Katie Hobbs defeats MAGA star Kari Lake in Arizona

Fox News hasn't found a way to replicate Tucker Carlson's massive ratings in primetime, but the network has found a behemoth of a winner in The Five.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced Wednesday she's refusing to vote for a bill on antisemitism awareness, arguing it would see Christians arrested for their faith.

Greene made this announcement on X the same day the bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023 (H.R. 6090) — crafted to combat the problem on college campuses — was slated to go to a vote in the House of Representatives.

"Antisemitism is wrong, but I will not be voting for the Antisemitism Awareness Act," Greene explained. "[It] could convict Christians of antisemitism for believing the Gospel that says Jesus was handed over to Herod to be crucified by the Jews."

Greene backs up this claim with two images; the first a screenshot of the bill's definition of antisemitism and the second a printout Greene doesn't source.

The bill uses the definition crafted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, of which the U.S. is a member, and adopted by the State department, congressional records show.

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews," the IHRA definition states. "Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The IHRA website page on which this definition appears also includes a bulleted list of 11 contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life that does not appear in the legislation's text.

But this appears to be the document Greene references in her refusal to back the bill.

"Read the bill text and contemporary examples of antisemitism like #9," Greene demands of her readers.

Number nine, in both the IHRA list and Greene's, reads as follows: "Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis."

ALSO READ: Former FBI official accuses Marjorie Taylor Greene of spreading foreign propaganda

These claims, according to the Holocaust Encyclopedia, were commonly repeated by the Nazis.

"The term blood libel refers to the false allegation that Jews used the blood of non-Jewish, usually Christian children, for ritual purposes," the definition states. "The Nazis made effective use of the blood libel to demonize Jews, with Julius Steicher's newspaper Der Stürmer making frequent use of ritual murder imagery in its antisemitic propaganda."

Greene is not alone in refusing to support the bill, but her reasons differ widely from those cited by the American Civil Liberties Union in their letter in opposition to House representatives.

"Federal law already prohibits antisemitic discrimination and harassment by federally funded entities," the ACLU argues. " H.R. 6090 is therefore not needed to protect against antisemitic discrimination; instead, it would likely chill free speech of students on college campuses by incorrectly equating criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism."

As this important debate on a complex issue unfolded in the House of Representatives, Greene's social media followers took the opportunity to remind readers of the Georgia lawmaker's history.

"BREAKING NEWS," wrote X user Mr. Newberger. "Woman who key noted a Nazi rally won't vote for Antisemitism bill."

This likely references Greene's decision to speak at a White Nationalist event in 2022.

"This you?" asked Travis Matthew, sharing an article entitled "Republicans blast Marjorie Taylor Greene's Holocaust remarks" about her likening COVID-19 masks to the Nazi's mass murder of Jewish people.

"This is absolutely nuts," wrote Hadar Susskind. "MTG is just mad that they didn’t accept her space laser amendment."

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) took another stab at defending her decision to shoot and kill a 14-month old puppy years ago that attacked some chickens, by citing a South Dakota law that allows animals that kill "livestock" to be put down.

Taking to X, formerly known as Twitter, the embattled Republican attempted to put out the firestorm she created by writing in her new book that she "hated" the puppy named Cricket and after an incident took it to a gravel pit and shot it while also claiming it was "worthless" as a hunting dog despite its young age.

On Sunday, she wrote, "I can understand why some people are upset about a 20 year old story of Cricket, one of the working dogs at our ranch, in my upcoming book — No Going Back. The book is filled with many honest stories of my life, good and bad days, challenges, painful decisions, and lessons learned."

ALSO READ: ‘Fraudulent’: Trump tormentor Lincoln Project loses big money in cybertheft scheme

She then continued:

"What I learned from my years of public service, especially leading South Dakota through COVID, is people are looking for leaders who are authentic, willing to learn from the past, and don’t shy away from tough challenges. My hope is anyone reading this book will have an understanding that I always work to make the best decisions I can for the people in my life. The fact is, South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill livestock can be put down. Given that Cricket had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them, I decided what I did. Whether running the ranch or in politics, I have never passed on my responsibilities to anyone else to handle. Even if it’s hard and painful. I followed the law and was being a responsible parent, dog owner, and neighbor. As I explained in the book, it wasn't easy. But often the easy way isn't the right way."

That did not satisfy Noem's many internet critics.

As one put it, she seemed more invested in selling her book, writing, "Stop using you murdering your dog in cold blood to try to sell copies of your book you sicko."

That was one of the nicer responses she received.

Former FBI special agent Asha Rangappa said, "It sounds like out of at least three options 1) train the dog; 2) drive any distance to a shelter; or 3) shoot it on the spot, you literally took the easiest one."

Former Trump campaign aide A.J. Delgado called Noem a "liar."

"BTW, liar, he never 'killed' livestock -- only attacked, which every dog does (i.e., runs after them). Quit changing your story. Your career is OVER."

@OurShallowState said, "The dog frustrated you. You killed it. That wasn't a tough decision by an empathetic person. That was a weak and lazy decision by a sociopathic person. Leading in government is making the right choices. You are insensitive and impatient. Your choices suck."

Democrat Harry Sisson also weighed in.

"There is no justifying your actions. What you did was disgusting and unforgivable. Also, nobody is going to buy your damn book," he said.

Noem even lost the support of some commenting users.

@colin_fendley said, "I have been a farm owner, I have been a K9 Handler, and I have trained thousands of dogs; you can not justify this, my dear. I'm a conservative, and you lost my support."