Uncategorized
Long-delayed Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial to begin Monday, igniting pain, fear and hopes for closure
(JTA) — Every Thursday, Brad Orsini gets on a conference call with dozens of other security specialists who, like him, focus on preventing threats to American Jews. But in a few days, and for the coming months, the conference call won’t just address the dangers of the present and future. It will also deal with events that occurred more than four years ago.
That’s because next week marks the beginning of the trial of the gunman who is accused of killing 11 worshippers in a Pittsburgh synagogue in October 2018.
Orsini, who oversaw the city’s Jewish communal security on the day of the attack in the neighborhood of Squirrel Hill, hopes to find a sense of closure in the alleged shooter’s prosecution. But he also knows that the trial threatens to broadcast the white supremacist ideas that lay behind the attack, and continue to pose risks for Jewish communities. And he worries that, in addition to providing a possible pathway for survivors and victims’ families to move into the future, it could also thrust them back into a painful past.
“It’s long overdue,” Orsini said. “This has been looming large over the Pittsburgh community and, quite honestly, the Jewish community in the nation. We’re all looking toward finishing this trial and prosecuting this actor for what he did.”
At the same time, he added, “This trial is going to reopen wounds that this community has suffered for almost five years now, and it’s going to have the ability to retraumatize many people in the community. And we have to be concerned about that.”
Beginning on Monday, those countervailing emotions and expectations will come to bear as the deadliest antisemitic attack in American Jewish history is litigated in court. The trial, which will begin with jury selection, is expected to last about three months. Few doubt the guilt of the accused shooter, Robert Bowers, whose name is hardly uttered by Jewish residents of Squirrel Hill. But what remains unclear is what the trial will mean for American Jews — and for the families most directly affected by the attack.
Some hope for the defendant to get the death penalty — even though that will mean prolonging the legal ordeal — while others have advocated against it. Some hope for the trial to shed light on the threat of white supremacy, even as renewed attention on the attack could inspire other violent extremists. And some hope the trial will help them move past the tragedy, even as they know it will be difficult to hear the details of the shooting laid out in court.
“The country is going to have to undergo this unprecedented trial of the country’s worst mass killer of Jews,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League. “It’s going to be really hard, so I think our community is really going to have to buckle down and brace ourselves.”
The attack on Saturday morning, Oct. 27, 2018, killed 11 people from three congregations, all of which met at the same building, and injured six others, including four police officers. The defendant faces 63 criminal charges, including hate crimes and murder charges. He has pleaded not guilty. The prosecution is seeking the death penalty — a choice some relatives of victims are vocally supporting. Previously, leaders of two of the three congregations that suffered the attack had opposed the death penalty in this case.
“This massacre was not just a mass murder of innocent citizens during a service in a house of worship,” Diane Rosenthal, sister of David and Cecil Rosethal, who died in the attack, told local journalists, according to reporting by the Pittsburgh Union Progress. “The death penalty must apply to vindicate justice and to offer some measure of deterrence from horrific hate crimes happening again and again.”
For the survivors and families of victims, the trial will likely be especially painful. Some told the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle that they intend to take time off work, delay a vacation or be away from family for an extended period of time to be present at the proceedings.
“I want to see justice happen, but at the same time, I hate to think about the families having to potentially see images of what happened and things of that sort,” Steve Weiss, who survived the attack, told the weekly Jewish newspaper. “I’m sure they have mental images, but to have to actually see photos of victims and things of that sort I think can really be difficult for them.”
One thing few people question is the shooter’s guilt, despite his plea of not guilty. He offered to plead guilty in 2019 in exchange for taking the death penalty off the table, but prosecutors, determined to pursue capital punishment for the crime, rejected the plea.
It was the same thing that had happened in the case of the man charged with killing nine Black worshippers in a Charleston, South Carolina, church in 2015. But there, despite the rejected guilty plea, the trial took place a year and a half after the attack, and the shooter was sentenced to death. (In an illustration of the length of death penalty cases, his latest court proceeding happened in October, and he has not yet been executed.)
In contrast, the Pittsburgh trial is not starting until four and a half years after the shooting there. Part of the reason for the delay stems from the work of the defense team, which has pushed back the trial through various court filings. The alleged shooter’s lead attorney, Judy Clarke, has defended a series of high-profile attackers: the Unabomber, the attacker in the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics bombing and the Boston Marathon bomber, among others. According to Pittsburgh’s local CBS affiliate, her singular goal is to avoid the death penalty for her client.
