A few days ago I exposed some statements Israel-hater Iymen Chehade made in an interview. He admitted a main goal of his is to ‘take advantage’ of increasing empathy towards palestinian Arabs in order to change the narrative to portray them as victims and not the aggressors, and stated how more palestinian Arabs need to seek political power in the US in order to change facts on the ground in the Middle East.
I was hoping my exposé would make it to the mainstream media (or even Jewish media), but of course that was wishful thinking. Chehade has, however, made the news anyway – for negotiating with a political rival conditions for not running against her, which included taking up some anti-Israel positions.
Rep. Marie Newman (D-IL) is facing an onslaught of criticism for a contract she signed with a political rival, in which—according to congressional investigators—she likely agreed to hand Professor Iymen Chehade a six-figure salary in exchange for him not running against her in a Democratic primary. But documents appear to show that a cozy job and big title weren’t the only things Newman negotiated.
In an Oct. 2018 email to Newman, Chehade memorialized that he and Newman had met earlier in the week and discussed a proposal where Newman would not only pledge to hiring Chehade, but would also “commit” to a number of anti-Israel policy positions.
Among the positions Chehade laid out were “opposing any legislation that entails ADDITIONAL military sales or aid to Israel,” supporting legislation that achieves “justice and self-determination” for Palestinians, and organizing “fact-finding” delegations to Palestine and other Middle East countries. Chehade even said he wanted “complete discretion” over the itinerary for such a trip.
“At no point will Newman accept partial or complete funding for congressional delegations from the [Jewish National Fund], any organization affiliated with the Israeli government, or any organization that embraces Israeli’s Zionist or colonial project,” Chehade said.
In total, Chehade’s section on the positions that “Newman commits to” was 277 words and included four bullet points with multiple sub-sections.
After receiving these demands on Oct. 27, 2018, Newman agreed later that day that it was a “very good discussion” and asked to “think through” Chehade’s proposal after she had more closely reviewed his conditions. Less than a week later, Newman responded to Chehade’s proposals not with outrage that someone would try to dictate her policy positions or seemingly extort her for a job paid for by the American taxpayers. Instead, Newman wrote this: “Most of it looks good. Couple of concerns -mostly phraseology.”
She then asked to meet in person to discuss, and if Chehade wouldn’t mind coming closer to her home this time.
These provisions weren’t included in a final version of the agreement that Newman and Chehade signed, and the final contract noted it “supersedes all other previous agreements and understandings between the parties.” But the mere existence of these discussions in any forum is extraordinarily unusual and currently part of an Ethics Committee investigation into Newman.
While Newman has been a vocal supporter of Palestine for years, her voting record and public positions have, in fact, closely mirrored Chehade’s listed anti-Israel demands. She has cosponsored multiple pro-Palestinian statehood bills, including one that would provide “congressional disapproval of the proposed direct commercial sale to Israel of certain weaponry and munitions.”
—
In 2018, Newman signed a contract promising Chehade a job on her congressional staff as a foreign policy adviser if she won her 2020 election bid. The gig was supposed to come with perks: A “private office within the congressional suite,” at least one fully paid weekly trip back to Chicago, and a yearly salary between $135,000 and $140,000.
When Newman changed her mind about the job, Chehade sued. And after a small legal battle, they settled—with both parties signing non-disclosure agreements.
Chehade’s demands are consistent with his stated goals in the interview – to influence US policy on Israel. Except here he would attempt to do it without even being a congressman.
This report also confirms something else about Chehade: he’s a nasty piece of work.
When Newman was asked about her interactions with Chehade, she described in detail why she ultimately decided to ignore the contract and not hire him. He was a bad fit for the job, she said, “incredibly disrespectful,” and “hard to get along with.” She claimed he screamed at her—often. His “behaviors” showed “very significant red flags.” And she felt he’d totally screwed up one of the two tasks she’d given him: writing a policy statement on the Middle East.
—
“He had very strong skills about Syria and Palestine. [He] is a good researcher and a strong writer. Those were all true. So he had those skills. But the skills required for the actual job, he lacked,” the congresswoman told them. “He also demonstrated behaviors and interactions that were deeply concerning.”
Reached by phone on Wednesday evening, Chehade declined to comment on his proposals regarding Israel-Palestine with Rep. Newman, but did tell a reporter for The Daily Beast she should “go work for a better news organization.”
Hat tip: Ely
