This transcript was created using speech recognition software. While it has been reviewed by human transcribers, it may contain errors. Please review the episode audio before quoting from this transcript and email [email protected] with any questions.

From “The New York Times,” I’m Michael Barbaro. This is “The Daily.”

[THEME MUSIC]

A powerful group supporting Israel is trying to defeat sitting members of Congress who have criticized the country’s deadly war against Hamas. In today’s Democratic primary in New York, it appears that strategy may work. My colleague, Nick Fandos, explains.

It’s Tuesday, June 25.

Nick, by the time people listen to this episode, voting will have begun in this congressional race that Democrats across the country are watching really closely, because in a way, it feels like it’s become a test of what a Democrat in office in Congress can or can’t say about the war in Gaza. So let’s start at the beginning with the Congressman who is at the center of this race.

So we’re talking here about Congressman Jamaal Bowman. He represents the district just north of New York City. That includes parts of the Bronx and cities like Yonkers and Mount Vernon, but also suburbs like Larchmont and Scarsdale. He’s a former middle school principal, lifelong educator who was never in politics until 2019 and 2020, when he decided, I’m going to take on a big, powerful incumbent in my district.

And he did it from the left.

So remember, this was right at the height of the COVID pandemic. The election actually took place in the weeks after the killing of George Floyd, and the whole country was up in arms. It was really thinking about race and equity, was thinking about power and whether the United States was moving quickly enough towards the goals that it professes to have.

And Bowman was really able to capture that energy as a younger Black man who was not in politics, speaks like a real person.

For Bowman, the race was about race and policing and Donald Trump and the feeling that the Democratic Party was not fighting hard enough, fast enough on all of these issues.

And his slogan was jobs and education, not bombs and incarceration.

Now, his opponent, Eliot Engel, was in his 70s. He’d been in Congress more than 30 years.

Wow.

He’s a committee chairman who was definitely more moderate than Bowman.

So in a sense, this becomes a perfect distillation of the outsider versus the establishment insider at a moment like you just said, where that is the question of the moment.

Exactly. And Bowman was really able to capitalize on a couple of instances where Engel looked out of touch. In one case, he was caught having stayed in Washington for the early weeks and months of the pandemic —

Instead of in his district?

— far away from his district. Yeah, far away from his district. And then when he does show up, he’s caught on a hot mic begging for a speaking slot at an event.

Saying something to the effect of, I wouldn’t care except I’ve got a primary.

Mm. Right. I remember that moment. It was incredibly embarrassing because here’s a Congressman already under fire for being MIA from his district in the pandemic, saying, I need to talk at this news conference, not because I necessarily care, but because I’m in a primary battle against Jamaal Bowman and I need voters to see me speaking and to think that I care.

Right. That’s certainly what it looks like. And Bowman, on the other hand, seems so in and of this moment that, come election day, he sails. He beats Engel by double digits. And it’s received at the time as kind of proof of the left’s ascendancy. This is only a couple of years after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won her seat. The Squad formed in Washington, that far left group of lawmakers.

Right.

And when Bowman arrives in Washington, he reinforces their ranks and adds to this kind of growing progressive bloc that, in the early days of the Biden administration, seems to be exercising a lot of power. And one really emblematic moment where Bowman and the squad try and flex their muscle is around President Biden’s signature infrastructure bill. Remember, this is a big trillion dollar program to build roads and bridges and replace lead pipes.

And originally, there had been a Democratic proposal to pair it with another bill more focused on climate change and some social policy that progressives really liked. And the two get split apart, and the left is really upset about that. So in order to try and get negotiating leverage to get that other climate bill passed, Bowman and a bunch of the Squad and other progressives vote against the infrastructure bill, vote against one of Biden’s biggest legislative priorities. And say, it’s not that we’re against it, but we need to have both.

So far, Nick, all of this very much feels in keeping with the way Bowman campaigned. He’s governing as the outsider progressive that he said he would be.

Yeah. I think that’s right. He’s pretty consistent and, frankly, is getting along all right in Washington. I mean, some people don’t like those positions, but generally speaking, he’s in good standing. Until two very consequential weeks last fall.

And what happens in those two weeks?

So let me just set the scene here. It’s late September. Conservative Republicans are pulling Congress towards a government shutdown. They’re in on a Saturday. Things are a total mess. Nobody knows if the government’s going to be able to pay its bills or find a solution. And in the middle of all of this, Jamaal Bowman is trying to rush to the Capitol to get to a vote. He gets to a door that he usually expects to go out. It’s locked. He tries it. And then what does he do? He pulls a fire alarm.

