Jewish Charity Scandals

Posted on July 18, 2025 by Luke Ford

ChatGPT says:

1. FIDF (Friends of the Israel Defense Forces)
Notorious for high executive salaries and spending a large share of donations on internal operations and events rather than direct aid to soldiers.

CEO salaries in the past have exceeded $900k/year.

2. The Jewish National Fund (JNF-USA)
Controls massive real estate in Israel, but has faced criticism for lack of transparency.

Spends heavily on marketing and events.

CEO salary over $600k/year, and a relatively small portion of donations goes directly to tree planting or land development.

3. American Friends of Magen David Adom (AFMDA)
Supports Israel’s emergency medical services.

While effective in some areas, watchdogs have flagged high admin and fundraising expenses at times, including executive salaries well above average.

4. American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC)
A major player in global Jewish aid.

Criticized in the past for top-heavy executive structures and expensive global operations.

Multiple execs earning over $400k.

5. American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science
Supports science research in Israel.

Some reports show a disproportionate chunk of donations spent on fundraising and salaries.

6. Birthright Israel Foundation
Heavy donor-backed programs sending young Jews to Israel.

Criticized for lack of spending transparency and marketing-heavy overhead.

Exec pay and admin costs sometimes flagged by donor advocates.

7. Hadassah
Owns hospitals in Israel; one of the largest Jewish women’s organizations.

Has had major scandals over pension mismanagement and high compensation (former CEO earned over $500k).

Also criticized for investing donations into self-owned infrastructure and not direct aid.

Grok says:

1. Friends of the Israel Defense Forces (FIDF)

Claim: Notorious for high executive salaries and spending a large share of donations on internal operations and events rather than direct aid to soldiers. CEO salaries in the past have exceeded $900k/year.

Analysis:

Executive Compensation: Historical data supports high CEO salaries at FIDF. For example, former National Director and CEO Meir Klifi-Amir received compensation ranging from $700,000 to $1.2 million annually between 2016 and 2020, with a total of over $5 million during that period. Current CEO Steven Weil’s exact salary for 2025 isn’t publicly detailed in the provided sources, but a 2025 eJewishPhilanthropy report notes he earns “one of the higher salaries in the Jewish nonprofit world,” suggesting it remains significant. In 2021, 161 employees received $17 million in total compensation, averaging $106,000, with 16 highly compensated employees earning over $4 million collectively.

Spending on Operations/Events: FIDF has faced criticism for lavish spending and high administrative costs. A 2025 Jewish Telegraphic Agency report and Ynet investigation highlighted allegations of mismanagement, including wasteful spending on five-star hotel stays and exclusive travel contracts, creating a “poisonous” work environment under board chair Morey Levovitz. FIDF raised $280 million in 2023, nearly triple its anticipated $100 million, but critics like Daniel Mael and Arnie Draiman argue that large reserves ($174 million in net assets as of 2021) are not being used efficiently for urgent soldier needs, with some funds tied up in investments rather than direct aid. FIDF’s 2024 year-end report claims $250 million committed to emergency needs (e.g., PTSD treatment, medical equipment) and $63 million for core programs, but the program expense ratio isn’t specified in recent data.

Transparency and Efficiency: FIDF has a 4-star Charity Navigator rating (98% score) and CharityWatch’s “Top-Rated” seal, indicating strong accountability. However, CharityWatch notes FIDF does not meet governance benchmarks, and critics argue its fundraising efficiency is questionable due to high-profile galas featuring celebrities like Mike Tyson and Ashton Kutcher, which cost millions to host. In 2021, FIDF spent $85 million against $89 million raised, with $25 million annually on average going to administrative costs, including compensation.

Verification: The claim of “most money” going to internal operations isn’t fully substantiated, as FIDF reports significant program spending (e.g., $101 million in emergency funding in 2024). However, the high reserves and allegations of lavish spending suggest a notable portion supports overhead. Check FIDF’s 2024 Form 990 on GuideStar or ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer for the latest program-to-admin expense ratio.

2. Jewish National Fund (JNF-USA)

Claim: Controls massive real estate in Israel but has faced criticism for lack of transparency. Spends heavily on marketing and events. CEO salary over $600k/year, and a relatively small portion of donations goes directly to tree planting or land development.Analysis:Executive Compensation: The claim of a CEO salary over $600,000 aligns with historical data. In 2020, JNF-USA’s CEO Russell Robinson earned approximately $600,000, per nonprofit salary reports. No 2025 data is available, but this suggests high executive pay is plausible.

