The Jewish Nation

Originally published December 11, 2019

Iron casted Star in black and White with a dramatic back light overtone. The Star of David, known in Hebrew as the Shield of David or Magen David, is the quintessential symbol of Jewish identity.

With the news of President Trump signing an executive order affirming the fact that Judaism can, in fact, be seen as a nationality (as opposed to a religion), left-wing groups and pundits — both Jewish and non-Jewish — have declared that this action is anti-Semitic. These groups seem to despise the notion of a Jewish nation.
In his 2018 book, “Judaism, Zionism, and the Land of Israel”, Rabbi Yotav Eliach begins the history of the Jewish people in Israel with the definition of a nation and how Judaism fits into that definition. That premise is pivotal when discussing the conflicts of the Middle East, as it cuts against the left-wing and Arabist arguments that the Jews are a colonial interloper in Palestinian-Arab land. Zionism is, itself, Jewish nationalism. Those who classify themselves as “anti-Zionist” are anti-Jewish nationalism at their core, so this executive order embodies everything against which they have fought.
Rabbi Eliach writes that “Judaism operates on three levels”: Religious, social, and nationalistic. The religious level includes “lifecycle rituals, prayers, holidays, religious garb, and the Sabbath.” The social level includes personal modesty, behavior, and diet, unrelated to a specific religious ritual. The nationalistic level “is the basis for a constitution for running a Jewish State.” This includes criminal law, property law, liability law, business law, family law, rules regarding social welfare, governance, and military law. Studying the Torah (the Five Books of Moses) alone will show you that Judaism is more than a religion.
So what is the definition of “nation?” Rabbi Eliach quotes Professor Bela Kiraly of Brooklyn College, who taught “the definition of a nation is a group with a common language (preferably distinct); a common culture (preferably distinct), and a common land of origin — a location on Earth where a particular group developed its language and culture, and where this culture and language were dominant.” Judaism easily fits these three qualifications.
The common language of the Jews is Hebrew, which has been used for over 3,000 years. Hebrew letters, the same alphabet that is used today, can be found on the Dead Sea scrolls, which date back 2,100 years. The Jewish people managed to maintain this language after they lost their independence and were spread into the global Diaspora. This is why prayer books throughout history have all been written in the same Hebrew.
The Jewish people also have a common, and unique, culture. As stated, there is a Jewish constitution, which has laws that separated the Jewish people from other cultures at the time of the writing of the Torah. There is also a unique Jewish calendar (still used to this day), specific clothing that Jews — specifically Jewish men — must wear, schools that Jewish children attend, food that Jews are allowed to eat, a different day of rest, and a specific place Jews pray toward: Jerusalem.
Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Land of Israel, is the direction every observant Jew faces when he prays three times a day. In Europe and America, Jews face east. In Asia, they face west. There are libraries that are filled with the historic connection that Jews have with the Land of Israel. The specific borders are described in the Torah. It was conquered by the prophet Joshua, the successor to Moses. It existed without a centralized monarchy for 300 years until Saul was made King. Saul was succeeded by David, who expanded the territory and shored up the defenses of the land. His son, Solomon, built the First Temple. There was Jewish sovereignty for 687 years until the Babylonians conquered the land. That is almost three times longer than the United States of America has been a nation. And that’s just the beginning.
The Babylonian Empire was conquered by the Persian Empire, who gave the Jewish people autonomy of the land — albeit without their own monarch. The Second Temple was built and the Jews still had their own court system, calendar, and language. The Persians were conquered by the Greeks, who eventually attempted to force the Jewish people to adopt Greek language, religion and culture. The Jews revolted, and won their independence in the year 165 B.C.E. (before the common era).
These events barely scratch the surface of the history of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, which has maintained a continuous Jewish population through today. “The Jewish relationship with [The Land of Israel] is not theoretical”, writes Rabbi Eliach, “it is a historical relationship that goes back over 3,000 years. That is one of the reasons archaeology is so important in modern Israel. The more one digs, the more one finds a Jewish past.”
So when Slate headlines “President Donald Trump to Sign Executive Order Redefining Judaism as Ethnicity or Nationality,” The Guardian says “Executive order could redefine Judaism as a race or nationality, which critics argue is itself antisemitic,” or Newsweek writes “President Donald Trump plans to sign an executive order defining Judaism as a nationality rather than just a religion,” they are being historically ignorant. President Trump cannot redefine Judaism as a nation, because Judaism is already, by definition, a nation.
The Jewish nation, despite being the subject of more hardships than any other nation in the history of the world, has managed to survive precisely because it is a nation more so than it is a religion. Only a nation, with a common language, culture and land, could outlast every other nation that has sought to conquer and destroy the Jewish people. President Trump is merely recognizing that fact — and protecting Jews on American campuses while doing so.
Moshe Hill is a political analyst, columnist, and student of Rabbi Eliach at Rambam Mesivta. You can like Moshe Hill on Facebook at and follow him on Twitter @theMoHil.

The difference between ‘loving Israel enough’ and ‘dual loyalty’

