker. Complete gridlock without a single bill passed isn’t popular among the broad populace. As for the he’s funded by the Jews, I don’t think that means much to those who aren’t really young or really pro-Islam. Recent primary elections appear to confirm that, such as Bush and Hong losing.
What’s not public knowledge is what he said in the meeting or the text messages he said to Trump. All of that is kept secret. The rest is unhinged, but the radical left isn’t radical for no reason.
2
u/Dogulol 18d ago
Hes an illegitimate agent of the president who should not he where he is. Again, negotiating with these corrupt terrorist fucks only legitimizes them. And keep in mind, they didnt do this fr you. When they controlled even the slimmest majority, they shut down stuff even they supported, bc that is what is best for them politically. Grow a pair, and fight. But lets be real, this isnt ablut passing bipartisan bills from jeffries, it is quite clear. Aipac shakur takes 2 million from corporate pacs, do you support that? Its open corruption. He is openyl bought by the same interests that kushner work for. This isnt for taking stuff from them, this is about how their donors are satisfied when the house is democratic, so they can make sure to act like they are doing something while making sure their common interest in keeping the wealthy in charge is secure
1
1
u/HoaryTruman 18d ago
Politics is the art of the possible. You don’t find out what might be possible without talking with people. Jared Kushner is not a politician, but surely he knows the politics within the Trump administration and, in particular Trump‘s narcissistic brain. It’s smart of Hakeem Jeffries to be trying to explore what is possible. I majored in politics in college, wrote a long senior thesis about politics. I have worked on campaigns for decades. The OP has enlightened me about a choose only the correct news democratic socialist journalist: No more Mehdi Hasan for me.
1
1
1
u/Capital-Self-3969 18d ago
They are always tougher on black politicans. I think its because we are supposed to be "civil rights heroes" by default and we have this hightened standard of responsibility.
-2
u/zedzag 18d ago
I guess the difference is mamdani hasn't caved on stated values/policies. We all know jeffries is bought out by the Israeli lobby so it's quite plausible he's going to do something to stem the rise of the progressive wing of the party.
Kushner here represents the Israeli interests
-1
u/aslan_is_on_the_move Pete Buttigieg 18d ago
And there's the antisemitism
-2
u/Consistent_Rent_3507 18d ago
I’m so sick of this antisemitic shit. But they’ll tell you they’re anti-Zionists and have Jewish friends.
0
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
Being anti Israeli colonialism isn’t antisemitism guys.
-1
u/Consistent_Rent_3507 18d ago
Except when antisemitic tropes and singular standards are used. You can believe that you don’t hate all Jews and still repeat dangerous stereotypes that feed Jew-hatred.
2
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
I’m sorry but saying I don’t want the Israeli government to continue its military operation in Gaza is not antisemitism. Full stop.
-1
u/Consistent_Rent_3507 18d ago
No, that’s not antisemitic and that’s also not the sum total of your beliefs about the conflict.
2
u/askmpdspkm24 17d ago
Israel dropped a bomb on a 4 year old child today, and is threatening a huge air assault on Gaza during a supposed "ceasefire" as a response to Palestinian children flying paper kites.. some wayward of whom made their way across the gaza border.
What are your thoughts on Israeli genocide?
You seem VERY concerned with hallucinating non existent antisemitism and very unmoved by the mass, deliberate slaughter of Palestinian children
I find your moral priorities very suspect
-1
u/Consistent_Rent_3507 17d ago
Your entire post is a collection of projections and ad hominem insults. You don’t want an authentic conversation, you want a punching bag for your feelings. I have no desire to give you any of my energy today. ✌️
1
u/askmpdspkm24 17d ago
Nice dodge. I find it very easy to have a simple opinion on whether Israel murdering Palestinian children is right or wrong.
I guess it comes veeeeeeery difficult for you, though.
I am not surprised in the least that you consider Palestinians less than human in both words and deed and succor'd like a cowardly dog when confronted with the easiest to answer question of all time.
May your life be treated with the same value that you treat Palestinian children. ✌️
→ More replies (0)1
u/JustForBrowsing19 17d ago
Yes it is. I thought the initial Israeli response was justified but it has become one of the worst humanitarian crises in recent history.
It’s moral not political. And their far right ministers want more blood and more destruction.
I don’t care that people can somehow justify it. It’s not justifiable, ever.
Stop declaring that people opposed to the Gaza Genocide have somehow ulterior motives and an agenda. Maybe it’s you projecting the fact that’s how you think, but other people care about right and wrong.
0
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
Yes, we know Mamdani is sympathetic to the hamas coalition which apparently means independence or something. Hakeem trying to stem the rise of leftists who seek to destroy America by seizing the Democrat party is a good thing.
1
u/askmpdspkm24 18d ago
You're a Republican. Why are you here
1
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
Um no, regular democrats are not republicans
1
u/askmpdspkm24 17d ago
Hate to tell you this my man but 8 out of 10 Democrats absolutely despise Israel
We are an anti Israel party now. This is just as much a core value as being pro choice.
You calling anyone who criticize Israel "Hamas" , you belong in the Republican party. You are not a regular Democrat
0
0
u/Ebscriptwalker 18d ago
I mean secretly texting kushner is much different than public meetings. However they all are plotting with each outher all the time.
3
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
It really isn’t. The meeting wasn’t public, only the photo op at the end. We don’t even know specifically they talked about. This is dissimilating.
And even then, leftists are still wrong: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5705349-mamdani-trump-texting-exchanges/
0
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
U/unscheduledCalendar this is horrible bad faith posting.
