Democrats were trying to ‘protect’ Omar with resolution denouncing hate, Rep. Liz Cheney says |
Politics Election

Democrats were trying to ‘protect’ Omar with resolution denouncing hate, Rep. Liz Cheney says

The Washington Post
House Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., does a tv news interview just outside the House chamber to discuss her reason for voting against the Democratic resolution condemning anti-Semitism that was sparked by controversial remarks from freshman Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, at the Capitol in Washington, Friday, March 8, 2019. Cheney, the No. 3 House Republican, called the resolution ‘a sham’ by Democrats to avoid condemning Rep. Ilhan Omar directly for her comments.

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said Sunday that House Democrats were trying to protect Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., with last week’s resolution broadly denouncing hate, as a Democratic co-author of the measure pushed back, arguing that “history is going to judge” those who voted against it.

Cheney was one of 23 lawmakers, all Republicans, who opposed the resolution, which condemned anti-Semitism and discrimination against Muslims in equal measure and overwhelmingly passed the House on Thursday. Democrats had introduced the resolution in an effort to move past alleged anti-Semitic comments by Omar, a freshman Muslim congresswoman.

In an interview on NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” Cheney described the House resolution as “clearly an effort to actually protect Ilhan Omar, to cover up her bigotry and anti-Semitism by refusing to name her.”

“They are protecting her by failing to put a resolution on the floor that names her and strips her of her committee assignment. Instead, they put a resolution on the floor which she then went out and said, ‘This is a tremendous victory for me,’” Cheney said.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., one of the resolution’s lead sponsors, pushed back in an interview on MSNBC on Sunday afternoon. He called the measure the most powerful anti-Semitism resolution “in the history of the United States Congress” and argued that those who opposed it were wrong to do so.

“History is going to judge them very harshly for that,” Raskin said.

He went on to take aim at President Donald Trump for his campaign’s closing TV ad during the 2016 race. The ad — which featured images of billionaire philanthropist George Soros, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein and then-Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, all of whom are Jewish — was “the most anti-Semitic TV ad in American history,” Raskin said.

After last week’s vote, Omar issued a statement with fellow Muslim Reps. Andre Carson, D-Ind., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., calling the vote “historic on many fronts” for denouncing “all forms of bigotry.”

“Our nation is having a difficult conversation and we believe this is great progress,” they wrote.

Omar has been the subject of verbal attacks and threats in recent weeks, including a sign posted in the West Virginia State Capitol that falsely linked her to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Asked about concerns among House Democrats that naming Omar would have made her a target of more threats in the future, Cheney argued that Democratic leaders were nonetheless “enabling anti-Semitism” by crafting a broad resolution.

“I think it is absolutely shameful that Nancy Pelosi and Leader (Steny) Hoyer and the Democratic leaders will not put her name in a resolution on the floor and condemn her remarks and remove her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee,” the Republican lawmaker said.

Trump has sought to use the resolution against Democrats, arguing on Friday that the party has become “anti-Israel” and “anti-Jewish.”

“I thought yesterday’s vote by the House was disgraceful,” he told reporters. “I thought that vote was a disgrace, and so does everybody else if you get an honest answer.”

Democrats on Sunday disputed that characterization, with Rep. Katie Hill, D-Calif., noting that the resolution passed on a bipartisan basis.

“I don’t think that there’s any validity to what he’s saying,” Hill said in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” She added that “if we’re going to condemn one sort of behavior, then why should we isolate it to one group? We should condemn all forms.”

Rep. Will Hurd, R-Texas, said that while he backed the resolution, he understood why some members of his party chose not to.

“I voted for it because you shouldn’t hate people, period, end of story,” Hurd said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We learn that stuff in kindergarten. What I think many of my colleagues were doing in voting against it was lodging their being upset about (the fact) that this was watered down; it wasn’t narrow.”

Categories: News | Politics Election
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.