Originally published December 10, 2019

At the Israeli American Council (IAC) summit over the weekend, President Donald Trump re-opened the door for the left to attack his philo-semitic bonafides. Some might believe that in claiming American Jews “don’t love Israel enough” Trump was trafficking in the same anti-Semitic “dual loyalty” smear that Reps. Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and others have pushed. Not only is this demonstrably false, the distinction between the two is one American Jews need to understand when making political decisions in 2020.
When Omar accuses Jewish lawmakers or pundits of siding with Israel, to the detriment of America, she accuses those Jews of dual loyalty. That smear has historical ramifications, as it was the excuse used for centuries in Europe and Russia to segregate the Jews into ghettos and attack them. Many countries would not allow Jews to become full citizens, when that is what they were.
Ironically, Omar, who pushes for globalism and consistently derides American nationalism, is claiming that if you are pro-Israel, you are anti-America.
Trump, on the other hand, is wondering why American Jews don’t love Israel more. The president, who clearly pushes a nationalist “America First” foreign policy, is not accusing American Jews of choosing Israel over America. Rather, he is recognizing that Israel is not in competition with America, and that their interests are aligned to such a degree that loving Israel should be a given.
Subscribe to The JNS Daily Syndicate by email and never miss our top stories
This is no different to what Jewish children the world over are being taught every day. Millions of Jews have vowed that there will never be another Holocaust, because the Jews now have the means protect themselves when others won’t. Indeed, Israel’s history is replete with examples of how it protects Jews around the world, and not just the ones that live within its borders.
Israel brought in and settled a million Jewish refugees in the first 10 years of her existence, while she was a fledgling, third-world nation.  Israel did the same with Russian Jews who managed to escape from the Soviet Union in the 1970s and 1980s. In the mid-1980s, Israel conducted “Operation Moses,” a covert evacuation of Ethiopian Jews to Israel, solely because they could not leave Jews to fend for themselves during a civil war in Sudan. Israel has a long and well-deserved track record of protecting Jews as well as it possibly can, regardless of where they live.
Where Jews live matters as well. The Jewish people have been in Diaspora for millennia, and have consistently attempted to make the best of the situations they found themselves in. In all that time, there has been no better friend to the Jewish people than America. The religious freedom codified in America’s Bill of Rights is something that no country before it was able to guarantee its Jewish citizens. World Jewry takes for granted today that equal rights and protections are granted to it. That those rights and protections exist today is due to American leadership.
American Jews do recognize this, and appreciate America. There is also appreciation for what Israel has been able to accomplish in the past century. These two things are not and cannot be mutually exclusive. America and Israel are allies, and share the common goals of democracy, freedom and national identity. An integral part of the American national identity is the “American melting pot.” Regardless of your background, an American is an American.
That does not mean you should ignore your background completely. If that were true, Rep. Omar couldn’t trade on her Somali background, and Rep. Tlaib couldn’t trade on her Palestinian one. Do they have “dual loyalty” to Somalia and the Palestinian territories? Anyone who would claim so would certainly be accused by them and their allies of the same bigotry.
The safety and security that Jews can feel around the world for the first time since the days of kings David and Solomon is due to the tireless efforts of the State of Israel. This is the feeling that Trump is attempting to tap into and encourage American Jews to appreciate. Omar is trying to ostracize American Jews by saying that they cannot truly be Americans if they have Israel’s interests in mind. Trump is trying to embrace American Jews by encouraging appreciation for a common ally of America and the Jewish people. These are not the same thing.
Moshe Hill is a political analyst who has written for The Daily Wire, The Queens Jewish Link, The Jewish Link of New Jersey and He is regularly featured on ‘The Josh M Show’ podcast. Subscribe to for more content from Moshe Hill. Like him on Facebook at and follow on Twitter @TheMoHill.

A Tribute To Rabbi David Hill

Originally published December 4, 2019

 Rabbi David Hill was known by many names.  Rabbi Hill, Dave, Davey, Dad, and Zaidy.  He was known by many as a leader in the Modern Orthodox community during the 1960s and beyond, as the President of the National Council of the Young Israel, Owner and President of 999 Real Kosher Sausage Co., and founder of Operation Lifeline, which provided a necessary connection between the Jews trapped in the Soviet Union and the rest of the world.  Rabbi Hill died this past Saturday, at the age of 98. 
 In the minds of the average person, the history of the Jewish People in the 20th century can mostly be attributed to two events, the slaughter of six million Jews during the Holocaust, and the reestablishment of the Jewish State thereafter.  That history is a fundamental and core aspect of Jewish existence, and it created the focus of Rabbi Hill’s life’s work.  He strived to avoid another Holocaust, this time in the Soviet Union, and worked to ensure that the Soviet refuseniks knew the value of making Aliyah. 
 Rabbi Hill was born in Latvia in 1921.  Emigrating to the United States in 1930, he was among the last groups of Jews that were able to escape Europe before the Holocaust.  Years later he recounted that he felt that he owed a debt to the Jewish people, as he has missed the Holocaust while so many of his brothers and sisters in Europe fell.  He immersed himself in Yeshiva education on one side and his family business on the other.  He was rabbinically ordained at Yeshiva University but did not become a pulpit Rabbi.  Instead he focussed on Kashrut by joining the family business; Real Kosher Sausage Co., known by most as 999.
 999 was a Lower East Side staple for decades.  Started by his father Elja, Rabbi Hill entered the family business during World War II, and oversaw what became a tradition in the factory, sending kosher salamis to Jewish soldiers fighting overseas.  Years later, one of the recipients of those salamis was working in the White House.  When he heard that Rabbi Hill from 999 was coming for a visit, he was immediately ushered into a meeting with President Kennedy. 
 After getting involved in his local Young Israel, Rabbi Hill quickly moved up the chain of command of the National Council of Young Israel, becoming its President in 1961.  It was at this point where the issue of Soviet Jewry became a central focus in his life.  In a 2013 interview with the Jewish Press, Rabbi Hill said that then-Foreign Minister Golda Meir was a major influence in his advocacy.  “Around 1960, I met with Golda Meir, and she wondered why nothing was being done in America about Soviet Jewry,” he said.  “I told her I would make this my priority.”  Going further in his autobiography, “Serving the Jewish People: My Message To The Generations”, he said that Israel had its hands tied, trying to do what they could for the Soviet Jews, while trying not to further alienate the Soviet Union, which was arming Israel’s Arab neighbors.  “It’s up to you Americans to induce other countries to do it,” Meir said to Rabbi Hill. 