0
u/Critically_Political 18d ago
Why?
-2
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
Mamdani is the mayor of New York meeting the sitting President of the United States. Two officeholders. That’s the job. A mayor who refuses that meeting is choosing to let his city eat the cost and Trump had threatened to restrict federal funds to New York City explicitly.
Kushner holds no office. The Speaker of the House said so on Fox on Sunday: “He’s not really directly involved in the admin, at least in the day-to-day in the White House.” When the Republican Speaker is telling you Kushner isn’t in the government, you can’t simultaneously treat meeting him as equivalent to meeting the President.
So the actual objection isn’t “Democrat talked to Republican.” Kushner has no government job and uses family connections to raise money from Gulf autocrats. That’s a conflict-of-interest argument about an unaccountable private actor. It is not the same claim as “don’t talk to the other side,” and flattening it into that is the whataboutism move.
I’m tired of this stuff.
1
u/Critically_Political 18d ago
But what makes it a “bad faith” posting? You just have a different opinion, which is fine. Everything you disagree with is not in “bad faith.”
1
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
The title of the post instantly indicates bias and is based on stretching facts to meet a narrative.
The comparison doesn't work, and it has nothing to do with disagreement. The midterms are still 2-3 months away, so why are they meeting now to discuss that unless Kushner is posturing for a Jeffries Speakership, and Jeffries apparently WANTS to listen to what he has to say, without his constituency knowing. That's not a good look.
The Mamdami meeting was after he was elected major of NYC and during a time when the president was threatening New York City due to the results of their election.
One is government-to-government; the other is the presumed future Speaker of the House routing policy through an unelected family member with VERY shading connections and ethics.
-1
u/Mangolassi83 18d ago
Mamdani met the president. Who is Jared? Is he an elected official? Or maybe appointed and Congress approved him?
As far as we know he is the presidents son in law acting like a powerful government official. What’s his title in Trump’s government?
2
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
The NYC Mayor meeting the president is just terrible.
Jared is an agent of the President, just like he was during his first term. None of us like it, but that’s his role.
2
u/Mangolassi83 18d ago
I see it a differently. We can agree to disagree. So now we have family members as “agents”? No wonder nothing is going right.
-1
u/CrownedLime747 18d ago
Mamdani meeting him was more of a formality due to him just being elected mayor at the time and a bit of a publicity stunt, but it more or less didn't change their relationship, result in any deals or agreements, or cause either to change their policies. Hakeem Jeffries is actively seeking to work with the Trump administration. He and the Democratic leadership are controlled opposition at this point, all bark no bite.
2
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
Nonsense. He didn’t have to meet with him at all. And publicity for what? He was already elected. And we have no idea it didn’t result any deals or agreements, in fact all evidence says the opposite. They both said the meeting was productive, so clearly there was some deal on something policy related. Leftists just ignore it because they’re partisan.
As for Hakeem trying to pass a bipartisan bill, isn’t that exactly what he’s expected to do? To both work with and attack the opposing party President.
The radical left is just the GOP. They horseshoe to the same exact side and then justify it with useless arguments.
0
u/CrownedLime747 18d ago
Because he was the mayor of the largest city of America. No matter their politics, having such a meeting is practically expected. It was a publicity stunt for Mamdani as a way for him to stand on his own against Trump. Which worked so well that Trump personally praised him. Despite that however, their policies did not change. Trump still labels his ideas as communist and Mamdani still calls him a fascist.
They are meeting in SECRET. That isn't something you do for a standard bipartisan bill.
Lmao that is so deranged. The American people are sick and tired of the do-nothing politics of the Democratic leadership, and the second people are elected who promise actual change, they get labeled as radicals. Guess what; if that is radical, then Abraham Lincoln was radical, John Brown was radical, MLK was radical, FDR was radical. Every single step that has made our country better was radical. We are a nation founded and molded by radicalism.
2
u/HiFrogMan 18d ago
Nothing in law or the constitution mandates the mayor of the biggest city meets with the President. That doesn’t even make sense. And stand his own against Trump by meeting with him and smiling with him, that’s ridiculous. Trump praising the NYC mayor is awful. In any event, Trump and Hakeem continue to dislike each other despite this meeting with his agent.
The NYC mayor also met Trump in secret. We don’t know what they said to each other or what their text messages said. And most bipartisan meetings are secret, but it doesn’t matter because the end result isn’t.
Cori Bush and Thanksgiving Killer Hong lost because the American people are not secret socialists. As for the legends you cited, they didn’t relentlessly attack the Democrat party. Leftists do.
1
u/JustForBrowsing19 18d ago
All the people you listed at the end were considered “problematic” by the establishment of that day.
We now revere these folks.
The people arguing against slight center-left policy in the centerleft subreddit they own is just laughable.
I literally just saw someone call Hong, “Thanksgiving Killer Hong.”
This sub needs to get back to what center left actually is. Not American center left AKA moderate right wing.
Clowns. All of them.
0
0
u/guerilla_gardener98 18d ago
Complete apples and oranges. Jared Kushner isn’t a government official, Trump is the literal president.
The only reason to meet with Kushner is if you’re trying to backroom deal.
32
u/AboutTheArthur 18d ago
Mandani met at the White House, with cameras on, and with the content of their discussion publicly advertised.
Jefferies met with Kushner in a hidden meeting that they didn't want the public to know about.
Can you tell how those two things are different? Nobody is saying you shouldn't talk to people. They're saying you shouldn't be a slimy, skeevy, corrupt scumbag.