AIPAC eyes another push against El-Sayed after $32 million defeat in Michigan primary

Press TV – August 7, 2026
US pro-Israel lobbyists are considering spending millions on propaganda to boost the popularity of pro-Israel Republican Mike Rogers against Democrat Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan’s Senate race.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and other special-interest groups have already wasted tens of millions of dollars in a failed attempt to stop El-Sayed during Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary.
On Wednesday, El-Sayed defeated his rival Haley Stevens, who enjoyed overwhelming backing from AIPAC as well as the Democratic Party establishment.
Stevens, who openly described herself as a “proud pro-Israel Democrat,” had received substantial campaign funding from AIPAC in return for her support of the Israeli regime.
To secure the nomination, El-Sayed not only overcame Stevens, a four-term Democratic congresswoman, but also the full weight of pro-Israel groups and Michigan’s Democratic power brokers, including Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who had endorsed Stevens.
AIPAC reportedly spent $32 million trying to promote her.
El-Sayed’s victory stunned the US political system. If he wins the Senate seat, he will become the first Muslim to serve in the US Senate. Immediately after the primary, US President Donald Trump rushed to label him a “Communist loser who hates Jews and Israel.”
“[I]f we come through this, when we come through this, Inshallah, we’ll have taken $70 million on the chin and kept fighting back,” El-Sayed said after his win, referring to the massive spending deployed against him.
Senator Bernie Sanders called the result the “most extraordinary victory” in modern US politics.
The win carries special weight because El-Sayed prevailed in a statewide race in a swing state that voted for Trump less than two years ago, despite the flood of money and establishment endorsements lined up against him.
Pennsylvania progressive Representative Chris Rabb said the victory sends a clear message to the Democratic establishment: “The things that used to work are old and arcane and do not reach the types of people that will come out who won’t vote for normal traditional Democrats.” Rabb added that El-Sayed’s ability to expand the party’s voter base will help defeat Rogers in November.
El-Sayed’s campaign slogan is direct: “Money out of politics. Money in your pockets. Medicare for All.” He has consistently argued that taxpayers’ money currently wasted on wars should instead be used to support communities across the United States and Michigan.
His victory demonstrates that when a candidate runs on a clear anti-war platform and is prepared to confront special-interest groups like AIPAC, American voters will support them, said Michigan Democratic Representative Alabas Farhat.
El-Sayed, a former public health official, will now face Republican former congressman Mike Rogers, a close Trump ally, in the November midterm elections. AIPAC’s heavy involvement and the growing unpopularity of the Israeli regime among Americans over wars in West Asia have become central issues in the race.
“AIPAC can try dumping millions of dollars into propaganda, but at the end of the day, American voters don’t want our tax dollars to go toward bombing families abroad. We want to fund healthcare, not warfare,” said Iman Abid, political director of the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights Action.
Sally Howell, a history professor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn who has pioneered research on Arab-American and Muslim-American communities, described El-Sayed’s win as “genuine change” for Michigan.
“It tells us that voters are very frustrated with the establishment – the establishment in Washington and the establishment in the Democratic Party,” she said. “They want leaders who are going to bring change, not more of the same.”
Undeterred, AIPAC has already announced it will escalate its efforts and push for significantly higher campaign spending in a desperate bid to defeat El-Sayed in November.
“Our members remain determined to ensure that voters reject Dr El-Sayed and his radical anti-Israel agenda in November,” the group declared in a statement on Wednesday.
Yet social media commentator Russell Ellis, known as Jolly Good Ginger, observed that the more AIPAC pours into pro-Israel propaganda, the fewer votes it is likely to win. American voters across the country are showing they are fed up with the Israeli regime and its powerful lobby.
AIPAC spends $30m but fails to stop El-Sayed in Michigan
MEMO | August 5, 2026
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has suffered a major electoral defeat after Dr Abdul El-Sayed won Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, crushing pro-Israel congresswoman Haley Stevens despite an unprecedented spending campaign on her behalf.
AIPAC’s super political action committee, the United Democracy Project, spent more than $30 million promoting Stevens and attacking El-Sayed, according to Federal Election Commission filings analysed by the New York Times. NBC News projected El-Sayed as the winner on Wednesday, dealing a major blow to the pro-Israel lobby’s efforts to determine the outcome of one of the most closely watched Democratic contests in the country.
El-Sayed campaigned against US military assistance to Israel and repeatedly highlighted AIPAC’s intervention in the race. Stevens, by contrast, received the backing of AIPAC and the Democratic Party establishment.
The result is seen as providing some of the clearest evidence yet that association with Israel and its powerful lobby groups is becoming a political liability among Democratic voters as opposition grows to Israel’s genocide in Gaza and the unconditional support it receives from Washington.
A New York Times investigation published before the primary result was announced revealed the scale of AIPAC’s transformation from a traditional lobbying organisation into one of the largest spenders in US elections.
Spending by AIPAC-affiliated political action committees on campaign advertising and voter outreach has more than doubled in less than five years, rising from $29.3 million to $67.2 million. Much of the money has been directed towards Democratic primaries, where the lobby has sought to defeat candidates who criticise Israel or question US military assistance to the occupation state.
