Sanders is still the only candidate who is remotely anti-capitalist, and the only candidate who calls himself a socialist. But his policies aren’t quite as unique as they were in 2016. Though no doubt “radical” in the American setting, Sanders’ economic agenda would be considered center-left in the rest of the developed world, and in practical terms there’s not much separating him from Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has insisted that she is “capitalist to [her] bones.”

Donald Trump is now president. Sanders hasn’t changed his vision for America. But the world around him has. He’s not just fighting the corporatist wing of the Democratic Party he was in 2016, he’s also fighting what he sees as a global rise in authoritarianism, one embodied by Trump in the United States. Suddenly, the issues he once strained to fit in his narrative — from social injustice to foreign policy — are on his home turf.

True to his socialist roots, Comrade Bernie also declared “economic rights are human rights.” But he neglected to mention that in the U.S., where individual liberty and economic freedom have always been emphasized, “economic rights” can’t exist if we are to keep our other freedoms in place… It’s impossible to have a society in which there is individual freedom and government guarantees for every good and service known to man. Comrade Bernie knows it.

When it emerged that Israel was headed toward another electoral campaign, the need arose for additional US emergency assistance to Netanyahu. Something along the lines of US President Nixon’s arms airlift to Israel during the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Then, it was to save the Jewish state from defeat in the battlefield. Today, it is to save Netanyahu’s neck. As simple as that.

Indeed, for President Trump, no other politician’s success seems to matter more than Netanyahu’s. They have known each other for years, but the president isn’t backing the prime minister for sentimental reasons. From Trump’s perspective, helping Netanyahu means currying favor with Israel’s supporters in the U.S., checking Iran’s power, and keeping alive his fantastical dream of an “ultimate deal” between Israel and the Palestinians.

U.S. President Donald Trump called on Israelis to get their act together and allow his friend “Bibi” to form a government since he was elected to do so. Trump, it seems is telling us to disregard the basic rules of our democracy and allow Netanyahu to be prime minister even if he fails to form a viable coalition… To those claiming we have the greatest friend in the White House and that is all that matters, I say, presidents come and go, and looking ahead to the next president, Netanyahu’s relations with this one could cost us dearly.

I know, Buttigieg tries to be “even-handed.” But it’s the same evenhandedness as Trump’s “There are good people on both sides.” Trump equated Nazis and anti-Nazi demonstrators. Buttigieg compares the democratically chosen leaders of Israel and the terrorists that should represent Muslim Palestinians but only enrich themselves and further follow one “ideal”: the continuation and eventual victory of anti-Semitism.

He was restrained but critical on Israel. He reaffirmed our support for the Jewish state as an “essential tenet” of U.S. foreign policy, but maintained that one can be a good friend of Israel yet disagree with the positions of its “right-wing government,” as he described it. He forcefully reaffirmed a two-state solution and warned (vaguely) that if Israel annexed the West Bank, U.S. taxpayers “won’t foot the bill.”

If you don’t think Benjamin Netanyahu has changed the debate about Israel inside the Democratic Party, just listen to Pete Buttigieg’s foreign policy speech yesterday at Indiana University. Buttigieg is no radical; he’s a darling of the post-Obama Democratic establishment. And yet he said things on Tuesday that would have been unthinkable during Obama’s campaigns.

The government treats BDS movement as a danger to security, or a terrorism threat, and uses the resources of its security agencies and other means to monitor citizens who express opinions it doesn’t like; even worse, it does so beyond the borders of the state. This is a battle against the freedom of political expression of the Palestinians and their supporters throughout the world. The means Israel employs in this battle are antidemocratic and draconian, and they often achieve the opposite of the desired effect, distancing liberal Diaspora Jews from Israel.

Contrary to intuition that human rights groups oppose the Mossad’s involvement in fighting BDS as interference with political debate and free speech, the groups the Post spoke to either view the idea positively or neutrally. Some called BDS a real potential threat to the security of Israel, saying that the country must do its best to combat it. While saying that they do not know if the Mossad is involved, they said it was a good idea to utilize the agency to perform surveillance and sabotage some BDS activities.

The BDS mission originates straight from the founding mission of the PLO in 1964, before any Jewish settlements existed, which was to eliminate what is still seen as the unacceptable and humiliating sovereign Jewish-Zionist presence in Arab-Muslim lands.

Jew hatred may fuel the Israel hatred behind BDS and other anti-Israel forces, but after that, Israel-hatred wreaks havoc on its own. This is why, in my eyes, anti-Zionism is more lethal than anti-Semitism: It carries the virus of elimination.

…it’s not totally uncommon for hateful images to make it into print in the guise of political cartoons: The unnecessary anti-Semitic depiction of Netanyahu is one of a few recent examples, including a “racist” depiction of Serena Williams that was recently published in Australia, and a New York Times editorial animation of Trump and Putin was widely criticized as homophobic by critics. Still, such mistakes, while deeply regrettable, should not cloud the important work that many other cartoonists do.

This is a gross overcorrection, even though the outcry had some justification. While you can just about get away with claiming the blue Star of David signifies the state of Israel rather than Jewish people in general, the signification of Trump’s yarmulke is impossible to argue away: the implication is clearly that the US president has been “Judaised” by the dirty Israeli dog, both of which are common antisemitic tropes of the type notoriously published in cartoon form in the Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer.

The NYT took well-deserved heat for NOT stopping publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon, w/conservatives such as DJT Jr particularly outraged. Yet those very same conservatives are now angry because Facebook dares to ban similar hateful content from its own platform. So WFT?

The notion of making deepfakes of the people who allow them to exist — putting fictionalized thoughts in their mouths — is so brilliant that I’m enraged no one thought of it sooner.

It’s not just celebrities being targeted — any person with public photos or videos clearly showing their face can now be inserted into crude videos with relative ease. As a result, revenge porn, or nonconsensual porn, is also becoming a broadening threat. Spurned creeps don’t need sex tapes or nudes to post online anymore. They just need pictures or videos of their ex’s face and a well-lit porn video.

It’s good for journalists to start getting in the habit of tracking down creators of mysterious web content. And it’s good for the rest of us to start expecting as much from the media. When deepfakes fully arrive, we’ll be glad we’ve prepared. For now, even if it’s not ideal to have amateur political operatives exposed to the ire of the internet, it’s better than carrying on as if we can still trust our lying videos.