“Amalek,” Genocide, and Israeli Public Opinion: A Disturbing Poll

 

Introduction

As accusations of genocide against Israel intensify at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), a new poll published in Haaretz’s Hebrew edition on May 22, 2025, reveals a chilling reality: widespread support among Jewish Israelis for extreme violence against Palestinians, including exterminationist measures. Conducted by a Penn State University researcher, the poll’s biblical framing—referencing the command to destroy Amalek—echoes rhetoric used by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and cited by South Africa as evidence of genocidal intent. These findings expose not just government policy but a broader societal embrace of policies meeting the definition of ethnic cleansing and genocide, rooted in history but amplified by the trauma of October 7, 2023. For a world grappling with how to respond, this poll demands a reckoning with the beliefs of a society, not just its leaders.

The “Amalek” Poll

The Haaretz poll asked Jewish Israelis about their attitudes toward Palestinians in Gaza and Israel, framing questions around the biblical story of Amalek, where God commands the Israelites to destroy an enemy entirely. The results are staggering:

• 47% supported the Israeli army “acting as the Israelites did at Jericho”—killing all inhabitants of a conquered city.

• 82% supported the forced expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza.

• 56% supported expelling Palestinian citizens of Israel.

• Even among secular Jews, often seen as more liberal, 70% backed Gaza expulsion, and 38% supported expelling Palestinian citizens.

This “Amalek” framing is not accidental. Netanyahu’s November 2023 call to troops—“You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible”—was highlighted by South Africa at the ICJ as evidence of genocidal intent (Mother Jones, Jan. 2024; AP, Jan. 2024).

Historical Continuity and October 7’s Impact

These attitudes are not solely a reaction to the October 7 Hamas attack. A 2016 Pew survey found 48% of Jewish Israelis agreed that “Arabs should be expelled or transferred from Israel,” with majorities among non-secular Jews and a significant minority of secular Jews (Telhami, Brookings, 2016). Polls over the past decade consistently show support for discriminatory or violent policies toward Palestinians, especially during conflicts.

Yet October 7 amplified these sentiments. The attack’s trauma, as journalist Gideon Levy writes, led even Israel’s liberal left to “shut off” their moral compass, justifying horrors in Gaza as vengeance (Haaretz, Mar. 2024). Genocide scholar Omer Bartov notes that latent hatreds, rooted in decades of political Zionism, have become public and normalized, with biblical rhetoric moving from the far-right fringe to the mainstream. The poll reflects this shift: extreme measures—expulsion, denial of aid, even extermination—are now openly endorsed.

Why “Amalek” Matters

The “Amalek” reference is no mere metaphor. In the Hebrew Bible, God commands the Israelites to annihilate Amalek—men, women, children, and animals—as divine justice. By invoking this, Netanyahu and others justify total war on Gaza, with leaders like Defense Minister Yoav Gallant vowing to “eliminate everything” (Stack, New York Times, Jan. 2024). South Africa cited these statements at the ICJ as evidence of genocidal intent. That nearly half of Jewish Israelis endorse this logic shows how religious and historical narratives shape not just policy but public opinion, normalizing atrocity in the present.

Implications and Conclusion

The poll challenges the narrative—common in Western media—that only Netanyahu or the far right drive Israel’s extreme policies. Support for atrocities crosses lines of religiosity, age, and political affiliation, revealing a society radicalized, not just a government. As the ICJ and International Criminal Court weigh charges of genocide and crimes against humanity, and as Western governments reassess support for Israel, understanding this public sentiment is critical. The potential silencing of voices discussing these findings, whether through gate-keeping or hasbara, further complicates the path to truth.

This is a wake-up call. The poll reveals the depth of support for policies meeting the definition of ethnic cleansing and genocide, fueled by trauma and religious narrative. Confronting this requires not just condemning leaders but examining the societal beliefs that empower them. Only then can there be hope for justice—or peace.