However, the investigation uncovered a striking feature of AIPAC’s campaign strategy: it rarely reveals its connection to Israel.
Between April 2022 and the end of July, AIPAC-funded groups produced 109 television and digital adverts. Only six mentioned Israel. Instead, the adverts focused on issues such as abortion rights, the economy and the cost of living, despite being financed specifically to elect politicians who support Israel.
AIPAC’s reluctance to mention Israel is seen as a reflection of a deeper political problem: open association with the Israeli government has become increasingly toxic following the mass killing, displacement and starvation of Palestinians in Gaza.
The lobby is effectively asking voters to support Israel’s preferred candidates without making Israel itself part of the public argument.
AIPAC has also channelled approximately $22 million into five smaller super PACs with innocuous names that make no reference to Israel. These include Elect Chicago Women, Affordable Chicago Now!, Voters for Responsive Government and Blue Wave Action.
The Michigan contest became the lobby’s largest gamble. United Democracy Project spent more than $10 million promoting Stevens and over $20 million attacking El-Sayed through advertising and voter outreach.
Nevertheless, El-Sayed prevailed.
El-Sayed’s victory is thought to be particularly significant because Michigan is home to one of the largest Arab-American populations in the US and became the centre of the “Uncommitted” movement, which challenged former President Joe Biden’s support for Israel’s assault on Gaza.
Signs of the political backlash were already visible in April when Stevens and another AIPAC-backed politician were booed during the Michigan Democratic Party Convention. El-Sayed and his former primary rival, Mallory McMorrow, had both pledged to reject AIPAC funding.
AIPAC has previously succeeded in removing several prominent critics of Israel, spending millions of dollars to defeat former Democratic representatives Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush. It has also targeted Republicans who questioned US military support for Israel.
However, the lobby has faced a growing number of defeats. Summer Lee survived repeated AIPAC-funded attempts to remove her, while candidates in Illinois and New Jersey successfully used their opponents’ links to the lobby against them.
Polls have also documented a rapid decline in support for Israel. A majority of Americans now oppose providing economic and military assistance to Israel, while Democratic voters have become increasingly critical of both Israel’s conduct in Gaza and the influence of pro-Israel lobbying organisations.
Abdul el-Sayed defeats AIPAC-backed rival in Michigan primary, defying millions in lobby spending
The Cradle | August 5, 2026
Abdul el-Sayed, a former public health official, has won Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, defeating AIPAC-backed Representative Haley Stevens in a close race, NBC News reported on 5 August.
Sayed won despite being heavily outfunded, with outside groups pouring close to $65 million into the race to stop him.
More than $30 million of the television advertising behind Stevens came from a group affiliated with the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC.
Taken together, Stevens and her allies outspent Sayed and the groups supporting him on advertising by a factor of nine to one, according to the ad-tracking firm AdImpact.
Sayed pointed to the imbalance in his closing argument, saying during a debate, “If you need a $60 million crutch, you probably can’t be elected on your own terms.”
He also went after Stevens’ support for aid to Israel, and stated outright that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, a position that carries particular weight in Michigan, home to large Muslim and Arab communities.
Sayed made Stevens’ backing from AIPAC and corporate political action committees a central charge against her, attacking both the funds she accepted directly and the advertising her big-spending allies bought on her behalf.
Stevens, a four-term congresswoman, ran with the backing of the Democratic establishment, positioning her campaign squarely within the party leadership alongside Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Governor Gretchen Whitmer endorsed her on 24 July in a late move seen as an attempt to stifle Sayed’s rise. Outgoing Senator Gary Peters, whose seat is at stake, also endorsed her after deciding not to seek a third term.
Despite the cumulative hurdles, Sayed’s victory follows a run of defeats for AIPAC-funded candidates in Democratic primaries this cycle.
On 30 June, Democratic socialist Melat Kiros unseated Diana DeGette in Colorado’s 1st congressional district by nearly 10 percentage points, ending a 30-year congressional career built in part on well over $1.6 million from AIPAC.
A week earlier, in New York, Brad Lander defeated Dan Goldman after attacking his refusal to call the assault on Gaza a genocide or to back restrictions on arms sales to Israel, while Darializa Avila Chevalier unseated Adriano Espaillat in a campaign centered on his acceptance of AIPAC money.
A senior House Democrat called the Colorado result a wake-up call, with support for Israel turning from an asset into a liability. Strategist Jon Paul Lupo told POLITICO that candidates opposing the war on Gaza held a massive political advantage this cycle.
Pew Research Center polling released in April found 60 percent of US citizens now view Israel unfavorably, with very unfavorable sentiment nearly tripling since 2022, while a Gallup poll in February recorded more US citizens sympathizing with Palestinians, at 41 percent, than with Israelis, at 36 percent – the first such result in US history.
El-Sayed Wins Michigan Democratic Primary for Senate

Al-Manar – August 5, 2026
Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive public health advocate, has won the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate, overcoming more than $60m in campaign spending, mostly from pro-Israel groups, NBC has projected.