 Over the next decade, Rabbi Hill worked tirelessly to ensure that the Jews in the Soviet Union would not be forgotten.  One of the initial challenges that he faced was actually finding the Jews, who spent their lives hiding from the Communists.  Rabbi Hill worked closely with the Lubavitcher Rebbe, who had a wide network of followers who could provide crucial intelligence that was needed.  “I was the first person whom [the Lubavitcher Rebbe] allowed his followers to give names and addresses,” Rabbi Hill said.  Through this, he created a network that allowed kosher food, siddurim, chumashim, matzos on Pesach, and many more essential Jewish items to be smuggled into the Soviet Union.  One year, when the Matzah factory in Russia burned down, Rabbi Hill and his son, Jay, quickly gathered and shipped 7000 pounds of Matzah into the USSR.  This was the only connection these millions of refuseniks had with the rest of Judaism. 
 Rabbi Hill met with Prime Minister and Israeli Founding Father David Ben-Gurion in 1963, during a trip to Israel as the President of the National Council of the Young Israel and as an emissary of the Conference of Presidents.  Rabbi Hill spoke with Ben Gurion specifically about the plight of Soviet Jews, and how that issue must be at the forefront of Israeli policy with regards to Russia.  Ben Gurion’s diary specifically notes that due to his meeting with Rabbi Hill, “we are making an effort to keep the issue alive in Israel and make sure they know they are not alone”.  History has shown that those efforts paid off.  Between 1969 and 1973, 163,000 Jews emigrated from Russia to Israel. 
 In the 1970s, Rabbi Hill’s years of hard work was finally paired with a name, Operation Lifeline.  Operation Lifeline, with Rabbi Hill at the helm, found and trained people who were experts in Judaism, it’s religious, ethical, and nationalistic aspects, to go into the Soviet Union to meet clandestinely with Jews to prepare them to make Aliyah.  These people were followed by the KGB from the moment their planes touched down, so they had to be extremely cautious.  They also couldn’t send the same person too many times, or else that person would be arrested and interrogated by the Soviets.  Through these efforts, Judaism stayed alive and well behind the Iron Curtain. 
 In 1981, Rabbi Hill and his wife, Lee, traveled to the Soviet Union themselves to attend a Soviet Book Fair.  The purpose of the book fair was for authors and publishers to meet and work out deals within the Soviet Union.  This was prior to perestroika, where the Soviets began allowing Western literature into the country.  Rabbi Hill brought along 1500 books to the fair.  Under the watchful eyes of the KGB, Jews from around the country flocked toward the little booth in the corner of the fair where the Hill’s were handing out bookmarks with Jewish calendars, records with Jewish music.  When people asked for the books, which weren’t allowed to be distributed, Lee smuggled them outside to give out as many as she could.  When the KGB asked what happened to the books, the Hills claimed they were stolen. 
 To further his goals of assisting Soviet Jewry specifically, and world Jewry generally, Rabbi Hill met with nearly every United States Presidents and their high ranking Cabinet Members for decades.  He was not afraid to get tough with these world leaders.  When meeting with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter’s National Security Advisor, he asked if Brzezinski believed in the Bible.  This was during the time when Carter was being particularly tough on Israel.  Brzezinski replied that of course he did.  Without missing a beat, Rabbi Hill said that the bible says that Israel was promised to the Jewish People – why don’t you believe in that?  Brzezinski turned around and walked away.  Years later, when Rabbi Hill saw Brzezinski again, he asked the same question. 
 Rabbi Hill did all this while running a meat factory in New York, and raising a family with Lee in Kew Garden Hills.  While his office walls were lined with photographs of him meeting with Presidents Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush and Prime Ministers Meir, Begin, Shamir, Rabin, Sharon and Netanyahu, his office desk had pictures of Lee and their children Tzerel, Jay, Debbie, Rebecca and Jonathan (z”l).  His home was littered with pictures of his 13 grandchildren, their spouses, and his 36 great-grandchildren.  Rabbi Hill was fortunate enough to see all of his grandchildren create a Jewish home for themselves, following his lead about the importance of Jewish family and tradition. 

 When the Hill family suffered their greatest tragedy, the loss of Jonathan in March of 2000, they turned their loss into further activism for K’lal Yisroel.  They gathered funds in Jonathan’s name and memory in order to give to the Jewish community in Israel.  Rabbi Hill’s years of influence and prestige in the Jewish community yielded enough to dedicate not only an ambulance in Jerusalem in Jonathan’s name, but also a Sefer Torah in the Kibbutz of Tirat Tzvi.  The Hill family, which already had an annual family reunion over Rosh Hashana, traveled to Israel for this dedication.  
 The Hill family gathered again in Israel in December of 2011, this time to celebrate the achievements of their patriarch.  The National Conference on Soviet Jewry (NCSJ), with whom Rabbi Hill worked with into his 90s, honored him as the inaugural recipient of the NCSJ Leadership Award.  It became a double celebration for the Hill family, as Rabbi Hill’s youngest granddaughter got married in Israel that same week. 
 Rabbi Hill’s 98 years cannot be summed up in a tribute, or even an autobiography, for his legacy can only be truly measured through the lives he touched.  Whether it is his direct descendants, who mourn his absence while teaching his lessons to their children, the hundreds of thousands who were affected by his advocacy, or the millions who enjoyed the delicious delicatessen that his factory churned out, the history of Rabbi David Hill is the history of the Jewish People in the last one hundred years.  Strong, principled, thoughtful, dynamic and unafraid to ensure that continued survival and prosperity of the Jewish people.  

 Rabbi Jacob Hill is a Chaplain and Captain in the Civilian Air Patrol, and the son of Rabbi David Hill.  Moshe Hill is the grandson of Rabbi David HIll, and a contributor to the Queens Jewish Link. 