But in many other ways, the parallels between the Charleston trial and this one are clear. Both concern shootings by alleged white supremacists in houses of worship, tragedies that have become gruesome symbols of a national rise in bigotry. In both, the culpability of the defendant was assumed before the trial began. Like the Pittsburgh defendant, the Charleston shooter has been lionized by white supremacists, including some who cited him as an inspiration for their own violent acts.
And in both cases, there is an understanding that a conviction does not heal the wounds opened by the shooter.
“This trial has produced no winners, only losers,” said the judge in the Charleston shooter’s trial, Richard Gergel, according to the New Yorker. “This proceeding cannot give the families what they truly want, the return of their loved ones.”
Still, some who are watching the Pittsburgh trial closely hope that it will bring new facts and connections to light. Amy Spitalnick, the executive director of Integrity First for America, a nonprofit that spearheaded a multimillion-dollar victory in a civil trial against the organizers of the 2017 far-right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, hopes that the Pittsburgh trial illustrates the links among different white supremacist shootings — such as the attacks in El Paso, Texas; Christchurch, New Zealand; and at a synagogue in Poway, California.
Those attackers spouted similar conspiracy theories and referenced other recent violent attacks in their manifestos. Spitalnick said that the accused Pittsburgh shooter allegedly communicated with the organizers of the Charlottesville rally on the social network Gab, which is known as a haven for right-wing extremists.
“Trials like this can really be illustrative of how deep the poison of white supremacy and antisemitism goes,” she said. In the Charlottesville trial, she said, “The reams and reams of evidence… really helped pull back the curtain on what motivated the defendants, how they operated, the tools and the tactics of the movement, the conspiracy theories at its core.”
There’s also the possibility that, with the attack resurfacing the shooter’s motivations, and putting him back in the spotlight, it will act as an inspiration for other white supremacists. In the years following the synagogue shooting, Pittsburgh became a kind of pilgrimage site for the defendant’s admirers — leading to continued harassment of local Jews.
“We’re giving a platform to an individual who is a Jew hater, who wanted to kill all Jews,” Orsini said. “What does that spark in other like-minded people? We need to be very cognizant throughout this trial on what kind of chatter is going to be out there on the deep dark web, or even in open portals.”
In the face of concerns about retraumatization, Greenblatt said the ADL is preparing resources on how to discuss the trial with students and amid the Jewish community.
“To relive the horrors of, the grief of, the event — this thing being constantly in the news — it’s going to be hard to avoid, it’s going to be difficult and it could be grisly and upsetting,” Greenblatt said. “I would much prefer this trial didn’t happen — I would much prefer this crime never happened, I would much prefer that those people were all still with us today — but this is where we are.”
He added, “If there might be some ability to raise awareness among the non-Jewish population of what we’re facing, [that] would be of value.”
One potential challenge for American Jews as a whole, Spitalnick said, is that federal prosecutors don’t necessarily share the needs of Jews who will be following the proceedings. While the trial will conjure a mix of emotions for Jews locally and beyond, she said, prosecutors will be more focused on the nuts and bolts of what happened that day and the details of the accused attacker’s actions and motives.
“We’re going to probably spend a lot of time hearing from the prosecution about what motivated him, but it’s not through the lens of what we as Jews think about when we think about Jewish safety,” she said. “It’s through the lens of making the case that this guy did what he did motivated by this extremism and hate… It’s going to be very deliberate and tactical and precise, versus where we as American Jews have been thinking about this from a deeply personal, communal safety perspective.”
The deliberate and detailed work of prosecutors, however, may not be at cross purposes with the emotional needs of Jews, Orsini said. When the trial ends, he said, the establishment of Bowers’ guilt may itself prove to be transformative for how Jews relate to the tragedy, in Pittsburgh and beyond.
“The fact that this individual has not been fully brought to justice… and is not convicted yet of this mass shooting — in some way, yes, that closure and finality will be done at the end of this trial,” he said. “The community can kind of regroup and truly become resilient once this phase is over with.”
—
The post Long-delayed Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial to begin Monday, igniting pain, fear and hopes for closure appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
This Jewish family’s toy company challenged Trump’s tariffs. The Supreme Court agreed.
(JTA) — Stephen Woldenberg was in a meeting with his father last Friday, refreshing the Supreme Court’s website, when the news finally came through: Their company had prevailed in its legal challenge to the Trump administration’s tariffs.