The result on Tuesday represents an enormous blow to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which led the way in the effort to defeat El-Sayed, backing his opponent, US Congresswoman Haley Stevens, with more than $30m.
El-Sayed will face former Republican Congressman Mike Rogers in November. The race is considered one of a handful of competitive Senate contests in the November midterms and could determine which party controls the chamber for the rest of President Donald Trump’s term.
If El-Sayed – who is of Egyptian descent – wins in November, he would become the first Muslim senator in US history.
Tuesday’s result in Michigan – a swing state that voted for Trump in 2024 – will have major implications for the Democrats’ policies on conflicts in the Middle East.
El-Sayed recognizes Israel’s atrocities in Gaza as a genocide and argues that money spent on conflicts that benefit ‘Israel’ should be invested in local communities in the US to address healthcare, housing and infrastructure problems.
Maya Berry, executive director of the Arab American Institute, a non-partisan advocacy group that does not endorse candidates, called El-Sayed’s victory a “big deal”.
She said voters “did not buy” the avalanche of ads that did not talk about policies and only launched negative attacks “about an Arab American Muslim man named Abdul”.
AIPAC blacklists dozens of US lawmakers that backed cutting military aid to Israel
The Cradle | July 18, 2026
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) cut off online donations to more than two dozen House Democrats on 17 July, only days after they voted against a $3.3 billion military aid package to Israel.
AIPAC’s donation portal shows “pro-Israel” incumbents with contribution buttons, which were removed for Democrats who backed the amendment, while links stayed active for those who opposed the vote this week.
“AIPAC members are deeply appreciative of their representatives who stand on principle and are disappointed by those who don’t,” AIPAC spokesperson Deryn Sousa said in a statement.
On 15 July, Republican Representative Thomas Massie introduced the amendment to the National Security and Department of State Appropriations Act (NSDSA) 2027, aiming to cut about $3.3 billion annually in US military aid to Israel.
If approved, the measure would have eliminated Israel’s share of Foreign Military Financing (FMF), the program through which Washington funds foreign governments’ purchases of US weaponry, and would also have prohibited any funds in the fiscal 2027 State Department bill from being used to support Israel.
While the proposed amendment was defeated in a 314-to-104 vote, it marked a significant political shift, with nearly half of House Democrats voting in its favor.
Ties to the pro-Israel lobby have become an ideological litmus test for US voters.
Candidates critical of Israel have seen a sharp rise in support, with progressive challengers in New York defeating pro-Israel incumbents in congressional primaries in late June.
The defeats significantly impacted AIPAC, highlighting campaigns that focus on their opponents’ acceptance of lobby funds and their reluctance to label Israel’s assault on Gaza as genocide.
Accepting AIPAC funds has become “toxic” to a growing number of US voters, who increasingly weigh a candidate’s loyalty to the US against loyalty to a foreign lobby.
The financial pressure campaign runs parallel to broader Israeli efforts to shore up support among US citizens.
A recent investigation by TIME revealed that Israel has been paying President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager around $1.5 million per month to run an influence operation producing pro-Israel content aimed at Gen Z audiences across social media platforms.
The efforts have failed to stop the long-running reputational collapse, as one Pew Research Center poll released in April found 60 percent of US citizens view Israel unfavorably, while an older survey by Gallup showed more US citizens sympathizing with Palestinians than Israelis for the first time in US history.
AIPAC-backed candidates lose New York primaries as voters reject pro-genocide lobby
The Cradle | June 24, 2026
Progressive candidates in New York secured significant victories on 23 June, defeating pro-Israel incumbents in congressional primaries that marked a “huge hit” for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Brad Lander, a former city comptroller, unseated Rep. Dan Goldman in a contest defined by disagreements over Israel’s military actions. Lander, describing himself as a so-called “liberal Zionist,” rebukes Goldman for his refusal to label the Israeli assault on Gaza as a genocide or support measures blocking arms sales to Israel.
The progressive surge continued as democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier toppled Rep. Adriano Espaillat.
Her campaign focused on Espaillat’s acceptance of donations from the pro-Israel lobbying group, AIPAC.
Meanwhile, state lawmaker Claire Valdez is poised to replace retiring Rep. Nydia Velazquez after criticizing her opponent’s delay in using the term “genocide” and highlighting ties to AIPAC-affiliated groups.
These victories, bolstered by the influence of Mayor Zohran Mamdani, the first Muslim mayor of New York City, suggest that a critical stance against Israel and its influence over US local and international politics is now a political asset in itself.
Accepting AIPAC funds has increasingly become a litmus test for US voters weighing a candidate’s loyalty to the US over a foreign lobby.
Longtime strategist Jon Paul Lupo told POLITICO that voters opposing the Gaza war held a “massive political advantage” this cycle.
In his victory speech, Lander condemned the former US president Joe Biden’s “hug Bibi” strategy, calling it a “catastrophic mistake.” He stated, “I believe it made us complicit in genocide. Bombs we paid for killed more than 70,000 Palestinians – most of them women and children.”
