Pro-Palestinian Protesters who have attacked President Joe Biden have reportedly all been funded by major Democrat donors.
Breitbart reported that several key figures backing President Biden are also financially supporting pro-Palestinian protests. These demonstrations have criticized Biden's policies using the moniker “Genocide Joe.”
The complexity arises as major Democratic contributors such as George Soros, David Rockefeller Jr., and Nick Pritzker are linked financially to groups involved in these protests.
This revelation has sparked a debate about donor influence and intentions within the Democratic Party.
Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow has been central to demonstrations on campuses like Columbia University. These groups receive funding from the Tides Foundation, known for its support from many high-profile philanthropic entities.
The Tides Foundation itself benefits from contributions from figures such as George Soros and, previously, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. However, the Gates Foundation has since ceased its support, distancing itself from the groups mentioned.
In 2022, David Rockefeller Jr., linked with the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, contributed $300,000 to the Tides Foundation, which supported Jewish Voice for Peace with approximately $500,000 over five years.
The protests have escalated over time, showing a surge in intensity. Incidents of property damage and antisemitic remarks during these demonstrations have raised concerns about their nature and the broader implications for the party.
President Biden himself has commented on these protests, delineating between lawful and unlawful actions. "Destroying property is not a peaceful protest, it’s against the law," he stated, emphasizing the legality of peaceful demonstrations.
Meanwhile, the backing of Biden alongside these protest groups by the same donors has led to internal contradictions within the party.
Some Democratic allies have voiced their disapproval, concerned about the antisemitic undertones of some protests.
These developments have not gone unnoticed among the donors themselves. Daniel Goldwin highlighted donor apprehensions, saying, “We’re hearing from folks who want to make sure their dollars aren’t supporting people who are supporting Hamas and shouting antisemitic things.”
Moreover, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, through its spokesperson Sarah Edkins, described its funding policy as supporting a range of ideas, "some align with the Biden administration’s agenda and others conflict." This statement underscores the complexity and nonpartisan nature of their philanthropic efforts.
Elisha Wiesel, critic of the Rockefeller Fund’s decisions, questioned the support for groups directly opposing Israeli policies by stating, "Why [is the Rockefeller Fund] giving significant grants to Jewish Voice for Peace, [which] blamed the horrific Oct. 7 attacks on Israel and the United States rather than Hamas?”
The effect of these protests on upcoming elections remains uncertain. According to Jill Zipin, while foreign policy issues typically do not dictate election outcomes, the evolving dynamics of protest movements could shift public perception.
Omar Wasow echoed this sentiment, suggesting that the salience of these issues might increase if protests continue, potentially affecting the elections. However, he also noted that American voters generally show limited interest in foreign policy.
As U.S. casualties in Gaza increase, the anti-Israel sentiment globally might also play a role in redefining political support for Biden among the electorate.
In summary, pro-Palestinian protests have illuminated a complex and somewhat paradoxical situation within the Democratic Party, driven by funding from some of Biden's major backers. The concerns raised by the escalation of these protests, coupled with donor apprehensions and unclear electoral implications, paint a picture of an intricate political scenario that continues to evolve.