Spending and Transparency: JNF-USA is known for real estate and development projects in Israel, including water infrastructure and community building. However, it has faced criticism for lack of transparency, particularly regarding how funds are allocated to specific projects like tree planting. Charity Navigator gives JNF-USA a 3-star rating (86% score), citing strong accountability but noting fundraising and administrative costs. In 2023, JNF-USA raised significant funds for resilience campaigns, but exact program expense ratios aren’t detailed in recent sources. Critics have pointed to heavy marketing (e.g., promotional campaigns, events) as diverting funds from direct programmatic impact.

3. American Friends of Magen David Adom (AFMDA)

Claim: Supports Israel’s emergency medical services. Watchdogs have flagged high admin and fundraising expenses at times, including executive salaries well above average.

4. American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC)

Claim: A major player in global Jewish aid. Criticized for top-heavy executive structures and expensive global operations. Multiple execs earning over $400k.Analysis:Executive Compensation: JDC’s executive pay has been scrutinized. In 2020, multiple executives, including the CEO, reportedly earned over $400,000, per nonprofit salary databases. No 2025 data is available, but this aligns with JDC’s scale as a global organization with significant operational needs. Charity Navigator’s 2023 rating (4-star, 91% score) notes strong governance, but high salaries are a point of contention.

5. American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science

Claim: Supports science research in Israel. Some reports show a disproportionate chunk of donations spent on fundraising and salaries.Analysis:Executive Compensation: No specific 2025 salary data is available, but historical reports suggest the CEO and top executives earn competitive salaries, likely in the $300,000–$500,000 range, typical for large research-focused nonprofits. Charity Navigator rates the organization highly (4-star, 90% score), but salary concerns persist among critics.

The Forward published Oct. 21, 2013:

One Jewish charity CEO hid allegedly stolen cash in his apartment closet. Another had an affair with his assistant while the assistant’s son-in-law stole from the CEO’s organization. A third covered up sex abuse charges for decades.

Scandal after scandal has hit New York’s top Jewish charities this year. Experts blame lax oversight, saying that the multi-decade leadership tenures common among Jewish charity CEOs have corroded governance at some of the Jewish community’s largest not-for-profits.

The four major Jewish charity scandals over the past 10 months come just five years after some of the same organizations lost a fortune in Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi scheme.

Two-decade terms are common for the men who run the nation’s largest Jewish organizations. Wealthy families hold seats on multiple boards of trustees. Several professionals who specialize in Jewish charity management told the Forward that fixes exist for the governance problems facing the Jewish not-for-profit sector, but they require structural changes. Executive suites need to turn over faster, the experts said. Trustees need to be better trained, and to be selected with an eye toward oversight skills, not just deep pockets…

The worst year for Jewish charities since the Madoff debacle in 2008 started in late December 2012, when the Forward reported that Yeshiva University’s longtime former president Rabbi Norman Lamm had admitted to covering up allegations of sex abuse of high school students from the 1970s through the ’90s. Alleged victims soon filed a $380 million lawsuit against the school.

Then, in May, the Forward reported that top officials at the Conference of Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, which distributes aid to Holocaust victims, had been warned of fraud being perpetrated by employees eight years before a full investigation uncovered a multi-million dollar scam.

Things got even darker over the summer. In July, the 92nd Street Y fired its executive director, Sol Adler, after learning of Adler’s affair with his assistant, Catherine Marto. His affair, though embarrassing, wasn’t the worst of it. Marto’s son-in-law was the Y’s head of facilities, and was accused of taking kickbacks from vendors on construction projects. The Y shouldn’t have been surprised: He had pleaded guilty in 1999 in a Mafia-backed Wall Street fraud.

All those scandals were just a warm-up for the firing in August of William Rapfogel, CEO of the Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty and one of the largest figures on the New York Jewish not-for-profit scene. Rapfogel was charged in September with stealing $5 million from Met Council in a two-decade kickback scheme. His predecessor at Met Council, Rabbi Dovid Cohen, resigned in September from his current job running the Jewish ambulance service Hatzolah.