Though AIPAC-funded candidates have found success elsewhere – such as when republican lawmaker Thomas Massie was defeated on 19 May by AIPAC-funded Ed Gallrein following the most expensive primary elections in history – US sentiment towards Israel has been on a sharp downturn since the genocide in Gaza was launched.
A poll by the Pew Research Center released in April reveals that 60 percent of US citizens now view Israel unfavorably, with “very unfavorable” sentiment nearly tripling since 2022.
A separate poll by Gallup in February found that, for the first time in US history, more US citizens sympathize with Palestinians (41 percent) than with Israelis (36 percent), a shift that occurred after years of witnessing Israeli war crimes and ongoing genocide in Gaza.
AIPAC concealing support for candidates as its brand becomes ‘toxic’ in Democratic primaries: Report
Press TV – June 1, 2026
The pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC has adopted fundraising methods that obscure its role in directing campaign contributions to political candidates, as support for the Israeli regime declines among Democratic voters in the United States, according to a report.
AIPAC has traditionally highlighted its success in helping elect candidates committed to supporting the regime, including backing billions of dollars in annual US military aid.
Reporting on Sunday, however, Israeli paper Ha’aretz said growing criticism of the regime among Democratic voters has made public association with the lobbying group a potential political liability.
“But as the Israel-boosting organization’s brand becomes toxic in many Democratic primaries, [AIPAC] has adopted a new fundraising method that hides its involvement in steering funds to favored contenders,” it wrote.
According to the report, AIPAC has encouraged donors to contribute through online portals it controls that direct funds straight to candidates’ campaigns, thereby “erasing AIPAC’s fingerprints in public data.”
The tactic was reportedly used in Michigan, where Congresswoman Haley Stevens is running for an open Senate seat against Abdul el-Sayed. During the campaign, el-Sayed criticized Stevens for accepting AIPAC-linked funding, saying the money had “bought” her support for continued US military aid for Tel Aviv.
The Detroit News reported that AIPAC raised several million dollars for Stevens through a fundraising page hosted on its website. Ha’aretz also said the group previously emailed donors directing them to candidate-specific donation pages on the “Pro-Israel Network” website rather than to AIPAC itself.
The report added that these portals allow AIPAC to gather donor information and share it with candidates, while working on their behalf and “shielding” the process from public view. According to Ha’aretz, the strategy helps candidates avoid criticism for accepting AIPAC support at a time when only 13 percent of Democratic voters reportedly view the regime favorably.
In March, Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego said, “I wouldn’t take AIPAC money because you have to basically be endorsing what’s happening right now, and it’s not good.”
Ha’aretz also reported that AIPAC has increasingly operated through political action committees whose names do not reference either the organization or the regime.
The issue has also surfaced among Republicans. Earlier this month, AIPAC spent $16 million in efforts to defeat Representative Thomas Massie, a prominent critic of Tel Aviv, in a Republican primary. Following his defeat, Massie said, “It’s turned into a referendum on whether Israel gets to buy seats in Congress.”
Thomas Massie Introduces Bill To Finally Force AIPAC To Register As A Foreign Agent Under FARA
blueapples on X | May 18, 2026
Ahead of a monumental primary on Tuesday, May 19th, which will determine whether or not the dying embers of America’s democratic process will be completely extinguished by the pro-Israel lobby, Kentucky representative Thomas Massie has introduced a bill into Congress that could deter future politicians actually willing to put America before Israel from suffering his same fate. On May 14th, Massie introduced the Americans Insist on Political Agent Clarity Act (”AIPAC Act”) in an effort to finally force the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (”AIPAC”) to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (”FARA”). The proposed legislation is the apotheosis of a crusade fought by Massie that has opened the eyes of the American people to see how the pro-Israel lobby has taken control over the country’s electoral process. Yet, despite widespread public support to force AIPAC to register as a foreign agent under FARA, the pro-Israel lobby’s stranglehold over Congress stands as a seemingly insurmountable obstacle keeping Massie’s proposed legislation from turning that into a reality.
The express aim of the AIPAC Act is to “amend the Foreign Registration Act of 1938… to clarify the definition of ‘foreign principal’ and ensure transparency in lobbying on behalf of foreign interests.” Under FARA, a foreign principal is defined as:
(1) a government of a foreign country and a foreign political party;
(2) a person outside of the United States, unless it is established that such person is an individual and a citizen of and domiciled within the United States, or that such person is not an individual and is organized under or created by the laws of the United States or of any State or other place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and has its principal place of business within the United States; and
(3) a partnership, association, corporation, organization, or other combination of persons organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country.
Since its inception in 1954, AIPAC has circumvented the registration requirements under FARA by virtue of being established as a domestic lobbying organization legally distinct from the parameters that the act uses to designate a foreign principal. AIPAC was created by Isaiah L. Kenen, a lobbyist for the Israeli government that previously served under the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who worked as the information director of the American Zionist Council (”AZC”). After raising $65 million and $73 million in U.S. aid for Israel in 1951 and 1952, respectively, Kenen grew weary that he would be investigated by the U.S. State Department for not registering as a foreign agent under FARA. Kenen created the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs (”AZCPA”) to navigate around the registration requirements under FARA in response to that concern. The AZPCA was renamed the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in 1959 and became the preeminent political vehicle for the pro-Israel lobby in the decades that followed its creation.
