CNN host Abby Phillip and conservative writer Noah Rothman clashed on Saturday over the distinction between antisemitism and criticism of Israel during a panel discussion on "Saturday Morning Table For Five."
The exchange highlighted the complexities of the issue, with Phillip attempting to separate criticism of the Israeli government from antisemitic sentiments, while Rothman argued for a closer examination of certain criticisms.
Phillip noted a growing critical stance toward the Israeli government and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, observed across both the left and the right of the political spectrum. She pointed to the recent primary wins of three New York City Democratic congressional candidates critical of Israel and cited comments made by Senator JD Vance as examples of a tougher stance emerging on the right.
Phillip also referenced Vice President Kamala Harris's public admonishment of Netanyahu, suggesting it indicated an awareness of a shift in public opinion, with both Democratic voters and the "MAGA base" reportedly turning against Israel. This sentiment, she noted, has intensified amid the ongoing war in Gaza following the Oct. 7 Hamas attack.
Rothman, however, pushed back, suggesting that some on the right harbor "antisemitic instincts." He brought up the case of Carmella Charrington, a district leader in Brooklyn who faced backlash for recirculating a video containing antisemitic conspiracy theories espoused by Henry Ford. Charrington has since apologized for the post, calling it a "mistake."
Phillip countered that Charrington's actions, while problematic, were not the focus of her distinction. She emphasized that she was referring to legitimate criticism of the Israeli government's actions in the Middle East.
The debate intensified as Phillip stated, "You refuse to disentangle criticism of Israel from antisemitism." Rothman responded by suggesting that phrases like "the 'Zionist entity controls the banks'" go beyond mere criticism and venture into antisemitic territory. Phillip reiterated that her point concerned criticism of specific government actions, not broader conspiracy theories.
The discussion ultimately became a contentious exchange between the panelists, underscoring the sensitive and often debated nature of discussions surrounding Israel and antisemitism in contemporary politics.