These weren’t the first embarrassing scandals in recent memory for Y.U. or for Met Council, both of which lost donor money in the 2008 Madoff fraud. Madoff was chairman of the board of Y.U.’s business school and a former treasurer of the university; J. Ezra Merkin, who managed funds that secretly fed millions into Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, was on Y.U.’s investment committee. That Merkin was on the board committee charged with overseeing the university’s investments didn’t keep Y.U. from investing in his fund, a conflict that received heavy criticism after the Madoff fraud was revealed. Y.U. lost $105 million invested with Madoff through Merkin.

Apr. 11, 2016, the Algemeiner published:

Back in January, a Jewish healthcare charity in New York was ordered to repay $47 million to state and Federal authorities following the revelation of Medicaid fraud. This followed the dubious bankruptcy of the Federation Employment & Guidance Service — another Jewish social service nonprofit. And then there’s the scandal of the Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty, whose former director is currently serving a prison sentence for a 20-year attempt to defraud the charity. What’s going on?

CenterLight Healthcare

Formerly known as the Beth Abraham Family of Health Services, CenterLight Healthcare provides long-term care solutions such as nursing, home help, and rehabilitation services. It’s a much needed and much welcomed institution that has doubtlessly givenaid to those in need, including those without adequate healthcare provisions.

However, late last year it emerged that CenterLight “did not play by the rules” (in the words of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman) when it came to certain Medicaid dealings. Essentially, CenterLight enrolled more than a thousand Medicaid patients into programs for which they did not qualify. CenterLight then fraudulently claimed state payments. While the patients may well have benefited from these programs, the fact that CenterLight falsely took state money puts a rather less philanthropic light upon the case.

FEGS And The Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty

Back in March 2015, another Jewish social organization, the Federation Employment & Guidance Service (FEGS) filed for bankruptcy. Nearly 1,400 people lost their jobs, but the executives all got substantial pay outs. By October the organization was under investigation for mismanagement, and those who lost their jobs were filing suit against their former employers to the tune of $6.6 million.

FEGS was one of the largest nonprofits in the United States, but allegations that it treated its employees shabbily have not gone away, and the circumstances surrounding its bankruptcy smell decidedly fishy.

Coinciding with all of this is the case of the Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty. This charity aims to help families in need to connect with and obtain services (such as housing, social benefits, senior aid, food, and so on) that would help them. In May of last year, its former executive director, Rabbi David Cohen, was sentenced to a jail term for his part in defrauding the nonprofit out of around $9 million over the course of 20 years.

Posted in Charity | Comments Off on Jewish Charity Scandals

Morey Levovitz Pushed Out Of FIDF, Steven Weil Pushed Back

Posted on July 17, 2025 by Luke Ford

How did Steven Weil get his job with FIDF? It helps to have a friend (relative? cousin?) by the name Elazar Stern who is a retired General of the IDF school from the Dati Zionist camp in Israel’s Knesset. Steven Weil has always done a great job cultivating the rich and powerful. While at Beth Jacob, he would regularly meet with the machers (big shots) in a cigar club in Beverly Hills. The farm boy from upstate NY who started as a little rabbi in Detroit ended up in Beth Jacob and then the OU and then he earned millions of dollars with the FIDF.

Judah Ari Gross writes:

The board of the Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces is moving to force Morey Levovitz, the organization’s embattled chair, from his post in response to growing controversy surrounding his tenure, including allegations of mismanagement and creating a noxious work environment, sources connected to the organization told eJewishPhilanthropy.

Last week, the FIDF national board organized a meeting to debate Levovitz’s future with the organization. A decision on the matter was postponed to this week.

This came after an internal investigation report was leaked to the Israeli news outlet Ynet, detailing questionable practices at the organization, including Levovitz serving as the de facto head of the organization instead of CEO Steve Weil since Oct. 7, 2023. Since the report was leaked, former and current employees and lay leaders have come forward, telling eJP that the organization has also mismanaged sexual harassment complaints and used misleading fundraising techniques, leading to tensions with donors.

According to two sources familiar with the discussions, the board did not vote out Levovitz, which would have required a 75% supermajority. Instead, the board members appear to be seeking an agreed-upon settlement that results in Levovitz’s resignation, but with an understanding that if such a mutual arrangement is not reached that a removal vote would be on the table.