The AIPAC Act would amend FARA by adding a fourth paragraph that would additionally define a foreign principal as “any organization, association, corporation, or other entity….whose lobbying activities or stated mission is, either wholly or in part, to influence United States public policy or government action in furtherance of the political or economic interests of a foreign country or recognized state-affiliated political entity.” That language included in Massie’s proposed legislation would broaden the definition of a foreign principal to encompass domestic lobbying firms in the U.S. like AIPAC. The proposed legislation would also establish indicators for determining the foreign political alignment of lobbying firms and allow American citizens to file complaints with the U.S. Department of Justice to request investigations into potential FARA violations.
Massie explained the calculus behind the proposed legislation designed to require AIPAC to register as a foreign agent shortly after introducing it into Congress on May 14th in an interview with Redacted News. “For some reason, they’re immune right now, and I think not just the money that’s spent in politics but the lobbying that happens on Capitol Hill should be reported if it’s a foreign country. Whether it’s Great Britain, Australia, Turkey, Qatar, or Israel, it needs to be reported,” he stated, clarifying the amendment to FARA would apply to foreign principals lobbying on behalf of any nation.
Although the expanded definition of a foreign principal under FARA in the AIPAC Act would apply to lobbyists working on behalf of any nation, the material reality is that the legislation is designed to address the unrestrained power and influence of the pro-Israel lobby. In 2021, AIPAC changed its lobbying strategy by moving away from funding political candidates indirectly by working with unaffiliated political action committees (PACs) and instead created its own PAC to raise and contribute funds directly. In the 2024 election cycle alone, AIPAC backed candidates using its own PAC and super PAC, the United Democracy Project, in 389 congressional races through either official endorsements and/or campaign contributions. AIPAC-backed candidates won 318 of those 389 congressional races, expanding the roster of pro-Israel politicians in Congress even further. Presently, 80 members of Congress, or 15%, list AIPAC as their all-time top contributor.
Nowhere is the unyielding influence of the pro-Israel lobby on American elections more apparent than in Massie’s current bid for re-election to the U.S. House of Representatives. Massie, who has held the seat for the 4th Congressional District of Kentucky since first being elected to Congress in 2012, has seen the broader pro-Israel lobby spend tens of millions of dollars in an effort to depose him. Ed Gallrein, Massie’s opponent in the May 19th primary for the seat representing the 4th Congressional District of Kentucky, has received over $15.5 million in campaign contributions from pro-Israel PACs, including donations from the MAGA Kentucky PAC, created by Jewish billionaires Paul Singer, John Paulsen, and Donald Trump’s biggest political donor, casino magnate and fervent Zionist Miriam Adelson, expressly for the purpose of defeating Massie.
The race between Massie and Gallrein has eclipsed more than $30 million in spending, making it the most expensive congressional campaign in U.S. history. The majority of that spending has been made in an effort to unseat Massie, as the pro-Israel lobby’s expenditures against him have surpassed the $14.5 million dollars AIPAC spent to successfully replace former representative of New York’s 16th Congressional District, Democrat Jamaal Bowman, with pro-Israel candidate George Latimer in 2024. AIPAC also succeeded that year in unseating Democratic representative from Missouri’s 1st Congressional District, Cori Bush, with pro-Israel candidate Wesley Ball, thanks to $9 million of spending against her.
The defeats of Bowman and Bush were engineered by AIPAC to remove two of the most outspoken critics of Israel from Congress. However, neither Bowman nor Bush was as outspoken against the political malfeasance of the pro-Israel lobby as Massie has been. In recent years, Massie has shifted the Overton Window by exposing the inner machinations of the pro-Israel political machine toward a perspective that has accelerated the decline in public support for Israel from American citizens. In doing so, he has also amplified the efforts of AIPAC and the broader pro-Israel lobby inextricably tied to the Trump administration to replace him in Congress with a Zionist puppet, who has taken the form of Ed Gallrein.
While Massie had coasted to re-election in each of his previous campaigns, the spending against him by the pro-Israel lobby has created the realistic possibility that he could be ousted from Congress. If Massie fails at defeating Gallrein in the primary for his congressional seat, then it would render the AIPAC Act he has introduced to Congress as his last stand against a Zionist Occupied Government that has shown it will spend every resource at its disposal to subvert the American democratic process. That stranglehold that the pro-Israel lobby has over the American political system is clear as the AIPAC Act currently only has a 2% chance of being passed following its referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The dynamic cultivated by Massie that has led to the boundless spending against him by the pro-Israel lobby shows that even if he is defeated, then it may be little more than a Pyrrhic victory for AIPAC, as Massie’s demise would only prove how justified the crusade he fought against them was to begin with.