“It’s all a bit surreal, I’ll be honest,” said Woldenberg. “It’s very gratifying, though, to see that our case has had an impact and that the Supreme Court ruled and agreed with our position.”
For Woldenberg, who is the fourth generation of his family’s Illinois-based educational toy company Learning Resources, the decision to challenge President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs was rooted in a moral obligation shaped by his family’s Jewish values.
“I think that for us, being Jewish, we felt like we wanted to stand up for what we thought was right, and, you know, not being afraid to take a stand,” said Woldenberg. “I think that that’s part of our identity, and I think that’s a core part of what this case was about. It’s a civil legal challenge, it isn’t political, but we felt like we weren’t going to stand by idly, and I think that’s part of our Jewish identity.”
Learning Resources was founded by Stephen’s grandmother Joan as a spinoff of a company run by her father-in-law Max Woldenberg, who immigrated from Poland as a child in the late 19th century. Joan’s son Rick is CEO, while Stephen and his sister both have high-level executive roles.
The family, longtime members of a Conservative synagogue in the suburbs of Chicago, has a record of Jewish philanthropy. Rick and his wife have donated to local Jewish organizations as well as to the Center for Jewish Life at Princeton University, his alma mater. Elana, who also graduated from Princeton, founded a Jewish philanthropy fellowship there. And Max Woldenberg’s brother Malcolm was a prominent New Orleans philanthropist for whom the Institute of Southern Jewish Life is named.
It was not philanthropy but Learning Resources’ bottom line that got the family fired up by Trump’s tariffs, which raised import costs for businesses that rely on overseas manufacturing. Trump authorized the tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, rather than by seeking approval from Congress.
Like many American companies, Learning Resources relies on Chinese factories and workers to make its products, of which perhaps the most widely recognizable are plastic bears used for counting practice that are staples of many preschool classrooms.
Stephen Woldenberg said that in 2025, after the tariffs were imposed, Learning Resources paid over $10 million in tariff-related taxes, compared to $2 million the year before.
“After ‘liberation day,’ tariff rates spiked up to 145%, which effectively was like an embargo on Chinese goods,” said Woldenberg. “We decided to take action. We aren’t really a company that likes to stand by idly. We weren’t willing to let a single politician sink the ship.”
Learning Resources’ legal battle culminated in a decisive Supreme Court victory, and a notable loss for Trump, who heavily criticized the decision during his State of the Union speech Tuesday night.
In his decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the “IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.” The Supreme Court agreed 6-3 that the tariffs exceeded the law.
“The president asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope,” Roberts wrote in his opinion. “In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it.”
Among the estimated 1,000 lawsuits filed against the tariffs, which ultimately collected over $130 billion for the United States, were others filed by Jewish-owned companies.
Rebecca Melsky, a former a Jewish day school teacher, was among the first to legally challenge the emergency tariffs last April through her children’s apparel brand Princess Awesome, which she co-founded to defy “gender stereotypes” in kids clothing.
In 2025, Melsky said Princess Awesome had paid over $30,000 in additional tariffs, a cost she said had hit her small business hard.
“We’re a very small company — that money came out of our paychecks,” said Melsky. “We pulled back on our production. We did not make as much stuff last year as we normally do, which we are feeling this year, as we start the year with less inventory.”
After Melsky and her co-founder, Eva St. Clair, took to Facebook to explain the costs of Trump’s tariffs to their customers last April, the pair were approached by the Pacific Legal Foundation, which represented them in federal court. (Princess Awesome’s lawsuit was put on hold pending the Learning Resources decision.)
For Melsky, the choice to take on Trump’s tariffs in court was also inspired in part by her own Jewish values.
“Even if something feels scary, even if you don’t necessarily know if it’s going to do something, standing up for what is right, is, like, we have a moral and ethical obligation to do that, even if that means taking a risk,” said Melsky. “And thankfully, my business partner, her Catholic faith brought her to the same place, too.”
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling last Friday, Melsky and St. Clair took to Facebook again, posting a video shouting “we won!”
But the battle is not over for Melsky, Woldenberg or any of the other businesses that have sued the government over Trump’s tariffs. Following the ruling, Trump swiftly vowed to impose more tariffs, including a temporary 10% global import duty.
While the Trump administration said during the Supreme Court battle that suing parties would “assuredly receive payment” if they lost, the court did not stipulate in its decision what would happen to the tariffs that had already been collected.
As companies seek refunds following the decision, they are likely to be met by a lengthy legal process, with Trump already dismissing calls for refunds as a process that would take “years.”