---

Sources:

• Middle East Eye, “Nearly half of Israelis support army killing all Palestinians in Gaza, poll finds,” May 24, 2025. (Reports on the  Haaretz poll which appeared only in its Hebrew ed. on May 22, 2025), 

• Pew Research Center, “Israel’s Religiously Divided Society,” 2016

• Arianna Coghill, As It Formally Accuses Israel of Genocide, Asouth Africa Condemns Netanyahy's Amalek Reference,  Mother Jones, Jan. 11, 2024

• Associated Press, Harsh Israeli rhetoric against Palestinians becomes central to South Africa's genocide case, Jan. 18, 2024

• New York Times, Don't Turn Away from the Charges of Genocide Against Israel, Megan K. Stack, Jan. 12, 2024

• Gideon Levy, Israeli Leftists: Shake Off the Shock of October 7 and Open Your Eyes to Gaza, Haaretz, Mar. 13, 2024

• Shibley Telhami, Brookings, How Israel's Jewishness is overtaking its democracy, Mar. 11, 2016

  
  

djt corruption updates: Deep corruption; Corruption damage; Memecoin corruption

After some recent cognitively and emotionally heavy-duty posts 👎 ☹️, a few light-hearted MAGA updates seem to be in order to lighten the mood up around here . 👍 👏 🌟

The corruption is blatant and gigantic: A NYT article reports that not only is djt a fracking extortionist and thief, MAGA government either likes it or could not care less: “As Trumps Monetize Presidency, Profits Outstrip Protests -- When Hillary Clinton was first lady, a furor erupted over reports that she had once made $100,000 from a $1,000 investment in cattle futures. Even though it had happened a dozen years before her husband became president, it became a scandal that lasted weeks and forced the White House to initiate a review. .... By conventional Washington standards, according to students of official graft, the still-young Trump administration is a candidate for the most brazen use of government office in American history, perhaps eclipsing even Teapot Dome, Watergate and other famous scandals.” (emphasis added)

The article goes on to point out that thirty-one years later, after dinner at Mar-a-Lago, Jeff Bezos agreed to finance a disgusting propaganda film about Melania Trump. That sleazy deal puts about $28 million directly in Melania's pocket. That is about 280 times the size of Clinton’s cash haul. And in this case Melania is a person with a vested interest in policies set by her husband’s government. In this case, no scandal, no furor, no nothing. Washington basically ignored it. 

Other reporting comments on the $400 million-sized violation of the emoluments clause when djt took the airplane from Qatar. That is a fine a country best described as an authoritarian monarchy with systemic corruption and concentrated wealth.

Q: Has kleptocracy in government been normalized and made acceptable to most MAGAlanders, especially the elites, or are they deceived into believing that what's going on isn’t large-scale corruption?

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

The NYT reports (not paywalled) about damage that djt can cause when he extorts a foreign government: “Why Vietnam Ignored Its Own Laws to Fast-Track a Trump Family Golf Complex

 -- Planning documents promised a “new benchmark in luxury, recreation and business.” [Vietnam's top leader] Le Van Truong, [who did not want to agree], pictured something else: the uprooting of a cemetery with five generations of his ancestors and the loss of rich farmland that has sustained local families for centuries. Yet he signed anyway, because, as he put it, “there’s nothing I can do.” “Trump says it’s separate — the presidency and his business,” Mr. Truong said. “But he has the power to do whatever he wants.” This $1.5 billion golf complex outside the capital, Hanoi, as well as plans for a Trump skyscraper in Ho Chi Minh City, are the Trump family’s first projects in Vietnam — part of a global moneymaking enterprise that no family of a sitting American president has ever attempted on this scale. And as that blitz makes the Trumps richer, it is distorting how countries interact with the United States.” (emphases added)

That level of corruption speaks for itself. ‘Nuf said.

Some of the land to be taken for 

djt's sleaze & corruption resort

They will be kicked out

for djt’s fun and profit

Le Van Truong next to graves that will be 

cleared to make way for djt’s fun and profit

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

The Independent reports about djt cashing in bigly on his cryptocurrency scams. GD Culture Group, a small Chinese-linked tech company, plans to buy $300 million worth of Bitcoin and $TRUMP, a djt cryptocurrency, shows blatant conflicts of interest and bribery galore. The Nasdaq-listed firm reported no revenue in 2023 and has just eight employees, will finance the purchase through a secretive stock sale to an undisclosed buyer in the British Virgin Islands, a tax haven that tax cheats like to use to hide their financial crimes. Aspects of the deal’s secrecy include the unidentified funding source and GD Culture Group’s vague regulatory disclosures with implied links to Chinese government control.  