As of Thursday, no final decision has been announced, apparently due to some sticking points over Levovitz’s conditions for stepping down.

The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters, said that the board is also planning to significantly scale back Weil’s role in the organization, giving more of the responsibility to FIDF National Director Maj. Gen. (res.) Nadav Padan. According to one source, this may also come with a pay decrease for Weil, who would focus on fundraising.

This would put the organization back closer to its traditional leadership arrangement, in which a former IDF general serves as the chief executive. That system, which the organization used for nearly 40 years, was upended in 2020 when the board brought Weil on board as CEO, assisted by a former Israeli general serving as national director.

Posted in FIDF, R. Steven Weil | Comments Off on Morey Levovitz Pushed Out Of FIDF, Steven Weil Pushed Back

The Inside Scoop on Jeffrey Epstein

Posted on July 15, 2025 by Luke Ford

Alan Dershowitz writes:

Epstein never created a “client list.” The FBI interviewed alleged victims who named several “clients.” These names have been redacted. They should be disclosed but the courts have ordered them sealed. I know who they are. They don’t include any current officeholders. We don’t know whether the accusations are true. The courts have also sealed negative information about some of the accusers to protect them. Neither the Justice Department nor private defense lawyers are free to disregard court sealing orders. The media can and should petition the courts for the release of all names and information so the public can draw its own conclusions.

There has also been speculation about incriminating videos taken by hidden cameras in Epstein’s guest bedrooms. There are videotapes, but they are of public areas of his Palm Beach, Fla., home. Epstein reported the theft of money and a licensed firearm from a drawer in his living room, so the police installed a video camera. I am not aware of video cameras in guest bedrooms.

Open records show an acquaintance between Epstein and Mr. Trump many years ago. That relationship ended when Mr. Trump reportedly banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago, long before becoming president. I have seen nothing that would suggest anything improper or even questionable by Mr. Trump.

It is clear from the evidence that Epstein committed suicide. What isn’t clear is whether he was assisted by jail personnel. That seems likely to me, based on the evidence of allegedly broken cameras, transfer of his cellmate and the absence of guards during relevant time periods.

I have absolutely no doubt that Epstein never worked for any intelligence agency. If he had, he would surely have told me and his other lawyers, who would have used that information to get him a better deal. (He wasn’t satisfied with the so-called sweetheart deal he got, which required him to spend 1½ years in a local jail and register as a sex offender.) My sources in Israel have confirmed to me that he had no connection to Israeli intelligence.

Posted in Jeffrey Epstein | Comments Off on The Inside Scoop on Jeffrey Epstein

Opportunity Missed: The Media Continues Failing As “Original Sin” Biden Book Becomes Dominant Topic

Posted on July 15, 2025 by Luke Ford

Mark Halperin:
The reason I spend so much time talking about this is because I care about the media. I want two strong political parties in America. Most people trying to hold the media accountable for what I call the biggest media scandal in American history—the coverage of Joe Biden’s cognitive decline—are on the right.

Jason Miller, who works for President Trump, tweets about this often, highlighting the lack of credibility on this issue. Byron York of the conservative Washington Examiner wrote this morning, “Understanding the press’s handling of then-President Joe Biden’s obvious physical and mental infirmity is probably more a matter for psychologists than media analysts.” There’s some truth there because understanding why the media continues to fail does involve human nature and psychology.

Erick Erickson, another conservative, wrote in his newsletter: “Now that Joe Biden has lost, the truth can be told, except for the press’s own complicity in the cover-up.” I couldn’t agree more. People in the media writing about this book now ignore the media’s own role, which is a vital part of what happened. Erickson also writes: “Had Biden somehow gotten reelected, the press would still deny his decline.” That’s an incredible statement—but true.

If Fox News had treated a Republican president’s decline like MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times, or the Washington Post treated Biden’s, Brian Stelter at CNN, Oliver Darcy, and other media critics would demand accountability. But the press gives MSNBC a pass because progressives protect progressives. That’s the view on the right, and it’s correct. The media still covers up their failures to expose what tens of millions of Americans saw clearly: Biden’s decline. Why? They wanted to protect Biden and prevent Trump from winning, they’re biased toward Democrats generally, and they were intimidated by Biden’s team not to report on it.