“The government, the administration, did not have a hard time taking the money, they found that to be quite easy, and so they should be able to turn around and send it right back to us,” said Woldenberg. “They know what everybody paid, and they know how to get the money.”
Melsky said that she felt her company was now in “limbo,” awaiting the Trump administration’s next move.
“It feels a little bit less chaotic, but we don’t know exactly what’s going to happen, and certainly we have no idea what will happen with refunds and if they are approved, when that money would come,” said Melsky.
Despite the uncertainty, Woldenberg said he hoped his family’s victory would “inspire” others that they too can make a difference.
“It doesn’t matter the size of the company or the notoriety of the individual,” said Woldenberg. “The American system is set up in a way where anyone can make a difference, anybody can have an impact.”
The post This Jewish family’s toy company challenged Trump’s tariffs. The Supreme Court agreed. appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
A compelling horror series from Israel — even if you don’t like horror movies
In general, I steer clear of genre entertainment. For me, films awash in horror and the paranormal are gory, frightening and in the end relentlessly dull — a lethal combination.
But to my surprise, The Malevolent Bride, an Israeli horror series now streaming on Chaiflicks, is so compelling and has such page-turning momentum that I had to know what happened next.
Set in Jerusalem’s ultra-Orthodox community, the series — which is the brainchild of Noah Stollman, and director Oded Davidoff, creators of, respectively, Fauda and The Beauty Queen of Jerusalem — recounts a wave of inexplicable, blood–curdling crimes. But beyond its mystery and thriller elements, the picture embodies an amalgam of Kabbalah, feminism, humanism, and, yes, even quantum field theory.

Here, the line between the scientific world and Jewish mysticism, each requiring its own brand of blind faith, is blurred. Interwoven throughout are themes related to the crippling power of religion and the cost of repressed sexuality that comes in its wake. Like many horror flicks, it has its share of high camp comedy too.
The characters (well, at least the secular ones) are relatable and appealing. The lead, Tom Avni playing Be’er Dov, a physicist, is sympathetic and appealing (easy to look at too). An ex-Hasid who has shed all religion, he lives openly with his equally non-religious doctor girlfriend. Be-er also advocates for the daughter of a Hasid. He’s a feminist too.
The performances are uniformly superb. Even the grotesque moments, and there are some, work entertainingly, if not credibly, within the parameters of the genre’s over-the-top sensibility, which can at times recall The Exorcist.
The series begins with the wedding night of a Hasidic couple — the terrified virgin bride, swathed in white, is soon to be deflowered by a man she’s met perhaps twice. Moments later, we see her clutching shards of glass, her hand bloodied, her gown covered in blood as she charges towards the groom; his corpse is on the floor.
Later in jail, eyes wild, and demonically possessed, she utters a sing-songy phrase, “oxyn, oxyn” that becomes the first part of a satanic refrain that more and more Hasidic women spew forth as they too are overtaken by a curse. Dybbuk imagery is evoked. Violent atrocities ensue.
Giovanni, a police officer (convincingly played by Hisham Suliman), uncovers evidence that connects Be’er to each of these women who owns a book, presumably given to them by Be’er. His name, in each case, appears on its pages as its original owner. The book in question is about Raizel, an archangel out of the Kabbalah who has magical knowledge and powers. Sketches of diabolical figures and illegible writings are scribbled across its pages and in its margins.
Be’er insists he knows none of these women. Nonetheless, with his career at risk, he realizes he must uncover the truth to save his reputation. Through flashbacks, we learn that as a young Yeshiva student he was drawn to the Kabbalah and had a clandestine and shockingly forbidden affair with a Hasidic girl named Yedidia to whom he did indeed gift the book.
At the same time, Dr. Malki Price (Leeox Levy), an Orthodox clinical psychologist who heads a mental health facility for deeply troubled girls, is also grappling with the growing menace. Some of her own patients have channeled the free-floating demon, leading to murder, suicide and terrifying occult acts.
Be’er and Malki join forces in order to track down Yedidia who, for reasons that are not entirely clear, seems to be the origin of this epidemic of violence and mysticism. Levy brings an understated compassion to her role that is riveting to watch.
Malki, we later learn, is a transgender woman as is Levy in her first major film role, which reinforces the series’ themes of tolerance and mutual respect. The Jewish mysticism with its scary folkloric and mythic warnings and taboos underscores the series’ embrace of sexuality and the fluidity of gender identity. After all, in the Kabbalah tradition, the Messiah will be both male and female.