About 80% of $TRUMP is owned by Trump’s business entities. djt recently hosted crypto-themed dinners (with bad food and crappy service) for entry fees up to $1.5 million. djt advocates for lighter crypto regulations, i.e., almost no regulations. That fine MAGA policy increases the value of djt’s holdings. All of this enables secret bribery of djt and his family on a gigantic scale. All of this corrupt sleaze coincides with djt’s efforts to broker a corrupt deal that allows TikTok to continue U.S. operations. GD Culture Group creates content for TikTok, which is owned by China-based ByteDance. In essence, the Chinese government is buying the US government by paying djt. 

Based on common sense, I presume that GD Culture Group is controlled by the Chinese Government, but asked Pxy.

Q: Can one reasonably surmise that GD Culture Group is controlled by the Chinese government?

A: While GD Culture Group isn't proven to be state-controlled, its financial dependencies, regulatory environment, and opaque transactions create plausible deniability for indirect influence. The company maintains its U.S.-based leadership (e.g., CEO Xiao Jian Wang in New York) and describes itself as independent, but this directly conflicts with its own risk disclosures.

There we have it. When it comes to the Chinese Government hiding behind plausible deniability, that constitutes persuasive evidence of culpability. There is no empirical basis for trust or the benefit of any doubt. Heck, that situation is no different than when djt or MAGA elites hide behind plausibility, i.e., there is no basis for one shred of trust. 

America First!! 

(or not)

Ehud Olmert's Historic 5/22 Article About Gaza Translated and With Commentary

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (2006–2009) published an op-ed in Haaretz on May 22, 2025, condemning Israel’s war in Gaza as a “war of extermination” and accusing the Netanyahu government of committing war crimes, including the deliberate starvation of civilians. Full English translation below. — Ehud Olmert writes: 

 

The Israeli government is currently waging a senseless war — without purpose, without clear planning, and with no chance of success. Since its founding, the State of Israel has never initiated such a war. In this too, the gang of criminals led by Benjamin Netanyahu has set an unprecedented example in the country’s history. The clear outcome of “Operation Gideon’s Chariots” is, above all, chaos within army units deployed across the Gaza Strip. This is especially true in neighborhoods where our soldiers have already fought, been wounded, and fallen — and where they have killed many Hamas fighters, who deserved their fate, but also very many uninvolved civilians. The latter have become statistics in a monstrous toll of false victims among the Palestinian population. What has happened in Gaza over recent weeks has nothing to do with a legitimate war objective. Our fighters are being sent by the country’s leadership — and by the military command that follows its orders — to fumble through the neighborhoods of Gaza City, Jabalia, and Khan Younis in an illegitimate military campaign. This has now become a private political war, and its immediate result is the transformation of the Gaza Strip into a humanitarian disaster zone. Over the past year, serious accusations have been made globally against the conduct of the IDF and the Israeli government in Gaza, including allegations of genocide and war crimes. In both domestic and international media forums, I strongly opposed those accusations — even while offering harsh criticism of the government. International media hear all the voices from our public discourse. They can tell who parrots Netanyahu and his courtiers, and who opposes him — those who, as is now common in the media, call him the head of a crime family. I did not hesitate to be interviewed in Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, the UK, and other global venues. I often disappointed my hosts by firmly asserting that Israel was not committing war crimes in Gaza. Excessive killing? Yes. An unfathomable number of uninvolved victims — children, women, and the elderly? Certainly. But I claimed, with self-conviction, that there had never been a direct order from a political decision-maker to deliberately target civilians in Gaza. The number of non-combatant civilians killed in Gaza was unreasonable, unjustified, unacceptable. But as I said in every media outlet worldwide — these were the outcomes of a brutal war. 

 

This war should have ended in early 2024. It has continued without justification, without a defined goal, and without a political vision for Gaza or the broader Middle East. Even if the army — which is obligated to execute the decisions of the political echelon — often acted recklessly, carelessly, or with excessive aggression, it did so without any order, instruction, or directive from senior command to indiscriminately harm civilians. Therefore, I previously believed no war crimes were being committed. [emph. added] Genocide and war crimes are legal definitions that depend heavily on the awareness and responsibility of those empowered to define the objectives, conduct, and limits of warfare. I tried, whenever possible, to distinguish between the crimes we were accused of — which I denied — and the carelessness and indifference toward Palestinian victims and the unbearable human cost. I denied the first charge, admitted the second.