Chanukah’s Wars Still Rage Today

Originally published December 24, 2019

Instead of becoming the Jewish version of Christmas, where we don’t have as many songs and don’t have as many presents, Chanukah is an opportunity for the Jewish people to remember the history of how the Jewish people fought for a sovereign Jewish home. This is all the more important when there are prominent politicians who seek to demolish that sovereignty and control Israeli policy from afar.
For the last 3,000 years, the land that currently consists of the State of Israel, Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, has existed in three different forms: a sovereign Jewish state, and autonomous Jewish state as part of a foreign empire, or a territory as part of an empire, with no borders or sovereignty of its own. Knowing the difference between the three forms shows how the battles that are occurring today are the same fight that was fought by the Maccabees in 165 BCE.
The difference between sovereignty and autonomy is that a sovereign nation rules itself, whereas an autonomous nation is part of a larger empire. The empire gives permission for the autonomous nation-state to have a language, currency, or handle some domestic issues, but that empire controls foreign policy. The Jewish State of Judah was sovereign in the times of the Judges, Saul, David, Solomon, and longer, totaling 687 years until the land was conquered by Babylonia. When Babylonia was conquered by Persia, the Persian king gave autonomy to the Jewish people over the land.
That area was conquered by the Greeks, under the leadership of Alexander the Great, who maintained the autonomous relationship with the Jewish people in the land. It was his successors, led by Antiochus, who decided to end the autonomous relationship that all nation-states had with his Syrian-Greek empire. He forced his subjects to worship Greek gods, use the Greek language, and follow Greek culture. Every nation-state accepted this, except the land of Judea.
Thus begins the story of Chanukah. The Syrian-Greeks ransacked the Temple; the Maccabees, led by Yehudah Maccabee, staged guerilla warfare against the Syrian-Greeks, defeated them, and rededicated the Temple. The Jewish people had sovereignty, not autonomy, over the land for the next 102 years. This is important because this was the last time the Jewish people had sovereignty over the land until 1948.
Skipping forward to the 19th and 20th century, when Jews from around the world made their way back to their homeland, it is critical to realize that no nation, neither autonomous nor sovereign, existed in that section of planet Earth. The land was a territory as part of multiple empires or rulers, including the Romans, Persians, Byzantines, Arabs, Crusaders, Ottomans, and British. None of these empires or ruling parties created a sovereign or autonomous state in the area, with a language, government, capital, or currency. All of the characteristics of a nation-state were absent in that area for thousands of years, until 1948.
Notorious anti-Semite and Member of Congress Rashida Tlaib is happy to ignore that history, and will use Jewish puppets to help her prop up her lies in order to destroy the Jewish state. She works closely and frequently with IfNotNow, a group of Jews who willfully ignore the historical roots of Judaism in the Land of Israel and the terrorist actions of Israel’s neighbors. In her Chanukah message to IfNowNow, Tlaib praised the group’s commitment to its “2020 platform calling for every public official to commit to defunding the occupation in Palestine and fighting anti-Semitism and white nationalism.” Just for context, Tlaib ignored specifically calling out the Black Hebrew Israelite terrorists who targeted 50 Jewish schoolchildren and ended up murdering three Jews in a Jersey City kosher supermarket. She cares more about her political agenda than dead Jews.
IfNotNow joins a long tradition of Jews who ignore the religious, ethnic, and national aspects of Judaism. Like the Hellenistic Jews during Maccabean times all the way back to the eirev rav in the Sinai desert, the Jewish people have always had to contend with fellow Jews who are so eager to please the rest of the world that they willingly throw away Jewish rights to sovereignty.
Bernie Sanders fits this mold. Sanders is happy to trade on his Jewish identity when trying to differentiate himself in the Democratic Party as anything other than his gender and skin color. During the latest primary debate, Sanders asserted that US policy “must be pro-Palestinian” in addition to being pro-Israeli. He fails to call for the demolition of Hamas, Fatah, and the Palestinian Authority, which is the only way to be “pro-Palestinian.” Instead, he calls Netanyahu a racist and blames Israel for the massive problems facing the Palestinian people.
Sanders, Tlaib, and IfNotNow have no respect for Israeli sovereignty. The same people who deride American involvement abroad actively try to control Israeli foreign policy, thus making Israel an autonomous state, not a sovereign one. They try to influence Israeli elections. They use the United Nations, which singles out the Jewish state for sanctions over any other state in the world. Like the Maccabees in the past, those who love the Jewish state – Jews and non-Jews alike – must defend Israel’s right to sovereignty, and the right to determine its own defense and security. This is the lesson of Chanukah. 

Moshe Hill is a political analyst who has written for The Daily Wire, the Queens Jewish Link, The Jewish Link of New Jersey and He is regularly featured on ‘The Josh M Show’ podcast. Subscribe to for more content from Moshe Hill. Like him on Facebook at and follow him on Twitter @TheMoHill.