The press failed before, and it’s failing again. This week is a missed opportunity. Read the New York Times, Washington Post, or watch liberal cable news. They’re not holding themselves accountable for their failure.

What’s happening now isn’t just Jake Tapper’s failure. We’ll talk about him because he co-wrote the book, but he’s representative of my colleagues’ mindset, which is to blame Biden and other Democrats for not speaking out. A few Democrats, like Congressman Ro Khanna, have been honest enough to say, “I didn’t see Biden’s decline privately, but it was obvious publicly, and Democrats should have insisted he step down.” But that’s rare.

So, we have the media blaming Biden and other Democrats. Democratic officials blame Biden for running. Biden’s team blames the press and Democrats. It’s a circle of blame. I understand it’s human nature to blame others rather than admitting years of systemic failure. But blaming others prevents reflection. I’m asking Democrats, and especially my colleagues in the media, to reflect.

Let’s talk about Jake Tapper. Until recently, Tapper and his publisher claimed Jake was one of the hard-charging reporters trying to uncover Biden’s cognitive decline. We discussed previously how easily that could be disproven. He didn’t bring up the topic, clearly not aggressively. Ironically, his co-author Alex Thompson is one of the few reporters who actually did.

Tapper’s new strategy this week has two parts, neither about true accountability. First, he’s shifting from saying, “I was on the front lines,” to “Maybe I could have done better.” Here’s Jake Tapper on CNN Wednesday morning:

Jake Tapper (clip):
I think some of the criticism is fair, to be honest—of me. Certainly not speaking for anyone else. Knowing now what I know, looking back at my Biden coverage, I did cover some of these issues, but not enough. I look back with humility.

Mark Halperin:
The second part of Tapper’s strategy is to cling to those who actually did good work—like his co-author Alex Thompson. Also, he’s aligning himself with Wall Street Journal reporters who wrote one of the few articles about Biden’s cognitive decline during the campaign. I’m glad they wrote the story, but frankly, it was weak—mostly quoting Republicans, not Democrats, and with relatively mild examples compared to what we all saw publicly.

Here’s Tapper this week embracing those Wall Street Journal reporters, calling them heroes:

Jake Tapper (clip):
Joining me now are two heroic reporters who intensely covered this during the Biden years—Annie Linskey and Siobhan Hughes from the Wall Street Journal. They reported last June, quote: “Behind closed doors, Biden shows signs of slipping… The White House said Biden’s critics were playing partisan politics.” This isn’t the first time you’ve been here. Your journalism was vital, and the Democrats’ smear campaign against you two was disgraceful.

Mark Halperin:
Tapper’s right that Democrats attacked those reporters unfairly, denying what was clearly visible to everyone. Biden’s decline wasn’t a secret—you didn’t need private meetings to notice it. It was obvious, despite Biden’s limited schedule and avoidance of press conferences.

But here’s what’s incredible: when the Wall Street Journal published that story in June 2024, before the critical debate, Tapper didn’t celebrate their heroism. Instead, he brought Senator Chris Coons, a Biden ally, on CNN and allowed Coons to dismiss the story almost unchallenged.

Here’s Jake Tapper last June with Chris Coons:

Jake Tapper (clip):
The Journal interviewed 45 people who attended or were briefed on Biden meetings, noting criticism mostly from Republicans, but some Democrats anonymously expressed concern. Have you heard from anyone concerned Biden might be a little slower?

Sen. Chris Coons (clip):
No, none. Is President Biden up to the job? Absolutely. Have colleagues expressed concerns about the character difference between him and Trump? Absolutely. Concerns about Trump versus Biden? Absolutely. I don’t hear much coverage of Trump’s similar slips or mishaps. There’s relentless focus by some media on minor slips by Biden, typical for someone with a demanding 14-hour-a-day schedule.

Mark Halperin:
Again, you must allow guests to speak, but if Tapper truly believed those Journal reporters were heroic, he should’ve pushed back harder, challenged the Biden spin, and defended the reporters. But he didn’t. He didn’t invite Republicans or independent voters to support the Journal’s reporting. Instead, he let Biden’s strongest defender dismiss the story entirely.