In recent weeks, I can no longer do so. What we are doing in Gaza is a war of extermination: indiscriminate, unrestricted, cruel, and criminal killing of civilians.  We are doing this not because of a loss of control in a certain area, not due to some disproportionate outburst by a military unit — but as a direct result of a government policy, deliberate, malicious, reckless, and intentional. Yes, we are committing war crimes. [emph. added]

First and foremost: the starvation of Gaza. On this issue, senior government officials have expressed their positions openly. Yes, we are denying food, medicine, and essential survival resources to Gaza’s residents as part of a declared policy. Netanyahu, as always, tries to obscure the nature of his instructions to avoid legal and criminal accountability. But some of his courtiers say it openly and proudly: Yes, we will starve Gaza. Because all of Gaza is Hamas, and therefore there is no moral or operational constraint on destroying them — more than two million people.

Israeli media outlets, for various reasons (some of which are understandable), attempt to soften the picture. But the image seen abroad is far broader — and shocking. One cannot remain indifferent. One can no longer dismiss the global response as mere antisemitism — as though “everyone just hates us.” That lie has run its course.

We cannot ignore what is happening in certain IDF units. There are too many incidents of cruel shooting at civilians and unjustified destruction of property and homes.

No — French President Emmanuel Macron is not antisemitic. I know him well and have spoken with him in recent months. In a time of need, the French military stood on the front lines defending Israel and helped intercept Iran’s missile attacks. “We fight alongside you against your enemies at my instruction, and you accuse me of supporting terror,” Macron recently said. He is a friend of Israel. So are the Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and others. Even leaders associated with the political right, who until recently avoided anything that might embarrass Israel, are beginning to distance themselves.

They hear the voices from Gaza. They see the suffering of hundreds of thousands. They hear what is said in the Israeli cabinet and understand what is obvious: Israel’s government, led by Netanyahu, is deliberately enacting a policy of starvation and humanitarian pressure that may result in catastrophe.

Even governments traditionally friendly to Israel — Canada, the UK, and France — are starting to suggest severe measures against the Israeli government, even if those steps could cause Israel serious harm. Macron has suggested suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement. The leaders of Spain, the Netherlands, and Italy have followed suit.

These voices will grow louder. And in addition to steps taken by the International Criminal Court in The Hague, there is a real danger that punitive actions will be taken against Israel — with devastating political, economic, and even military consequences.

Netanyahu’s gang and its poison machine will immediately cry out in their typical self-victimizing way: “The Gentiles are antisemitic. They hate us. They’ve always hated us. They support terror — and we’re fighting terror.”

The truth is: these governments are not anti-Israel — they are anti-this Israeli government. They believe the government has declared war on the State of Israel and its people, and that the damage it is causing is potentially irreversible.

I agree with them. I believe this Israeli government is the enemy from within. It has declared war on the State of Israel and its citizens. No external enemy in the 77 years of Israel’s existence has done us more harm than what the current Israeli government, led by Itamar Ben Gvir, Netanyahu, and Bezalel Smotrich, is doing now. No external enemy has ever succeeded in undermining Israel’s social cohesion — a key to its resilience — as Netanyahu’s government has. (cont'd---->) --

