Stocks Rebound as Oil Hits $95 on Iran Tensions

Marc Rowan, the billionaire CEO of Apollo Global Management, has poured $1.5 million into an AIPAC-linked super PAC this year to bankroll attacks on candidates critical of U.S. support for Israel. Federal Election Commission records show the first $1 million donation arrived in March, followed by another $500,000 in July. The United Democracy Project, the super PAC in question, immediately deployed the cash against figures such as Rep. Thomas Massie in Kentucky and progressive Senate hopeful Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan.

Rowan sits on President Trump’s so-called Board of Peace, a body approved by the United Nations to oversee reconstruction in Gaza. At a February gathering he described bombed-out Palestinian land as ripe for development, insisting the only obstacle was the absence of peace. Critics note that Palestinians had no say in his appointment, nor did American voters. Rowan’s business record includes past consultations with Jeffrey Epstein, adding to questions about the company he keeps while shaping policy toward the devastated territory.

The spending fits a broader pattern. AIPAC’s network has escalated efforts to neutralize Democratic and Republican voices calling for accountability over Israel’s war in Gaza. In Missouri the super PAC spent heavily on phone banking to undermine former Rep. Cori Bush’s allies. These moves come even as polling shows eroding public support for unconditional aid to Israel and growing skepticism about the lobby’s outsized role in primaries.

Pro-Israel groups insist the donations protect a vital alliance. Yet the scale of the effort reveals anxiety. After years of shielding Israel from scrutiny, AIPAC and its affiliates now confront a younger electorate less willing to accept blank-check support. The group’s super PAC has already spent tens of millions this cycle, targeting candidates who question arms shipments or settlements. Rowan’s checks represent a fraction of his fortune, yet they amplify a machine designed to punish dissent.

The contrast with Rowan’s Gaza vision is stark. While he promotes “peace” as a development opportunity, the political operation he funds works to sideline those highlighting civilian casualties and humanitarian catastrophe. Progressive organizers argue this dynamic distorts foreign policy and discourages honest debate. Massie, El-Sayed and others have faced well-funded attacks precisely because they refuse to treat criticism of Israeli policy as off-limits.

Whether the strategy succeeds remains uncertain. Primary challenges have already removed some vocal critics, but the underlying shift in public opinion continues. Younger Democrats in particular view unconditional backing for Israel as incompatible with human-rights principles. AIPAC’s donor class, led by figures like Rowan, appears determined to slow that change through money rather than persuasion. The result is a political environment where policy toward Gaza is shaped as much by super PAC ledgers as by constituent concerns.