Thomas Massie Gives the ‘America First’ Leadership Trump Promised
By Jack Hunter | The Libertarian Institute | May 18, 2026
When Donald Trump ran for president in 2024, he promised, among other things, no more U.S. regime change wars, no more of America sending its citizens’ dollars to fund foreign nations, and that he and Elon Musk would drastically cut federal departments and overall spending, finally taking a hatchet to the country’s mounting debt.
In other words, the opposite of the last Republican president, George W. Bush.
It is 2026, the United States is stuck in a seemingly endless regime change war in Iran, America continues to funnel money to nations around the world (particularly Ukraine and Israel), Musk is long gone and any promises of spending cuts through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) are but a distant memory.
At this juncture, President Trump’s goal seems to be to become more George W. than George W.
Then there’s Thomas Massie, the libertarian-leaning Republican U.S. congressman from Kentucky’s 4th district, who was an avid supporter of Ron Paul’s presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012.
Long before Trump officially entered the political fray, Massie supported Dr. Paul, in part, because he promised no more endless wars, an end to foreign aid, and because he was a serious fiscal conservative.
When Trump also promised these things, Massie lent his support at various intervals and gave his full endorsement in 2024. Massie also still votes according to these principles in Congress. If those votes run against any part of Trump’s agenda, and they have—part of Trump’s early ire against Massie was his opposition to the president’s big spending “Big Beautiful Bill” last year—Massie still votes against war and foreign aid and for fiscal responsibility.
Massie has refused to change throughout. This has made Trump and people who blindly support him mad.
President Trump and his allies apparently now expect Massie to support U.S. regime change wars, to support foreign aid, and to put up with financial recklessness from Republicans. They are so angry that he won’t go along with their complete betrayal of what Trump originally campaigned on that the president, leftwing Zionist billionaires and Israeli lobbying group AIPAC have poured a historic amount of money into Massie’s primary opponent ahead of tomorrow’s election.
Team Trump insists that Massie needs to betray his principles just like they have. They are absolutely outraged that he won’t do it.
If you think this sounds completely insane, you would be correct. Only someone with their head so far up Trump’s backend could not be able to see the complete lunacy of how Team Trump now views Massie and his primary race.
There’s a lot of those, unfortunately.
What is fortunate, however, is there are also powerful conservative voices who can still discern reality.
Tucker Carlson is chief among them. Before interviewing Massie on his popular podcast earlier this month, Carlson said in his opening monologue, “Thomas Massie is, in his district, and probably nationally, but certainly we know for a fact in his district, the most popular person.”
He continued:
“Thomas Massie has made good on the promises that Donald Trump made to the nation. Thomas Massie is a better standard bearer for Trumpism, for the ‘America First’ ideology that Donald Trump ran on three times, than Donald Trump is.”
Carlson went even further about Massie’s overall character. “He is, in short, the American they told us we should aspire to be. He is the man you want your son to be.”
That’s high praise.
Another Massie fan is Dr. Ron Paul, who was exiting Congress when the Kentucky Republican was elected in 2012. Paul has said of Massie:
“I met Thomas before he came to Congress and was sworn in before his class was actually sworn in. But I was leaving Congress a few weeks later. So we actually crossed paths so we could say we served in Congress together.”
Paul would add, “I knew he was very dedicated to the cause of liberty. I was anxious to help him. And I think he has proved his case for being a defender of liberty and the Constitution.”
The same Thomas Massie who supported Ron Paul’s presidential runs and who now votes according to those libertarian principles is the same in his beliefs now as he has been throughout his entire political journey. For a time, Trump claimed to believe in these things too, but now clearly doesn’t. As Carlson notes, in the three times he ran for president, Trump promised an “America First” agenda and now, today, prioritizes the state of Israel and other foreign interests over those of the country he was elected to lead.
Which indeed makes Massie “a better standard bearer for Trumpism,” or at least what Trump advertised himself as originally, than Trump himself.
This is barely even debatable. It is almost perfectly clear to anyone not completely blinded by mind-numbingly dumb partisanship.
Again, what Donald Trump and his supporters now truly need from Thomas Massie is for him to betray those principles too. To join them in putting America second or third or worse.
But he won’t. And thank God for that.
Two Primary Elections for the Soul of ‘America First’
By Alan Mosley | The Libertarian Institute | March 27, 2026
Political slogans are cheap. Governing is not. “America First” is not a bumper-sticker philosophy. It is a testable claim about priorities: How much debt will we pile up, how many wars will we drift into, and how often will elected officials treat Congress as a ceremonial prop rather than a constitutional branch.
Midterm elections are where slogans go to trial. Primaries, especially, are where interests that cannot reliably win a general election try to win the nomination. They do it with money, with media saturation, and with the oldest trick in politics: framing obedience as unity.
This year, two Republican races show the fork in the road. In northern Kentucky, Rep. Thomas Massie is fighting a primary that has become a national vendetta project. In South Carolina, Senator Lindsey Graham is seeking a fifth term while publicly linking his political identity to a foreign-policy crusade, and treating dissent at home as a moral failing.
If Massie survives and Graham falls, it signals that Republican voters still have room for independence, constitutional friction, and skepticism toward overseas commitments. If Massie loses and Graham wins, it signals the reverse: the slogan becomes a mascot for power, not a restraint on it.
