And therefore, the Corker Bill, whose passage ensured the implementation of the Iran deal. It’s why the Republican establishment, in spite of a lot of disingenuous noise designed to make AIPAC happy, wanted the Iran deal to happen.
That leads me to another point.
If the politics of the quasi-approval of the Iran deal didn’t expose AIPAC for the paper tiger I’ve known all along it was, then nothing will ever convince you. I never thought AIPAC was a powerful lobbying group, in the traditional sense of the word, because I’ve always thought that it stands around and takes credit for things that it didn’t do. Why is the United States of America the most pro-Israel country on Earth, maybe even more so than Israel itself? Is it because of AIPAC lobbyists, or Jewish predominance of the national news media and fundamentalist-evangelical Christian heft in national, esp. Republican Party, politics? Right. Another angle that last fall exposed was that another reason why AIPAC seems to be a powerful lobby is because when lobbying is actually needed, they and the military-industrial complex (e.g. Boeing) are almost always on the same side. But MIC does the heavy lifting, while AIPAC stands around after the fact to take credit. In the rare instances when MIC and AIPAC on opposite sides, such as the Iran deal, MIC will eat AIPAC’s breakfast, lunch, brunch, dinner, supper, coffee break, afternoon snack and midnight snack eight days out of seven every week.
It’s easy to see why MIC > AIPAC in the lobby game: If AIPAC goes away, we’re still standing with Israel. Meanwhile, MIC is the difference between your state or Congressional district having an airliner or fighter jet assembly line or not.