Recently Dana Schwartz, a Jewish writer for the Observer, wrote a sharp critique of Donald Trump’s pandering to White supremacists and anti-Semites, following his gauche tweet featuring an image of Hillary Clinton with a pile of money and the Star of David — a Jewish symbol — superimposed. After being called out by the mass media and Anti-Defamation League (ADL), rather than admit he had made a mistake, Trump went on the offensive claiming his tweet had nothing to do with Jews and that the media was to blame for dishonestly portraying the meaning of the tweet.
According to the New York Times, though, the image first appeared on a White supremacist website. Trump proceeded to delete the original message with the Star of David and replace it with a circle containing the words originally in the offensive image: “Most corrupt candidate ever!”
From the moment Ms. Schwartz saw that message, she began issuing blistering tweets towards Trump, rightly pointing out its offensiveness as well as Trump’s unwillingness to admit wrongdoing or fault. She concluded, based on that and other behavior, that Trump lacked leadership skills and should not be considered a legitimate presidential candidate. Then the nastiness began.
Anti-Semites on Twitter began coming out of the woodwork and flooding Ms. Schwartz with anti-Semitic insults, mocking her supposed Jewish nose, the Holocaust, and the Jewish people as a whole (as a matter of opinion, she’s cute and smart, but that’s neither here nor there). The very worst of humanity — or rather sub-humanity — reared itself to engage in collective attacks against this writer simply because she correctly pointed out the anti-Semitic subtext within the tweet, which many of the attackers themselves acknowledged.
Adding to the hurt for Ms. Schwartz is that one of her bosses high up in the chain, Jared Kushner, who owns the New York Observer, happens to be Trump’s son-in-law and Jewish, as well as an adviser of his. She has chided him for his silence on the matter, pointing out that, as an employee of his, her letter could be interpreted as insubordination. However, as a matter of principle and in defense of her people from such blatant and overt attacks, she has defied the corporate status quo and taken a stance that could potentially undermine her career at the Observer.
Ms. Schwartz’s situation is a reminder of her vulnerability, in contrast to the belief of many anti-Semites that she (and those like her) is a master string-puller who, using verbal trickery, manipulates society to control or negatively influence it in concert with other Jews. She is left as the recipient of vicious attacks on Twitter while her boss high up in the chain enjoys the political rise of his father-in-law, who is clearly appealing to these anti-Semites who would, if given the chance, strip Ms. Schwartz and even Mr. Kushner of their titles and cart them off to a place they would rather not be. Mr. Kushner, I assume, believes this to be a very low probability outcome, and seemingly believes he has something to gain from this situation given his family ties to Trump. Mr. Kushner is gambling that Trump will keep the situation under control. I believe we’ve been here before in history, with outcomes that were unexpected to all.
In conclusion, Ms. Schwartz is handling this situation nobly and deserves to be commended for following principle over playing politics with her employer. She is an independent thinker who is much-needed in our nation’s media. We all should therefore support her and make sure she is not retaliated against in any way for simply doing her job and defending herself and her people.