Labours Loss Foreshadows Democrats’ Defeat

Originally published December 18, 2019

Boris Johnson’s gamble when he called for elections in the United Kingdom paid off, as the conservative Tory Party trounced Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party.  The American equivalent would be if the Republicans, with a small majority in the House of Representatives, gained 75 more Democrat seats in an election. When looking at the current Democratic Party, they are headed down the same road as Labour, only a few miles back.  
The Labour Party has spent the last three years undermining the Brexit vote that occurred in 2016, where the British people decided to leave the European Union.  Labour, under Corbyn’s communist leadership, has pushed hard to stay in the EU, which espouses the same globalist sentiments that are the antithesis of the nationalism that the pro-Brexit electorate desire.  While Labour didn’t directly campaign against Brexit during this campaign, there were clear indications that if they won, Corbyn would have pushed for a second referendum.  
Similarly, the Democrats have been trying to undo the election of Donald Trump for 3 years, since his defeat of Hillary Clinton in 2016.  While they may claim that they are impeaching the President now with “a solemn heart” or because of their “duty to the Constitution,” their reasons and rhetoric regarding impeachment speak far louder.  They have desired to impeach Trump since his inauguration – this is not speculative, there are numerous tweets and videos proving this – and Ukraine is just an excuse.  Pelosi herself said, when asked why the impeachment process is so quick, replied, “It’s been going on for 22 months. Two and a half years actually.”  How could this be possible if Trump’s supposed “crime” occurred when the aid was withheld from Ukraine in 2019? Pelosi and the Democrats have never accepted 2016, and are trying to undermine 2020. 
The Labour Party ran on socialist policies this election cycle. In an Op-ed for the UK Guardian, Corbyn claimed that Labour “won the argument,” even though that did not translate into electoral victory.  Policies such as “public ownership of rail and key utilities to a massive house-building programme and a pay rise for millions” are being pushed in the UK by Labour, along with the socialist messages of income inequality (the “richest and the rest,” as Corbyn puts it) and climate hysteria. Corbyn dragged the party to the left since he gained control in 2015, and that leftist philosophy destroyed them this time.
Same thing is true for the Democrats. Since the 2016 Bernie Sanders campaign showed that a septuagenarian socialist from Vermont, without a legislative accomplishment to his name, could strongly compete against the anointed queen of the Democratic Party, socialism has taken over the policies of left-wing presidential politics.  Between “Medicare for All” proposals, Green New Deal co-sponsorships, open borders policies, and the proposed government takeover of multiple industries, the Democratic Party has gone so far to the left that the Washington Post recently had an Op-ed questioning if Barack Obama was a conservative.  
The media in England had incredibly close polls leading up to the election. After the stunning defeat, that same media was so stunned and outraged, the Guardian actually suggested that Russian interference in the election could have been the reason for such a conservative victory. “Britain needs its own Mueller report on Russian ‘interference,’” was the headline. The polls were incredibly wrong in the final result.
The American media is the propaganda wing of the Democratic Party. At this point, the editorial boards of the NY Times, the Washington Post, USA Today, the LA Times, Salt Lake Tribune, Tampa Bay Times, Orlando Sentinel, Boston Globe, NY Daily News, Chicago Sun-Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, SF Chronicle have all called for President Trump’s impeachment. They do this based on no evidence, only on the fact that they have hated Trump for years, same as the Democrats.  Their bias is so well-known, that when pollsters call likely-Trump supporters, those supporters do not answer honestly. This explains the discrepancy between polls and electoral results.   
Finally, there is the rampant anti-Semitism that engulfed the Labour Party. Corbyn invited Hamas and Hezbollah as “friends,” wrote forwards for books labeling Jews as controlling the press, supporting Holocaust deniers, and much more. The Wiesenthal Center labeled Jeremy Corbyn the leading anti-Semite of 2019, ahead of the shooter of Chabad of Poway.  
The Democrats are well on their way to doing the same thing. There are hundreds of elected Democrats in the federal government, and thousands more in state governments, but the Democrats consistently push forward the agenda of the few who have rabid anti-Semitic tendencies. One of these voices, Rashida Tlaib, actually deleted a tweet condemning the violence against Jews in Jersey City because it was not associated with white supremacy, as she originally said. After a few days of silence, she eventually tweeted condolences, blaming the shooting on gun violence. There has yet to be any statements from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Ilhan Omar about that shooting.
The correlation between the way Labour and Democrats campaign and govern is too strong to ignore.  If the Democrats decide to do a course-correction, they may be able to avoid the same electoral embarrassment.  That would include working with their opposition and moderating their policies.  The mainstream media would have to become an objective source of news that the American people can trust.  Most importantly, they would have to excise the strain of anti-Semitism that is engulfing their party. If they do all that, then the country has a chance of uniting political divisions.  If not, then they deserve to be humiliated at the ballot box as Labour just was.  

Moshe Hill is a political analyst who has written for The Daily Wire, the Queens Jewish Link, The Jewish Link of New Jersey and He is regularly featured on ‘The Josh M Show’ podcast. Subscribe to for more content from Moshe Hill. Like him on Facebook at and follow him on Twitter @TheMoHill.

The Meaning Behind A ‘Nay’