Along their journey, Be’er and Malki meet an array of great characters and despite their differences grow increasingly attached to one another. The final romantic scene between Be’er and Malki is simultaneously unnerving, comic, and unexpected, though it shouldn’t be. Yet another hallmark of an original fun series.
The post A compelling horror series from Israel — even if you don’t like horror movies appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Why was Tucker Carlson pushing for DNA testing for Jews? What to know about the ‘Khazar’ theory that antisemites can’t shake.
(JTA) — During Tucker Carlson’s interview last week with Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, both men made considerable waves with their takes on history and theology.
Huckabee sparked a diplomatic row by citing the Bible to argue that Israel had a divine right to claim all of the Middle East — even though he didn’t back doing so politically.
But Carlson’s own interpretation of Israeli sovereignty was also notable, as the far-right pundit insisted that Israelis should undergo genetic testing to determine if they have a rightful claim to the land.
“Why don’t we do genetic testing on everybody in the land and find out who Abram’s descendants are?” Carlson asked Huckabee at one point, using the name Abraham used before he made a covenant with God to become the first Jew. “It’s really simple. We’ve cracked the human genome. We can do that. Why don’t we do that?”
At another point, Carlson singled out Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu specifically as an illegitimate Israeli.
“What you’re saying is that certain people have a title to a highly contested region. They own it, in some deep sense,” he told Huckabee. “So I think it’s fair to ask, who are they, and how do we know? So the current prime minister’s ancestors weren’t from here within recorded history. He has no deed. Bibi Netanyahu, on one side, his family’s from Poland, they’re from Eastern Europe. So how do we know he has a connection to the people who God promised the land to?”
The line of questioning made little sense to many Jewish listeners, who understand Judaism as a blend of religion, ethnicity and community in which converts have always been accepted. For Jewish listeners, too, the idea of tracing bloodlines is often associated with the Nazis, who chose their victims based on how many Jewish ancestors they had.
But both Carlson’s critics, and supporters across the ideological spectrum who have agreed with his views on Israel, understood what he was getting at. They identified his line of questioning as a variation on the “Khazar theory”: the belief that Ashkenazi Jews, like Netanyahu, are genetically descended from a Turkic minority that converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages rather than from the 12 tribes of Israel.
“The people currently occupying Israel are Khazarian Turks,” far-right pundit Candace Owens, a promoter of many antisemitic conspiracy theories, wrote on X.
“He has ZERO ancestral connection to the land. He’s Polish,” the far-left influencer Shaun King wrote on X about Netanyahu in praise of Carlson’s interview. “His real last name is Mileikowsky.”
The theories as to why the Khazars, who were a real people, would have converted en masse to Judaism have varied according to the teller; one tale holds that a Khazar royal held a debate between representatives of Judaism, Islam and Christianity to hold the best religion, and Judaism won out. But no matter how it happened, the theory goes, Jews who trace their genetics to Eastern Europe should not be considered rightful heirs of Israel, and should instead claim the Caucasus as their ancestral home.
The Khazar theory has a long history but was largely discredited with the advent of DNA analysis. Yet it has grown in prominence among antisemitic circles since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks in Israel and ensuing Gaza war, according to research by the Anti-Defamation League.
“Antisemites suggest that if Jews are descended from people not native to Israel (i.e., Khazars), then they have no legitimate claim to the land,” the ADL’s own description of the theory’s popularity notes. “In addition, because Nazis sought to expel Jews and others from their homes in Europe in order to obtain lebensraum (‘living space’) for ‘Aryan’ people, antisemites have argued that Jews are doing the same thing because they have no historic claim to the land of Israel.”
The ADL also notes that, setting aside the validity of the theory, most Israeli Jews are not Ashkenazi but rather trace their roots to North Africa and elsewhere in the Middle East.
The origins of the Khazar theory date back centuries and have always had some promulgation from Jews; Hungarian Jews in the 19th century latched onto the theory, according to researchers. The Khazar theory has also been promoted by some Jewish and Israeli scholars in more recent years, including Arthur Koestler in his 1976 book “The Thirteenth Tribe”; Shlomo Sand, a historian at Tel Aviv University who identifies as “post-Zionist,” in his controversial 2008 book “The Invention of the Jewish People”; and Israeli geneticist Eran Elhaik.
This has further boosted the theory’s seeming validity among proponents: Owens, for example, has cited Sand’s book on X as evidence for the theory.