It sends the Capitol basically into chaos, becomes a two day news cycle.

All these national cameras are already paying attention, and now here’s this crazy sideshow.

He said after the fact that he was trying to open the door, but generally, you don’t pull a fire alarm to open a door.

And eventually Bowman is actually charged and pleads guilty to a misdemeanor for a false fire alarm.

He has to pay a fine and apologize, and so it’s just a real kind of black eye on his public image.

Right. Embarrassing, ill-advised, but at the end of the day, not anything that’s going to necessarily endanger his career.

Yeah. No, that’s right. I think if it had just been that alone, he gets past it. But almost exactly a week later is October 7.

When Hamas attacks, Israel brutally, takes hostages, leaves 1,200 Israelis dead, and really ushers in a new moment in American politics, and particularly for Democrats, who have been divided on Israel for quite a while. Particularly this kind of the left wing Squad from the rest of the party. And those divisions are just kind of blown up in the days and weeks after October 7. And Bowman, of all people, throws himself right into the middle of the wreckage.

He condemns Hamas’s attack on October 7, but then, just days later, calls for a ceasefire in the region, essentially saying Israel should not defend itself. And that’s a position, I should note, by the way, that is way out ahead of President Biden, who hadn’t even gone yet at that point to Israel to give Benjamin Netanyahu that famous hug and say that the United States was standing with Israel.

Now, from Bowman’s point of view, this is consistent with the way that he views international politics. Remember the no bombs part of his slogan?

Right.

He wants Israel here to not meet violence with violence, to find some sort of diplomatic or political solution.

Bowman sees this as a clear moral case. I think he relates what’s happening in Israel to the racial justice struggle in the United States that he’s familiar with, to the economic struggle. Israel, to him, is a powerful nation that is not making good on its own promises as a democracy and is oppressing Palestinians.

So it sounds like in this moment, Bowman is becoming the public face of left wing congressional Democrats’ wariness and skepticism of Israel at an exceptionally sensitive moment.

Yes. And in the weeks that would follow, he goes there again and again and again. So he’s one of the first lawmakers not only to call for a ceasefire, but then to accuse Israel of committing genocide in Gaza once its counteroffensive begins. He begins calling for the United States to cut off all military aid to Israel, which is one of its closest allies, in the middle of this war. Saying basically American taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be going to bombs.

At one point he’s caught on video saying that claims that Hamas used sexual violence against women around October 7 is, quote, “propaganda.” Later, he apologized for those remarks, and all of this really adds to Bowman’s prestige on the left. He becomes a big figure, a galvanizing figure, really, in this energized anti-war movement around Gaza. But at the same time, he’s taking a huge political risk.

His district, which, remember, is just north of New York city, is quite diverse. It’s got a big Black and Latino population.

But it also is home to one of the largest Jewish populations in the country, and many of his constituents in that community feel betrayed. And not only that. Back in Washington, pro-Israel groups who exercise a huge amount of power are furious at Bowman. They look at everything that’s happening and they think, he’s got an election coming. We might be able to defeat him, and in so doing, make an example out of him.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

We’ll be right back.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

So, Nick, tell us about this well-funded effort by supporters of Israel to try to make an example of Congressman Bowman.

To answer that, Michael, let’s take a little bit of a step back in time and talk about AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is a bipartisan group that’s been around for a long time, whose mission, really, is to advance Israel’s interests in the United States. Traditionally, they’ve had very strong relationships with presidents and legislative leaders in both parties.

They’ve been really effective, frankly, at creating a consensus in Congress and in Washington more broadly to send military aid and defense to help protect Israel in the Middle East from its neighbors. They pay for lawmakers to travel to Israel and see the country, and they’ve long endorsed candidates they see as friends of Israel and even made small donations. And then more recently, they began to take much bigger overt political steps.

A couple of years ago they formed a super PAC for the first time, and they’re doing it because they’re watching that consensus that they worked so hard to build, start to crumble, and particularly on the left among young voters, and particularly young Democratic voters and Democratic voters of color who no longer see Israel in the way that maybe their parents or grandparents generation did. And for AIPAC, the embodiment of that change is the Squad.

Then October 7 happens and intensifies all of these dynamics, and AIPAC senses a real existential threat. And so they go and they survey the electoral landscape. They look at all the members of the Squad and other progressives in Congress who are critical of Israel and are trying to change the American relationship to it. And they figure out, OK, where could we go in electorally? Could we knock some of these people out?

And how do they end up zeroing in on Bowman, of all people?