Let me reiterate what is already becoming a broad consensus among the Israeli public: this government is unfit to rule. It is unwilling and incapable of doing what is best for the state and its citizens. It is obsessed with destroying the foundations of internal unity and cooperation — even among groups that disagree. It incites brother against brother, mother against child, soldier against soldier, and unleashes thugs on hostages and their families with sadistic, reckless cruelty — all while failing to bring the hostages home. Amid this chaos, we continue to slaughter Palestinian civilians in the West Bank. I’ve said it and I won’t take it back: the “Youth of the Horrors” are committing daily atrocities throughout the West Bank, with the army and police looking the other way. The murder of Tze’ela Gez is horrifying. One cannot help but feel grief for this young woman, killed on her way to give birth. May her son be saved and grow up surrounded by the love of his family. But when the head of the Shomron Regional Council, Yossi Dagan, calls for Palestinian villages to be destroyed — that is a call for genocide. And when a Palestinian village is torched — and many have been — we’ll be told it was just “a small violent fringe.” That’s a lie. There are many. The advance guard is always small, but behind them stand the Dagan-types, who inspire, aid, and shield them — and prepare the next wave. Where is the police? Where is the army? Where are the tens of thousands of settlers who will say: these are criminals who belong in prison — not in the olive groves of the West Bank? And let us not ignore what’s happening in certain elite IDF units — where some of Israel’s most daring fighters serve. Too many cases of cruel shootings, of looting, of theft from homes — and soldiers proudly posting about it. We are committing war crimes. I do not share the opinion of former Chief of Staff Moshe Ya’alon, who has said we are committing ethnic cleansing. But we are approaching a point where that becomes undeniable — the inevitable result of what our government, army, and brave soldiers are actually doing. It’s time to stop — before we are cast out from the family of nations and summoned to the International Criminal Court for war crimes. And we will have no good defense. That’s all. —END—

 

---

 My Commentary:

Former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s May 22, 2025, Haaretz op-ed represents a watershed moment in Israeli political discourse. For over a year, Olmert publicly defended Israel against charges of war crimes and genocide, even as he harshly criticized Netanyahu’s leadership. In this piece, however, he openly admits that “in recent weeks” he can no longer do so, charging that Israel’s actions in Gaza now constitute a “war of extermination” and deliberate war crimes, including the starvation of civilians—allegations he previously rejected. Olmert’s reversal is not only personal but emblematic of a broader reckoning within Israel’s establishment.

This dramatic shift comes in the wake of mounting whistleblower testimony from Israeli soldiers, the looming threat of international legal action at the ICC and ICJ, and a tidal wave of condemnation from Western governments and media outlets, as I discuss in a parallel piece on the topic posted here yesterday. The convergence of these factors has made continued denial untenable for even the most prominent defenders of Israeli policy. Olmert’s words echo those of former IDF general and opposition leader Yair Golan, who days earlier broke political taboos with his own searing condemnation of government policy—further signaling a historic realignment among Israel’s elite.

Olmert’s op-ed is also deeply personal and political. His animus toward Netanyahu is unmistakable, with language describing the current government as a “gang of criminals” and “the enemy from within.” It is no secret that Olmert and Netanyahu have been bitter rivals for decades, and Olmert’s intervention may be partly motivated by the sense that Netanyahu’s political ship is sinking—potentially opening space for new leadership. Recent interviews suggest Olmert is not ruling out a return to politics if the opportunity arises, adding another layer to his sudden and forceful public break.

Olmert’s op-ed is a textbook example of how political and moral narratives shift under pressure. For months, he and others characterized the war as “senseless”—tragic but not criminal, the result of chaos or poor leadership rather than deliberate policy. In his own words, he previously distinguished between “carelessness and indifference” and actual war crimes, insisting that the mounting civilian toll was not the result of government orders but of battlefield excesses and the fog of war. This position allowed him—and many others—to criticize the conduct of the war without confronting its underlying intent.

 

Yet, in a pivotal and self-justifying turn, Olmert claims that only “in recent weeks” has he recognized the true nature of the war: “a war of extermination,” carried out as a “direct result of a government policy, deliberate, malicious, reckless, and intentional.” This is not a minor rhetorical adjustment but a fundamental reversal—one that is difficult to reconcile with his earlier claims of senselessness and lack of purpose. The contradiction is not accidental; it is the mechanism by which denial gives way to acknowledgment, and complicity is recast as belated moral clarity.

 

This rhetorical pivot is not unique to Olmert. It mirrors a broader pattern among Israeli and Western politicians, media, and intellectuals, who are now rapidly shifting their public stances in the face of mounting whistleblower testimony, imminent international legal judgments, and a dramatic change in global opinion. The timing of these reversals strongly suggests that the shift is driven as much by external pressures and reputational concerns as by any sudden moral awakening.

 

To reduce these reversals to mere opportunism would be to miss the gravity of the moment. But it would be equally naïve to take them at face value as purely the product of conscience. Rather, they reflect the complex interplay of personal, political, and historical forces that shape elite opinion in moments of reckoning. As the costs of silence rise and the verdict of history looms, we are witnessing not just a reckoning with the facts, but a reckoning with complicity itself.