Thomas Massie’s case is straightforward: he acts like Congress matters.
That is not a rhetorical compliment. It is a job description. Legislators are not hired to be studio analysts for executive decision-making after the fact. They are elected to vote, to demand records, and to treat spending as something more than a press release. Above all, they are meant to represent the voters of their district.
Massie has built a voting record that major conservative scorekeepers rate highly. Conservative Review’s Liberty Score gives Massie a 96% A-rating for his consistent conservative record. Club for Growth rates him at 92 for 2024 and 93 lifetime, and labels him a “Defender of Economic Freedom.” These scorecards are not holy writ, but they are a consistent signal: Massie votes against the spending reflex that has turned the federal government into a debt machine.
Recent actions match that pattern. Federal records show Massie raised about $2.45 million in 2025, with roughly $840,000 coming in unitemized contributions, the classic signature of small-dollar fundraising rather than a donor class writing checks in neat, report-friendly chunks. He also voted against President Donald Trump’s marquee tax-and-spending package, a bill that passed the House by a single vote, 215–214.
Then there is the achievement that infuriates people who prefer secrecy to law. Massie used a discharge petition process to force a House vote on the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which passed 427–1. He and Senate partners later pressed the Justice Department to brief lawmakers on implementation of that law. In plain English, he pushed Congress to demand documents from the executive branch. That is not radical. That is what should come standard for any elected official: constitutional oversight.
Massie’s opponent is Ed Gallrein, a Trump-endorsed challenger who leans into being the president’s chosen foil for Massie and says he is fighting for “the America First agenda.”
The Trump factor is not ambiguous. Reuters reported that Trump endorsed Gallrein as Massie continued pressing for release of files related to Jeffrey Epstein, and as Massie criticized the administration’s handling of that issue. CBS reported Trump has crusaded against Massie and predicted he would be remembered as the “WORST Republican Congressman” in history.
But the most important part of the Gallrein candidacy is not biography. It is the machinery behind him.
By March 11, outside groups had already spent more than $5 million aiming to unseat Massie in the May primary. A super PAC linked to the Republican Jewish Coalition directed more than $2.8 million into the contest since late February, with the group “MAGA KY” spending around $2.7 million this cycle. Those numbers matter because they establish what this contest is: a safe-seat nomination being nationalized by outside spenders.
What is the glue holding this coalition together? Foreign policy, especially Israel-related aid and posture.
Much like the antiwar congressional hero Dr. Ron Paul before him, Massie has taken lonely stands, including voting against funding tied to Israel’s Iron Dome system. That is not a minor detail. It explains why “America First” branding is being used to sell a campaign that is bankrolled by groups whose defining priority is unwavering support for Israel-focused policy.
Long before the current burst of spending, reporting showed that pro-Israel megadonors were flowing money toward the anti-Massie effort. Donors backing Israel were funneling money to denounce Massie with ad buys in his district, and identified major donors associated with that effort. Senior Republicans expected the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) to target Massie ahead of the 2026 primary, as they had done the same in prior spending runs against him.
The result is a familiar Washington pattern where a member votes against the foreign-policy consensus, and the donor class tries to end his career in a low-turnout election where ads can substitute for local affection.
A movement that cannot tolerate this kind of internal dissent is not a movement. It is a hierarchy.
Where Massie’s story is conflict with the foreign-policy consensus, Lindsey Graham’s story is partnership with it.
Graham filed for reelection in March with a campaign operation that looks financially impregnable. Federal Election Commission data show $19.6 million in total receipts through the end of 2025 and $13.4 million cash on hand. In a state where incumbency already carries heavy weight, that kind of bankroll makes a primary challenger’s job close to impossible.
But money is not the core issue. The issue is what Graham says he is for.
In an Associated Press report from March 16, 2026, Graham described the war posture toward Iran with blunt certainty: “We’re crushing them.” Graham was also quoted making an Israel-centered argument in which he said Iran would “kill all the Jews, and we’re next,” and then added that he would put his efforts to ensure the military has what it needs to win “ahead of anybody in the United States Senate.” That is not a senator describing prudence. That is a senator describing priority.
The rhetorical line that detonated online came from cable news. In remarks reported by Newsweek, Graham said, “I’m not with you, I’m with Israel,” and pledged to be with Israel “to our dying day.” In the same reported segment, he said he was going back to South Carolina to ask people to “send their sons and daughters into the Mid East.”
When a senator tells his own state, in effect, that the dissenters are beneath contempt, and the sacrifice is owed, he is not practicing representation. He is brazenly announcing to the world that his true constituency lies in a foreign nation.
That posture is consistent with Graham’s official communications. On his Senate website in January 2026, Graham praised Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “duo” for the security and prosperity of both countries, described enhanced weapons cooperation with Israel as a potential “21st century ‘Manhattan Project,’” and insisted “failure is not an option.” That is language designed for permanent emergency, not constitutional restraint.
Even AP’s reporting framed Graham as having “everything he could ever want,” including Trump’s ear and the war he has long advocated, while critics compared his posture to a child on Christmas morning. His energy for more war would make even the late John McCain blush.
