I guess this is going to be a confusing day for Paul Krugman. Earlier Krugman said the only anti-Semites that worried him were the ones on the right. In other words, Rep. Omar is nothing like the tiki torch marchers. But a few hours later, Omar was getting love eyes from David Duke on Twitter who praised her as the most important member of Congress:

I had to look up “Z.O.G.” It’s short for Zionist Occupied Government. In other words, Duke is claiming the Jews are in control of the U.S. That link goes to Duke’s blog (I’m not liking him here) which reads, “Today Dr. Duke and Eric Striker…heaped praise on Ilhan Omar (D-New Somalia) for being the one person in Congress willing to notice AIPAC and the ‘dual’ loyalty of many (((members of Congresss))).”

Is it fair to bring up this sort of thing against Rep. Omar? After all, it’s not as if she asked for Duke’s approval. Well, it was certainly considered news when Duke endorsed Trump in 2016. In fact, there have been a string of stories discussing Duke’s feelings about Trump since 2015:

I’m not even reaching for the left-wing blogs here. And there have been plenty of other stories about white supremacists’ support for Trump which didn’t focus specifically on David Duke. Here’s one from CNN last November: “Trump says he’s not a racist. That’s not how white nationalists see it.” Will we see a follow-up story: “Rep. Omar says she’s not an anti-Semite. That’s not how David Duke sees it.”

The reason all of these stories have been published in the past is that Trump is supposedly appealing to these white nationalists or offering some kind of dog whistle. For those who believe that, how is Omar any different? Aren’t her statements about dual-loyalty and Jewish money controlling the U.S. government exactly the kind of thing that would appeal to David Duke? It seems the answer is yes.