But such studies are largely refuted by established historical scholarship. “This claim, pardon my chutzpah, is nonsense,” Shaul Stampfer, an emeritus history professor at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, has said about the Khazar theory in college lectures.
In Stampfer’s own research into the Khazars, he said that while there were a few Jews among the Khazars, he has found no genetic links between the ancient Central Asian tribe and modern Ashkenazi Jews (whose own genetics have been thoroughly studied owing to a preponderance of genetic diseases in the population). There are, however, genetic links between Ashkenazi Jews and ancient Palestine, as well as to North Africa, he says.
In addition, there are very few Turkic origins to be found in Yiddish, while there are extensive Latin origins in Yiddish, further boosting evidence of broader Jewish migration to Europe and decreasing the likelihood of mass migration from Turkey.
There are other practical considerations, too, Stampfer told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency this week.
“Take a look at a map,” he wrote in an email. “Even if the Khazars had converted, they would not have dragged themselves to Poland. It is far away and cold in the winter.”
The National Institutes of Health, too, published an extensive genetic study in 2013 that found “no evidence from genome-wide data of a Khazar origin for the Ashkenazi Jews.”
The researchers assembled what they called “the largest data set available to date for assessment of Ashkenazi Jewish genetic origins,” as well as available genome sets from the Caucasus. Their conclusion, the abstract notes, “corroborates the earlier results that Ashkenazi Jews derive their ancestry primarily from populations of the Middle East and Europe, that they possess considerable shared ancestry with other Jewish populations.”
None of the evidence has stopped the Khazar theory from emerging as a lodestar of modern antisemitism, thanks in part to influential right-wing personalities such as Carlson. This is not the first time he has toyed with the idea of genetics testing for Jews, though he previously seemed to be aware that such an ask would carry undesirable connotations.
“In order to determine who’s actually inherited the land, we would have to conduct global genetic testing to award property on the basis of the results,” he texted right-wing filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza months ago, according to D’Souza, who shared the text on a recent podcast. Carlson continued, “Sounds like a Nazi project to me. As a Christian, I reject that.”
“I don’t think that’s necessary any more than it’s necessary to genetically test Indians to make sure their ancestors are from India,” D’Souza, who is Indian-American, responded. “Remember Jews maintained their tribal identity. Very little intermarriage. They didn’t try to convert people, as Christians did.”
D’Souza continued, “Shakespeare’s ‘Merchant of Venice’ conveys the picture very vividly. The Jews don’t mix. So their continuity as a group is generally more secure than virtually any other group.” (“The Merchant of Venice,” which features the Jewish villain Shylock, is generally seen as promoting antisemitic stereotypes.)
Carlson responded by returning to the genetics question — and this time seeming more open to it than when he first called it a Nazi project. “I agree with all that and I admire it. I’m hardly against Jews,” he texted D’Souza. “But if the claim is that Jews have a genetic right to certain pieces of land, it’s going to be necessary to do genetic testing.”
The broader lurch into conspiratorial thinking on the right, exemplified by the views on the Jews and Israel espoused by Carlson, increasingly has some other conservatives worried about losing control of the narrative.
“The most popular digital content on the Right is now ‘Erika Kirk killed Charlie,’ ‘Epstein was leading a pedophile blackmail ring for the CIA’ and ‘Jews are a diabolical power destroying the world,’” Christopher Rufo, an influential right-wing thought leader who helped orchestrate the larger push against diversity initiatives, warned on X. “In these instances, we need to correct public opinion, rather than cave to it.”
For his part after the Carlson interview, Huckabee accused his interrogator of drawing on a “dangerous conspiracy theory” from “some of the darkest realms of the Internet” for his genetic testing line of questioning.
“I do know that the discredited idea that most Ashkenazi or European Jews descended from the ancient Turkic kingdom of Khazaria is bunk,” Huckabee wrote on X. “It’s also been weaponized by people trying to deligitimize [sic] Jews, to strip them of their history, and to call them ‘imposters’ or ‘fake Jews.’”
Stampfer was hesitant to diagnose why the Khazar theory may be growing in popularity today.
“People who don’t like Jews might be attracted to the idea that this is one more Jewish lie,” he offered. Yet, he added, “Explaining why people believe what they believe is a tough business.”
The post Why was Tucker Carlson pushing for DNA testing for Jews? What to know about the ‘Khazar’ theory that antisemites can’t shake. appeared first on The Forward.