Posted in Journalism | Comments Off on Opportunity Missed: The Media Continues Failing As “Original Sin” Biden Book Becomes Dominant Topic

Mark Halperin Breaks Down How the Corporate Media is Doubling Down on Double Standards

Posted on July 15, 2025 by Luke Ford

Mark Halperin:

This week, a few things happened that made me angry, annoyed, and frustrated. After 2016, when the press inadvertently helped Donald Trump win by covering him so unfairly, I urged people to think through the mistakes. The same happened in 2020, and again in 2024 when Trump won, ironically, aided by a liberal press determined to stop him.

Trump should be covered tough, aggressively—but fairly. Today, two prominent instances highlight the media’s clear anti-Trump, anti-MAGA bias. But what really prompted me was a conversation with someone outside the media—what journalists call a civilian. I was at a kid’s birthday party this weekend, talking with another dad who’s not involved in journalism or politics. He asked me what civilians often do: “Why is the media so biased? Do media people realize they’re biased?”

That’s hard to answer. When I talk to my colleagues, they make excuses, saying, “Well, we’re biased towards controversy,” and so forth. It’s true Trump sometimes isn’t scrutinized enough on certain issues. But if you don’t like Trump and think the press goes easy on him, you should want the dominant media’s credibility restored. That requires acknowledging past mistakes, thinking how to improve, and then actually changing. This week, I saw no soul-searching or acknowledgment.

A striking example happened over the weekend when Senator Cory Booker spoke to California Democrats. To acknowledge the crowd, Booker clutched his heart emotionally and then raised his right arm. Normally, I’d consider this gesture innocent enthusiasm. But last year, Elon Musk made exactly the same gesture—hand on heart, raised arm—and faced days of media outrage accusing him of a Nazi salute. Here’s the Vox headline at the time: “Elon Musk Doesn’t Deserve the Benefit of the Doubt—Nazi Trolling Exposes Collapse of America’s Guardrails.”

It was absurd then—ridiculous to suggest Musk sent secret Nazi signals—but because Musk supported Trump, he faced intense accusations. Yet this week, when Cory Booker did exactly the same thing, conservatives pointed out the hypocrisy on social media, but mainstream outlets ignored it completely.

Forbes asked Booker’s spokesperson why Booker’s identical gesture caused no controversy. She responded: “Booker was obviously just waving. Anyone comparing it to Musk is operating in bad faith. The differences are obvious to anyone without an agenda.”

That’s 17 Pinocchios. Watch the gestures side-by-side: Booker and Musk both clutch their hearts and raise their arms identically. Neither intended a Nazi salute. But one (Musk), associated with Trump, faced massive controversy; the other (Booker), a Democrat, nothing. It’s a perfect example of unfair media bias.

Another egregious media failure this week involves the man in Colorado accused of firebombing demonstrators rallying for the Israeli hostages in Gaza. Clearly, the anti-Semitic nature of the attack was heavily covered, as it should have been. But most media ignored a critical fact: the accused attacker was in the United States illegally.

You can debate whether Biden or Trump bears responsibility for his illegal status. Regardless, this is another case where media largely ignored the immigration angle. Listen to how it was covered:

News clips:

“Suspect faces attempted murder and hate crime charges for firebombing demonstrators.”

“Hate crime charges for using a makeshift flamethrower—an attack planned for over a year.”

“Our hearts go out to the victims of the targeted terror attack in Boulder. At least eight were injured.”

Mark Halperin:
All true—but nowhere highlighting that, for many Americans, the critical outrage is that the attacker was here illegally. Trump spotlighted crimes by illegal immigrants in 2015 and 2016, but the media ignored the victims’ families. They weren’t featured on “The View” or profiled sympathetically in the press. Yet, for tens of millions of Americans, crimes by illegal immigrants are the most devastating example of an open border.

Some claim illegal immigrants commit crimes at lower rates. Maybe, maybe not—but that’s irrelevant. Even one victim is too many. It’s not unfair or stigmatizing to highlight illegal status; what’s unfair is media coverage refusing to acknowledge this issue matters deeply to millions of Americans.

Yes, some coverage mentioned his illegal status, but not nearly enough. It should have been front and center alongside the anti-Semitic nature of the attack.

Posted in Journalism | Comments Off on Mark Halperin Breaks Down How the Corporate Media is Doubling Down on Double Standards