Because when provided with positive evidence of obvious bias, you demanded proof of a negative which is ranges from prohibitively difficult to impossible. This is not a valid form of reasoning. The inability to disprove something is not a valid reason to believe in it.

Let me put it another way, I don't converse with paedophiles so I'm going to need proof that you've never diddled kids before we can continue.

Somebody could hypothetically have worked for AIPAC in the past and become a staunch opponent of Israel’s policy

I'd be surprised if you could find a single example...

AIPAC uses bribes as the carrot, then if you go against them, the being up past carrots (bribes) and use the disclosure of them as "the stick".

Like, do you not understand how state back propaganda works? AIPAC works hand in hand with Israeli intelligence and their administration.

Literally the only reason AIPAC exists is because it's predessor had to register as a foreign agent, so AIPAC replaced it and immediately bribed the people who decide who has to register as a foreign agent....

For me,

This isn't a one off specific issue you missed ...

You seem completely unaware what AIPAC actually is and what they do...

But still feel the need to weigh in. Why?

Why not spend 15 minutes reading up on AIPAC?