So beating incumbents is not the easiest thing to do. So in many cases, they look at some of their biggest critics, people like Rashida Talib or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and they simply can’t find a viable challenger. These guys are smart. They’ve run political campaigns before. They don’t want to put good money up to bat and waste it. But Bowman, they look at him and think, this guy is beatable. Not only do they not like what he’s saying about Israel, but in this case, they are able to find a primary challenger who is not only credible, but is deeply popular in the district.

And who is that?

The opponent is George Latimer.

A well-known Democratic fixture who first entered politics in the Reagan era and now serves as the county executive of Westchester County, which is the biggest county in the district.

And he’s also, importantly, staunchly pro-Israel.

A Democrat, frankly, in the mold of that old consensus model, who is willing to stand by the United States ally, Israel, through thick and thin.

So in the fall, he starts getting outreach from local rabbis and Jewish leaders in the district to jump in. And AIPAC gives him some encouragement as well.

So in a sense, AIPAC is helping to recruit Latimer to run against Bowman.

Right. And not only do they help to recruit him, but once he does get in the race and establishes, I’m a supporter of Israel, they begin raising very large amounts of money directly for his campaign. And in time, their super PAC starts spending far, far more to advance his candidacy.

And what does it look like for AIPAC’s super PAC to advance Latimer’s candidacy in this primary?

So since mid-May, AIPAC’s super PAC has spent upwards of $14.5 million in this race.

That’s a lot of money

That’s just over a month. Yeah, it’s a huge amount of money. Something like almost $17,000 an hour at one point. And if you add it all up, it’s actually not only more than AIPAC has ever spent in a single race, it’s more than any outside group, any super PAC has ever spent in a house race.

So some of that money actually goes towards the positive ad, trying to improve Latimer’s image as a good progressive who stands by President Biden.

But most of it is reserved for attacks on Bowman.

So they bring back that infrastructure vote, and the idea is basically to try and paint Bowman as a disloyal Democrat, somebody who’s attacking the president and is a chaos agent in Washington.

Now, notably, notice I have not mentioned Israel, because none of these ads — at least none of the ones on TV — mention Israel.

Why would that be? Why would AIPAC, which is clearly in the business of protecting Israel, run a bunch of TV ads against Jamaal Bowman, who they object to because of his views on Israel, and not mention those views about Israel in the ads?

Yeah. It’s a great question, and it’s one that’s inspired Bowman and his supporters to be like, what gives? So from AIPAC’s point of view, the logic is that voters in the district who really care about Israel, no matter which side they’re on, have probably already made up their mind about Jamaal Bowman. They’re not going to be persuaded. But there’s a big bunch of primary voters who may not be following the war that closely, but they are loyal Democrats. They like President Biden, they’re interested in beating Trump this fall, and they are susceptible to seeing ads about a guy who seems to be bucking the president, who’s out of the mainstream and not representing them.

Interesting. So an effective strategy from a group supporting Israel is not necessarily to talk about Israel in this campaign, but to talk about the way that a Democrat, Jamaal Bowman, in this case, is letting down his party’s president, is letting down his party, is basically being disloyal to the Democratic party, not necessarily Israel.

Yes. And so far, from what we can tell, it seems to be pretty effective.

Explain that.

So when I’m out in the district talking to voters, a really interesting thing has started happening. Many of them, when I asked them their views on Latimer and Bowman, start quoting back to me or citing facts that are very prominently being featured in these commercials. Now, often, they think it’s their own idea, but in political advertising, this is a sign of real success. Voters are thinking about infrastructure. They’re thinking about loyalty. They’re thinking about Bowman as a chaos agent. And I don’t think it’s an accident that they’re thinking about those things.

It’s not an accident because they’re getting those views, you’re suggesting, from these now ubiquitous ads.

Exactly. So ubiquitous that some households are getting dozens of mailers a week reinforcing these points, and some of these AIPAC ads have been viewed upwards of 180 million times.

Wow. 180 million. I mean, astonishing.

It’s complete saturation.

What you’re describing here is anecdotal reporting that you’ve done in the district. What are the polls telling us about the state of this race between Bowman and Latimer?

There has not been as much credible polling in this race as we would like. But what we have seen in polls that have come out is that Latimer has opened up a very large lead, double digits. And while it’s hard to exactly attribute cause and effect here, I think everyone would agree that if you spend $15 million is going to have an impact on the way voters think and eventually poll on the ballot.

Right. A.K.A. these ads do seem to be very much hurting Jamaal Bowman.

They’re certainly not helping.

OK. What does Bowman have to say about the fact that he has become the target of a group like AIPAC in this race?