Originally published December 11, 2019

This week, Satan pulled out the snow shovels, because the “Squad” split apart from the Democratic Party to vote with Republicans. The vote was for House Resolution 326, “Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding United States efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a negotiated two-state solution.” The resolution passed, 226-188, with 184 Republicans and 4 Democrats voting Nay. Not all “Nays,” however, are equal, and the reasons behind a vote are sometimes more important than the vote itself.
The resolution, which was introduced by California Representative Alan Lowenthal and pushed for by J Street, was immediately seen as “a strong rebuke to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump” by The Times of Israel, the former of whom has expressed plans to declare sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria (specifically the Jordan Valley), and the latter of whom just stated that the US no longer views the settlements in those areas to be illegal.
The resolution had multiple revisions, which caused division amongst the Democratic ranks, but it essentially called for a two-state solution and “opposed settlement expansion, moves toward unilateral annexation of territory.” The Democrats attempt to lend themselves credibility by calling upon history, making the argument that the two-state solution is bi-partisan. They mention the “parameters put forward by President Bill Clinton in December 2000, the Road Map proposed by President George W. Bush in April 2003, and the principles set forth by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry in December 2016.” At the same time, it ignores the very history that brought the situation to where it is now.
The Clinton Parameters were pushed hard in December 2000, as a last-ditch effort to salvage the train wreck of the Oslo Accords. It was essentially a call for territory, a splitting of Jerusalem, the end of a “right of return” claim by Palestinians, and security negotiations. These parameters came five months after then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat 95 percent of the West Bank, five percent of the Negev, the Gaza Strip, the Temple Mount, and half of Jerusalem as a Palestinian State. Arafat walked away without a counteroffer and began planning the Second Intifada.
The Bush Roadmap, mentioned in the resolution, was also an attempt to get the Israelis and Palestinians to the table to create a two-state solution. It was immediately a non-starter, however, as the Palestinian Authority was actively engaged in the Second Intifada at the time. Given that they didn’t cease hostilities, as was the designated first step in the roadmap, the settlement construction didn’t halt. Even though Israel unilaterally left Gaza (forcefully removing Israelis in the process), in 2005, no Palestinian State was ever declared.
Finally, “the principles set forth by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry in December 2016,” as stated in resolution, were not so much a set of principles as it was lashing out of a lame-duck president against a perpetual thorn in his side, Benjamin Netanyahu. Obama then proceeded to not veto a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel. At the time, then-President-elect Trump tweeted “We cannot continue to let Israel be treated with such total disdain and disrespect.” The only relevant part of that whole ordeal was that there was a mention of a two-state solution, but had no details.
This resolution had 192 co-sponsors, all Democrats. Only five Republicans ended up voting Yay during the vote. After placing his Nay vote, New York Representative Peter King said in a statement, “This legislation pretends to be a balanced proposal for achieving a peaceful resolution between Israel and the Palestinians but disproportionately criticizes the Israeli government while not assailing the terrorist attacks that murder and wound innocent Israelis.” King correctly points out that while the resolution pays lip service to the fact that Israel has a consistent terrorist threat on its doorstep, it “hand waves” the fact that the leaders of the Palestinians are themselves terrorists.
When Israel left the Gaza Strip in 2005, the Gazan people elected the terrorist organization Hamas to lead them. The Palestinian Authority pays the families of terrorists with money received as aid from other countries. The humanitarian funding that goes to these leaders is not used to build roads, schools, or hospitals; rather, it is used to fund terror tunnels and rockets. None of these facts are mentioned in the resolution; instead, a moral equivalency is given. This is why 188 Republicans voted Nay
However, not all Nays are for the same reason. Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley, popularly known as the “Squad,” also voted Nay. As opposed to their Republican colleagues, who deemed the resolution to be anti-Israel, the “Squad” found that the resolution wasn’t anti-Israel enough.
Omar laid their reasoning out in a 13-tweet Twitter thread. After lambasting Trump’s moves in Israel, like the Embassy move – which she said “makes peace unachievable” – she explains that changes to the resolution after she co-sponsored it caused her to remove her support. Those changes were the removal of the phrase “the United States has long sought…an end to the occupation…,” the removal of the notion that a two-state solution is a “broadly-held consensus,” and the addition of “an amendment committing to ‘ironclad’ support for $38 billion in military aid to Israel with no conditions.” She then followed up that such support is “essentially eliminating any potential leverage the US has to bring about peace.” In the mind of Ilhan Omar, American military aid to Israel is leverage.
Omar claims that her Nay vote “is a criticism of the pro-occupation establishment who tried to undermine [Representative Lowenthal and J Street] at every turn.” Then she ended with a truly evil absolutist idea: “When it comes to this issue, you are either for peace or you are for occupation. But you can’t be for both.” Not only is she spitting in the face of the 226 Democratic colleagues who voted Yay, she is once again ignoring the fact that there is no “occupying” force in Gaza or Area A of Judea and Samaria, and the Israeli military in the remainder of those areas is there for Israeli security, not for Palestinian subjugation. Additionally, it is impossible to “occupy” something that doesn’t exist, which would include a Palestinian state. What she really means when she speaks of occupied Palestine is the entirety of Israel, from the river to the sea.
This is the importance of explaining the meaning behind the Nay vote. Over 180 Members of Congress read this resolution and said that it drew a false equivalency between the democratic Israeli government and the terrorist Palestinian one, and said they will not support such language. Four Members of Congress read the resolution and said that Israel is the aggressor and the evildoer in this conflict, and unless there is language that reflects that notion within the text, they will vote against it. The same vote can have wildly different reasoning behind it.

Moshe Hill is a political analyst who has written for The Daily Wire, the Queens Jewish Link, The Jewish Link of New Jersey and He is regularly featured on ‘The Josh M Show’ podcast. Subscribe to for more content from Moshe Hill. Like him on Facebook at and follow him on Twitter @TheMoHill. 

Elizabeth Pipko Leads A Modern-Day Exodus

Originally published December 4, 2019

This Thursday night, December 5, the Queens Village Republican Club will host their annual Holiday Party. While the monthly meeting regularly discusses the dangers of one-party Democrat rule – which is what New York currently has – this particular meeting will feature an up-and-coming leader in the Republican Party, Elizabeth Pipko, the founder of the Exodus Movement.
Pipko, much like Candace Owens did with the Blexit Movement, took her conservative political values and started questioning the premise that Jews will always vote for Democrats. Statistically, the Jewish vote is over three-quarters Democrat in the last few election cycles, so that premise is well-founded. However, given the prominent rise of anti-Semites in the Democratic Party, like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, and those that enable them and espouse anti-Israel policies, like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren, the time for Jews to show the Democratic Party that they cannot take that vote for granted is now.
Pipko started working in politics when she walked into a Trump volunteer center in Trump Tower in Manhattan. She quickly moved up from a part-time volunteer to a full-time staff member. Pipko’s main career was in modeling, so she had to tell people that when she wasn’t taking jobs, she was teaching ice skating instead of working in Trump Tower (she skated competitively for seven years). After Trump’s victory in 2016, she returned back to her modeling career, but she found that, while she didn’t advertise her support for President Trump, many of her colleagues were incredibly vocal in their opposition towards him.

