Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Now let's go to Ari Hoffman, associate editor of the
New York Sun. And Ari, I think we're all fascinated
by a couple of stories today. One the terrorist attack
in Boulder, Colorado, and the fact that people who were
saying it's not anti semitic, is it is anti semitic?
It seems clear that it is. And whether this guy
(00:22):
was here illegally. Have you been able to sort through
all of this?
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Sure, good morning, Larry, and it's great to be back
with you. There's no doubt that this was an anti
Semitic attack. What's even more troubling is it's becoming a pattern.
From the arson attack on Governor Shapiro's house overpassover in
Pennsylvania through the awful murder of the two staffers at
(00:49):
the Israeli embassy in DC outside of the Jewish Museum,
it seems like there is now a sort of pattern
where much of the anti Israeli, anti Semitic rhetoric is
now becoming increasingly violent. I think one sort of fascinating
part of this is the way in which it seems
(01:11):
to be that both the attack in d C and
the attack and Boulder were tied to incorrect to put
it mildly. Media reports that circulated the day of those
attacks and d C murders that it had to do
with fourteen thousand children dying in forty eight hours, that
(01:32):
was quickly debunked. And yesterday it was this account of
many people being killed at an AID distribution site, which
also appears not to have been true. So there's no
doubt that the circulation of some of these sort of
fake news really is creating an atmosphere where violence is
(01:53):
more and more likely.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
Yeah, I agree with you, And it's getting a little
bit scary, especially for Jewish Americas and when they gather
or when they go to an embassy, or when they
go to a synagogue. And I know all the cities
across the country are on high alert, but aside from
being on a high alert, apparently that hasn't stopped this.
What can be done? I guess that is the biggest question.
(02:16):
How do we stop this?
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Yeah? Well, first of all, you know, I think there
are reports emerging that there were requests for security that
at this event that were not you know, kind of
acted on in a swift way. So first of all,
you know, cities and states and have to recognize that
this is now no longer a one off kind of situation,
but that there is a definite trend towards violence towards
(02:42):
Jewish events, Israeli events, and it certainly anything that combines
the two. I think a lot of Jewish Americans have been,
you know, raising the alarm on this as well as
many other folks for months, and it was sort of
you know, pooh pood or denied. So the first step
is taking things seriously. I think we're going to see
more Jewish Americans armed themselves honestly, you know, and you know,
(03:04):
under the Second Amendment, and sort of take security into
their own hands. But I think the first step is
sort of you can only solve a problem once you
name it, and I think naming the fact that there
are significant strands of this kind of free Palestine whatever
we want to call it, movement that are violent and
(03:25):
they are ready to bring that violence to citizens right
here in America.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
Talk about this trade war that we have, and when
I say a trade war, it's not the global trade war,
it's a trade war in this country. And the fact
that Donald Trump came in and talked about tariffs on
the campaign trail time and time again, and how unfairly
we were being treated, and how he had to save
American manufacturing. And once again you've got Democrats going to courts,
(03:54):
going to friendly courts to stop this agenda. I don't
know why Aria, the Supreme Court, it hasn't really ruled
on this yet, but this, as Elena Kagan said, this
has got to stop. When are they going to stop it?
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Sure, you know, there's no doubt that if you look
at you know, what is the you know, and what
is that the nucleus of Donald Trump's political program and
platform on which he was elected. As you mentioned, Larry,
you'd say, on the one hand, it's tariffs, on the hand,
it's immigration, right, and on both those scores district courts
and notably usually not the Supreme Court, but more local
(04:31):
district courts right through either nationwide injunctions or this Trade
Court as you mentioned at the end of last week,
have really blocked key parts of those agendas. And you
know what the Trump administration is arguing is, you know,
this is this is an arm of foreign policy, right.
The ability to impose tariffs is really tied to America's
(04:52):
interaction with the world, and of course the president under
the Constitution is granted, really the sole authority other than
the signing of treaties were he needs Congress to conduct
foreign affairs. Right, So the administration is saying, this is
the heartland of presidential prerogative. You know, we'll see, we'll
see if the Supreme Court agrees. But certainly the question
(05:14):
of who can impose tariffs is one that I think
the Trump administration is willing to go all the way on. Right,
this is not really something they can compromise on. It's
really at the core of how the president sees the
world and sees America in the world.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
And if he doesn't do this, if he doesn't get
his way on this, his entire policy might fail because
he's thinking about getting a lot of investment and a
lot of money for this and everything else hinges on that.
I just don't understand why the Supreme Court hasn't weighed in,
because certainly the Constitution doesn't want district courts to shut
(05:48):
off the executive branch across the country.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Right, Yeah, I mean that seems more like a bug
than a feature, right of our constitutions. It seems like
a gl and you definitely have at least two justices
on the Court Thomas and Gorsich. I think would definitely
be be in for getting rid of nationwide injunctions. I
(06:11):
don't think that, you know, the liberal justices will, so
you're down to kind of Roberts and Cony Barrett. But
remember it wasn't that long ago that the shoe was
on the other foot and it was Democrats who were
bewailing nationwide injunctions right issued by by conservative judges. So
I think it's in the interest of our overall system
of government to be frank that that this this is
(06:33):
limited right and or just better better kind of handled right,
rather than, as you said, this chaos of a single
judge somewhere, you know, handing down a rule for for
the whole country.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
Thanks so much, always fascinating. Thanks for the conversation. Aery Hoffman,
Associate editor of The New York Sun. Talk to you
again next week.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Sounds good.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
I will say he talked about the conservative judges. They
don't need it just conservative judges, because Olena Kagan is
on the record as saying she thinks this is ridiculous.
So I and we might be surprised by that ruling