 References/Suggested Readings:

 

>>Ehud Olmert,  "We are Committing War Crimes," Haaretz (Hebrew edition),  May 22, 2025 (Trans. provided by DropSite News on X) 

>> Monica Marks,  Selected translations of the article with commentary, X post, May 24, 2025.

>>Common Dreams, Israeli Troops Blow Whistle on War Crimes in Gaza 'Kill Zone,' April 7, 2025

>>Haaretz, "Breaking The Silence is a Legitimate Outlet for Israeli Whistleblowers," March, 2016

A critique of MAGA’s unitary executive legal theory

CONTEXT

My post yesterday urgently warned about the impending nullification of a 90-year old legal doctrine that makes it hard for a president to politicize, corrupt and weaponize independent federal agencies. The legal doctrine under threat is called Humphrey’s Executor, which was part of the name of the 1935 USSC decision to give congress the power to make it hard for presidents to ruin and corrupt critically important government functions that both parties at one time deemed to be too important for partisan politics or corruption and political weaponization. Today, the Republican Party wants to eliminate the Humphrey’s Executor precedent. That will empower djt and deeply corrupt, authoritarian MAGA elites to corrupt, politicize, and weaponize the federal government against democracy, the rule of law, civil liberties, political opposition, and tolerant, pluralist government.

A corrupt authoritarian takeover of American government and law is exactly what is going on right now in American politics, whether people know it, or believe it or not. The evidence is rock solid.

The unitary executive theory

The UET: To get rid of the Humphrey’s Executor legal doctrine, MAGA legal theory relies on the UET. The UET says the president should have powers close or equal to a true dictator. MAGA elites claim the UET is what the Founders intended and how the constitution defines the distribution of power in the federal government. Under a UET regime, the power of the courts and congress are sharply reduced and that power flows to the president. The UET, like originalism, is based on flawed legal reasoning and flawed (manipulated) history that distorts inconvenient facts. The UET is best and most rationally seen as a recipe for dictatorship.

A UET critique: The UET asserts nearly unlimited presidential control over the executive branch. It is grounded in false history and an unconstitutional legal framework. Proponents claim the Vesting Clause grants the president sole authority over federal agencies. However some historians argue that the Founding era included some independent government functions like the Sinking Fund Commission (SFC).**  The historical fact and existence of the SFC directly contradicts UET’s claims of historical and constitutional absolutism. Also, Madison explicitly rejected unchecked executive power, designing a system where Congress could counterbalance presidents through oversight and funding. Modern UET emerged not from Founding principles but from Reagan-era conservatives seeking to dismantle regulatory safeguards, later weaponized by djt to justify purging inspectors general and corrupting and weaponizing the US justice department.

** The SFC was established in 1790 by the First U.S. Congress and signed into law by President George Washington. Congress created the SFC to deal with repaying Revolutionary War debt. Its structure intentionally insulated fiscal decisions from presidential control.

Modern legal scholars warn that the UET attacks and erodes democracy by concentrating power in the presidency. The UET’s danger is exemplified by our MAGA USSC’s Seila Law (2020) decision. That UET-grounded decision weakened the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s independence. In short, a UET president is empowered to politicize and corrupt neutral, honest, competent agencies. This power is broad and vast, including election oversight, environmental regulation and consumer and worker protections. Various studies show that similar UET-based power grabs in Hungary and Turkey accelerated authoritarianism there.  

Polling indicates that public understanding of the UET and MAGA’s use of it is minimal. Polls show that rank and file Republicans increasingly equate “strong leadership” with unilateral executive action, a very dangerous ongoing authoritarian lie. The cynical mendacity of MAGA rhetoric praising autocrats like Viktor Orbán while dismissing checks on presidential power as “deep state” obstruction is becoming increasingly real to tens of millions of Americans. Due to its abstract legal framing, most Americans remain unaware of UET’s gigantic anti-democratic implications, especially its role in enabling corruption and undermining the rule of law. Although UET thrives in partisan echo chambers, e.g., Faux News, its historical illegitimacy and anti-democratic intent make it a deadly threat to our democracy, civil liberties and rule of law.