After a couple of years, Pipko decided to take the next step in her political activism, which meant potentially saying good-bye to her modeling career. “I decided to tell everyone instead of telling people personally; I actually just went to the New York Post and I told them,” Pipko said. “They reported the story and then I was on “Fox and Friends” the next morning and it blew up. And while I was doing all this, I guess, “right wing” press, at the same time, all my modeling contacts, some friends, agents that got word, kind of blocked me and disappeared, and that was the last of it.”
What began with a few tweets immediately grew into a nonprofit movement, and is now a super PAC. The Exodus Movement, formerly called Jexodus, focuses on many different congressional districts around the country, particularly on the issues that are important to the people who reside in those communities. This, as opposed to a broad message for the whole country, is a key part of their strategy. “Political efforts are more focus-based on different states and counties and where we know that we have to make a serious difference or to actually swing a vote,” Pipko said. “I think it’s less about different sects of Jews and more about different parts of the country.”
But there still is a broader aspect to what the Exodus Movement is trying to accomplish within the Jewish community. It’s working to de-stigmatize these political discussions within local communities, many of whom don’t feel comfortable publicly showing support for Trump, or Republicans writ large, lest they be penalized like Pipko was. “It’s about getting people to feel comfortable opening up and just having the conversations,” she said. “People don’t feel comfortable doing that anymore. It’s also about highlighting everything that President Trump has done, everything that the Left has done in recent years, and showing American Jews that although there has been loyalty to one party for so many years, it’s time to stick up for ourselves for the first time in a long time and become loyal to a different party.”
Trump’s record towards American Jews, and towards many of the policy priorities that the community has, has been excellent thus far. Many of those policies benefit large swaths of Americans, specifically the strong economy, but also the unprecedented support for Israel speaks to many in the Jewish community in particular.
Like all conservatives who gain popularity, Pipko has been the target of media harassment by left-wing sources, like The New York Times and Ha’aretz, who view her movement as a divisive one that seeks to exploit the anti-Semitism of the Democrats for political gain. But Pipko knows that her job pits her against the media as well as the Democrats. “There are a lot of Jews whom I know who didn’t really understand what I tried to tell them; but there are certain people running on the Left who mention cutting off aid to Israel,” she said when discussing the lack of information that the media is giving about the stances of Democratic Presidential frontrunners. “When I told them, they didn’t believe me and I made them Google it in front of me and they were shocked. To them, Israel is number one, and they think that the Left and the Right support Israel equally.”
While those on the Left deride Pipko’s chances to make real change, this is a movement that is growing rapidly and forcefully. Given the Democrats’ increasing embrace of policies that are antithetical to the Jewish community, this organization has come along at the right time. Hopefully, their efforts will be reflected in the results that come in November 2020.

Moshe Hill is a political analyst who has written for The Daily Wire, the Queens Jewish Link, The Jewish Link of New Jersey and He is regularly featured on ‘The Josh M Show’ podcast. Subscribe to for more content from Moshe Hill. Like him on Facebook at and follow him on Twitter @TheMoHill.

Meet Fernando Cabrera – The Democratic NYC Councilman Who’s Taking On AOC

Originally published November 27, 2019

While Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez traipses around the country with her ideological mentor Bernie Sanders, lines are forming around the block with challengers to her congressional seat. On the Republican side, there are currently eight candidates who will battle it out to take her on in the General Election next November. However, two Democrats will try to knock her out of the race well before then. Fernando Cabrera, Councilman for the 14th District of the New York City Council, is one of those candidates.
Cabrera’s motivation for running for a congressional seat after nearly a decade in the New York City Council is AOC herself. “I had a lot of concerns,” he said in a phone interview. “The first one began with the Amazon deal where we lost 25,000 jobs, direct jobs, 100,000 indirect jobs, and $27 billion of tax revenue that was going to come to the city, which we’re so desperately in need of in light of the fact that we’re about to go into $100 billion debt in the city.”
Before she was even sworn into office, AOC was working against Amazon providing jobs to the constituents who elected her. When Amazon decided to pull out of the planned headquarters in Long Island City, AOC cheered. “Anything is possible,” she tweeted. “Today was the day a group of dedicated, everyday New Yorkers & their neighbors defeated Amazon’s corporate greed, its worker exploitation, and the power of the richest man in the world.”
Cabrera is also concerned about the socialist ideology that AOC is spreading around the country, especially to the younger generation. “I don’t want the next generation,” he said, “to have an idealism that is not workable.” This includes the Green New Deal, which “even her colleagues have turned down” (referring to the 57-0 Senate vote against the Green New Deal). “At the end of the day, it’s going to be self-destructive,” Cabrera said of socialism. “As we saw in many countries like Venezuela, where my grandmother is buried, and I saw the most prosperous country in South America become one of the poorest, and lost ten percent of the population of the country due to the dire economic needs.”
Cabrera’s background in this matter informs his understanding of the dangers of socialism. “I had the advantage of having traveled to 30 countries,” Cabrera said, “and I’ve seen the results of what happens when you have free enterprise versus socialism. There is not a country in the world where socialism has worked. I mean, the experiment continues to fail over and over and over and over again. Why are we going to try to do something that has failed over and over and over again?”
Cabrera was born in the Bronx to a Dominican father and a Puerto Rican mother. His grandmother lived in Venezuela, so his knowledge of its downfall is not something he picked up from a history book. “[Seeing] what happened in Venezuela was horrific. I mean, Caracas right now is the most dangerous city in the entire world. That didn’t happen during free enterprise; that happened under socialism.” This is the same socialism that AOC wants to push in the United States.
Cabrera is also concerned about the quality of life issues in Queens and the Bronx. “Crime is already rising [in Queens],” he said. “The constituent services have been dismal. In the Bronx, she doesn’t even have a congressional office, basically sending a message to Bronxenites that you really don’t matter.” While Ocasio-Cortez is traveling the country interviewing for a White House position for Bernie Sanders, her own constituents are being neglected. “She’s been MIA AOC,” Cabrera said. “We have somebody who has pursued personal ambition at the cost of her own district.”
Speaking directly to the Jewish community, Cabrera addresses AOC’s anti-Semitic and anti-Israel track record. Cabrera, who has worked with Christians United for Israel (CUFI) and the Consulate General’s Latino-Jewish relations team, has traveled to Israel seven times. AOC, famously, refused to go to Israel with over 70 other freshman Members of Congress (a traditional trip for all new members). AOC also does not sit down with Jewish groups in her district. Cabrera works with the members of the Jewish community in New York City.
While Councilman Cabrera certainly has the passion and motivation to take on Ocasio-Cortez, he is fighting an uphill battle. AOC has already raised $3.3 million for her reelection campaign, and is a favorite of the Democratic establishment. Cabrera doesn’t see that as a problem, though. “Crowley had a lot of money and he lost,’’ Cabrera said, referring to the 2018 incumbent Joseph Crowley. This is certainly true; Crowley had a $4-million war chest, almost double what AOC had at the time. Crowley also had other things going against him. Crowley was supposed to be Nancy Pelosi’s successor, so he wasn’t present in the district. “Ironically, AOC is doing the same thing,” says Cabrera. AOC also has a low approval rating in her own district, which could easily work against her in a primary.
Ocasio-Cortez clearly has higher political ambitions than a mere Congressional seat, but she must still run for reelection every two years. 2020 is the first real test if the poster child of the Democratic Party has any staying power amongst her own constituency. Fernando Cabrera is here to prove that she does not.
 For more information on Fernando Cabrera, visit his website at

Moshe Hill is a political analyst who has written for The Daily Wire, the Queens Jewish Link, The Jewish Link of New Jersey and He is regularly featured on ‘The Josh M Show’ podcast. Subscribe to for more content from Moshe Hill. Like him on Facebook at and follow him on Twitter @TheMoHill.