None of this requires conspiracy theories. American campaign-finance law makes the incentives plain.
Now place AIPAC and allied pro-Israel groups into that structure. FEC data show AIPAC has raised $34.3 million in receipts from January 1, 2025, through February 28, 2026, and disbursed $32.3 million in that period, including over $30.5 million in contributions to other committees. That is not marginal money. It is an industrial operation.
Major outlets have documented how Israel-related outside spending has surged in the 2026 cycle, including efforts in key primaries where advertising often avoids overt mention of Israel while targeting candidates critical of Israel policy. The Washington Post described AIPAC’s role in super PAC spending this cycle and the use of affiliated committees with benign names. When accounting for other associated organizations, upwards of $200 million has been spent on 361 congressional candidates who pledge to support a pro-Israel agenda.
Against that backdrop, the contrast between Massie and Graham becomes obvious.
Massie is punished for crossing the line against an imperial presidency. Graham is rewarded for enforcing it, in public, with contempt for “isolationists,” and with calls for deeper military involvement.
This is why the “America First” label is now contested terrain. A slogan that can be used to sell both constitutional restraint and open-ended war is not a philosophy. It is a marketing asset, and marketing assets are purchased.
Massie’s primary is not simply a question of whether he will hold a House seat. His district is reliably Republican and not expected to be competitive in the general election. The real decision is whether a Republican electorate will allow an independent lawmaker to keep office when national money and presidential ego demand submission.
Graham’s race is not simply a question of whether he will win reelection. It is whether South Carolina Republicans will ratify a posture that treats foreign conflict as a defining purpose, and treats constituents as a manpower pool, rather than citizens with rights and limits on what government may demand.
If “America First” means anything beyond applause, it means the country is not obligated to bankrupt itself, or bleed itself, to prove its virtue to donors, allies, or television audiences. It means wars are debated and authorized by Congress, and that military force is not a lifestyle. It means elected officials remember that “ally” is not a synonym for “master,” and that patriotism is not measured by willingness to sign blank checks.
That is why these two primaries matter as a pair. One man is being targeted for saying no. The other is being rewarded for never saying no, and for mocking those who do.
A party can choose restraint, or it can choose appetite. It cannot choose both and keep its soul intact.
Instagram suspends Track AIPAC, watchdog tracking pro-Israel lobby spending
MEMO | February 11, 2026
Instagram has suspended the account of Track AIPAC, a widely followed watchdog project that tracks political spending by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and related pro-Israel lobbying groups. The social media giant cited alleged violations of the platform’s intellectual property and trademark rules. The suspension places the account at risk of permanent deletion unless successfully appealed within 180 days.
Track AIPAC — also known as AIPAC Tracker — was launched in 2024 by Cory Archibald and Casey Kennedy as a transparency and advocacy platform documenting AIPAC’s political donations, endorsements and influence on US elections. The project publishes Federal Election Commission data on pro-Israel political spending, highlights which lawmakers receive the most support, and endorses opponents of candidates reliant on AIPAC funding.
The watchdog has become a prominent source for voters and activists seeking to make AIPAC funding “politically toxic” and to hold elected officials accountable for their ties to the pro-Israel lobby.
In a post announcing the suspension, Track AIPAC said Instagram had removed its account, which had amassed more than 137,000 followers, for alleged trademark violations, without clear explanation of what specific content triggered the action. The group said it plans to appeal the decision while shifting its engagement to its website and its X presence.
Supporters of Track AIPAC decried the suspension as a double standard on free speech and accountability. On X, critics argue that transparency about political influence is being stifled while lobbying groups with deep pockets continue to operate without similar oversight.
Commentators noted that the suspension comes at a time when AIPAC’s influence in US politics is increasingly being challenged. Since Israel’s genocide in Gaza began, there has been a steady shift among Democratic voters and some candidates away from accepting pro-Israel lobby funding.
Once considered politically untouchable, AIPAC is now viewed by many as a liability, with candidates distancing themselves from its donations amid growing public anger over Israel’s policies and its role in the genocide.
Polling suggests that a significant portion of Democratic voters now oppose candidates who accept pro-Israel lobby funding, reflecting a shift in grassroots sentiment.
This shift has been evident in recent elections and legislative cycles, with some lawmakers returning AIPAC donations or refusing further support, and others publicly criticising the lobby’s priorities. For instance, US Congressman Seth Moulton announced that he would return AIPAC funds and no longer accept the lobby’s support, citing concerns about its alignment with current Israeli government policy, a move that underlines how AIPAC’s brand has become fraught within its once-traditional political base.
The suspension comes at a time when AIPAC’s political spending is facing heightened scrutiny and growing resistance from segments of the Democratic base. As some candidates increasingly distance themselves from pro-Israel lobby funding, the removal of a watchdog account dedicated to tracking those donations has added to debate over transparency and accountability in US politics.


Modern medicine is built around costly, narrowly approved drugs that treat (but rarely cure) specific disease franchises, with regulatory approval correlating more strongly with money spent than with real therapeutic value.