EXCLUSIVE: Trump’s Highway Sign Vandalized

Over Christmas week, President Trump’s Adopt-a-Highway sign was vandalized, with spray paint covering the last name of the 45th President.  The sign is located on the 79th Street exit of the West Side Highway in New York City.  
According to the New York Department of Transportation website, “Legislation to formalize New York State’s Adopt-A-Highway Program was passed in 1990 to encourage individuals or groups to clean up highway roadsides and to recognize those volunteers who do. Participation in the program also fosters a sense of community ownership of the roadway as well as a sense of pride in its appearance.”  Trump has sponsored the 2-mile stretch of highway since at least 2009.
This is also not the first instance of vandalism on this particular sign.  In December 2017, the sign was removed to be cleaned after a vandal threw black paint on it.  On the other side of the country, Trump’s walk-of-fame star on Hollywood Blvd has been vandalized multiple times. 
Earlier this year, Trump famously ceased his residency of New York, so it is unclear at this time if the sponsorship in the Adopt-a-Highway program will continue.  The Department of Transportation and the Trump Corporation could not be reached for comment. 
Moshe Hill is a political analyst who has written for The Daily Wire, The Queens Jewish Link, The Jewish Link of New Jersey and He is regularly featured on ‘The Josh M Show’ podcast. Subscribe to for more content from Moshe Hill. Like him on Facebook at and follow on Twitter @TheMoHill.

Who’s To Blame For The ‘Do-Nothing Congress?’

Originally published December 3, 2019

As the year 2019 comes to a close, many will reflect upon their own productivity and accomplishments over the past 12 months. Fortunately for America’s elected representatives in Congress, they don’t need much time.
Congress has done little to nothing in terms of “major legislation” — so much so that any bill that hits the president’s desk makes national news. Since September, one of President Trump’s favorite phrases on Twitter has been “Do Nothing Democrats,” thereby blaming the House majority for the lack of meaningful legislation in this calendar year. Given Trump’s tendency to exaggerate, a legitimate question to ask is: Which is actually the worst offender, the Democratic-controlled House or the Republican-controlled Senate?
Knowing they were at a partisan impasse on most topics important to the American people, the House seemed to  largely focus on investigating President Trump and the Senate focused on confirming federal judicial nominees. Ironically, both of these courses of action play well for Trump, who began his year speaking directly to the new House majority. “An economic miracle is taking place in the United States,” Trump said during the State of the Union Address this past February, “and the only thing that can stop it are foolish wars, politics, or ridiculous partisan investigations. If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation. It just doesn’t work that way!”
The latest debacle in the House over the Ukraine issue, which was preceded by the House investigations over the findings of the Mueller Report, shows that Trump’s words were not heeded. The lack of legislative action has even become a Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) talking point on the Democratic presidential primary campaign trail.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) tweeted at President Trump her list of “accomplishments” after he derided the “Do Nothing Democrats.” “In my first 11 months,” she said, “I’ve cosponsored 339 pieces of legislation, authored 15, took on Big Pharma w/ my colleagues in hearings that brought PreP generic a year early & exposed abuse of power. In 4 years, you’ve jailed kids & made corruption the cause celebré. Try to keep up.” While this may have gotten her Twitter lackeys all fired up, its patently ridiculous. There have been over 8,000 congressional bills introduced this year, so signing your name onto 339 of them is not an accomplishment. Of the “authored 15,” 10 are new bills which have not been brought to the floor to a vote and five were amendments to current bills.
This is par for the course for the House Democratic majority. While the Democrats complain about the lack of a vote in the Senate on such bills as H.Res 5, the “Equality Act,” or H.Res 8, the ironically named “Bipartisan Background Check Act of 2019,” both of those bills are largely partisan efforts with little to no compromise attempted. Each bill had a mere eight out of 197 Republicans voting for it.
Legislation introduced in the Senate isn’t going anywhere, either. Unlike the House, though, the major legislative moves that are occurring on the Senate floor do have strong bipartisan support.
Take, for example, S.1321, the “Defending The Integrity of the Voting Systems Act.”  This was introduced by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) in May, passed the Senate unanimously, and has been sitting in the House since July 19th. Or take S.395, the “Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act of 2019.” This was also passed unanimously, sent to the House in June, and has been sitting there since then. S.488, the “Justice for Victims of Lynching Act of 2019,” was introduced by presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) and was passed by a voice vote; it has been sitting in the House since March. Then there’s S.1, the “Strengthening America’s Security in the Middle East Act of 2019,” which passed 77-23 — including 27 of 49 Democrats voting for it; it has been held in the House since February 6th.
All of these bills are strong, bipartisan issues that should be brought up in the House for a vote. However, any one of these bills, were they to be signed by President Trump, would be seen as a “win” for both the president and Republicans. Much like the never-ending investigations, House Democrats are more interested in victory during the next election cycle than they are in actually accomplishing anything for the American people.
While it may be a fair accusation to blame Congress, as a whole, for doing nothing in 2019, analyzing the partisanship and the willingness to work across the aisle finds that Democrats are guiltier of unwillingness to govern than are Republicans. So when Trump rants on Twitter that they “do nothing,” he certainly has a ground to stand on.
You can follow Moshe Hill on facebook at and Twitter @theMoHil.