Bowman’s response has been really interesting because where other politicians, I think, faced with this set of circumstances want to get reelected, might kind pull back or moderate some of their harshest positions, Bowman has totally stood firm where he is, and he has actually leaned in to the AIPAC ads and made AIPAC a central point of his campaign, arguing that they are the representation of everything that’s wrong with big money in American politics, that they’re coming in and have basically not only bought his opponent, but are now trying to buy an election.

And by the way, they may be a bipartisan group, but they’re doing it with big checks from Republican mega donors. And they’re coming after me not just because of my position on Israel, but because those donors don’t like the other things I stand for, the progressive values, my outspokenness as a Black man. He’s really made this a kind of referendum, in his words, of the money versus the many. And by what he means by that is all this money versus the people who don’t have that much money that are fighting against entrenched corporate interests.

He’s basically taking it back to his original 2020 Democratic primary when he was running on a message of me versus the establishment.

Exactly. And he says the establishment never liked me. And this strategy has really worked to kind of galvanize the national progressive movement. They’ve really rallied around him. They’ve donated money. Groups like Justice Democrats have emptied their bank accounts to try and save him.

And all of this came together this past weekend at a rally in the Bronx.

Where Representative Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders joined Bowman and a bunch of other progressives, some of whom flew in from as far away as Florida. And Bowman was really fired up.

He framed it as if their whole movement was on the line.

And profanely, again and again, ripped into AIPAC and what they’re doing in this race.

I just want to say, Michael, because I was there, Bowman very well may keep this seat. But the man on that stage was certainly acting like he was up against the wall and had nothing to lose. He was letting it all rip.

Nick, if Bowman does lose — and we have to be really clear on the iffiness of that question. It’s a summer primary. Turnout’s going to be, who knows. We’re in the middle of a heat wave here. The polling has been kind of subpar. But if Bowman loses, I have to imagine AIPAC will claim this as a big victory for its cause. Will say, we have made an example of this member of Congress. But taking out a lawmaker, I have to think, is very different than rebuilding a consensus around support for Israel, which is AIPAC’s real goal, isn’t it?

Absolutely. This is such an important point, Michael, because as we’ve said, AIPAC’s real goal here is to maintain or reinstate a consensus support for Israel in the United States. And that has to do with both who’s in Congress and who the people electing them are. And you can take people out of Congress, and they may succeed in taking out Bowman. They may succeed later this summer in another primary in Missouri in taking out representative Cori Bush.

Another member of the Squad.

Exactly. But if they’re not changing the minds of the people who elect them, if they’re not actually running ads that are trying to change those people’s minds or running candidates that are trying to change those people’s minds, who’s to say that in the future, when circumstances are different or candidates don’t have the flaws that Bowman maybe did, that those voters aren’t just going to keep electing more politicians that AIPAC doesn’t like.

And it seems to me that in this race, not only have they missed an opportunity to try and move voters in the direction they want, they may actually be spawning a bigger backlash that could cause them further problems down the line. The very people that they’re trying to win back, I think, have only seen their distrust for AIPAC grow.

Right, and perhaps, by proxy, Israel itself.

Exactly. And in the long-term, that seems to make the problem worse, not better. But at the same time, for AIPAC, a win is a win. And they seem to be saying that they are willing to let that longer term battle over Democratic hearts and minds play out another day, because right now they have a much more urgent question and problem in front of them, and that is the war that’s going on with Hamas and the need for American military aid.

And so the composition of this Congress matters a lot to Israel right now, and it matters a lot to AIPAC. And a defeat of somebody like Jamaal Bowman not only takes out one of their critics, but it sends a message to everybody else in Congress who may be considering voting to cut off aid or criticizing Israel in other ways, that you’re either with us or we’re coming after you next. And that chilling effect for AIPAC may be the most important victory of all.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Well, Nick, thank you very much.

Always a pleasure, Michael. [MUSIC PLAYING]

We’ll be right back.

Here’s what else you need to know today. Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, has agreed to plead guilty to a single felony count of illegally obtaining and disclosing US national security material in exchange for his release from a British prison where he spent more than five years. The deal would end Assange’s long standoff with the us, which began after he released highly sensitive American secrets, including documents about military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan and confidential cables shared among diplomats. Under the deal, Assange will serve no additional prison time.

And, for the first time, the Supreme Court has agreed to decide the constitutionality of state laws banning medical treatments for transgender youth. The court will examine a Tennessee law that prohibits three types of transgender medical care for minors, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and gender transition surgeries. Its ruling, expected next year, could have broad ramifications for the roughly two dozen states that have enacted similar bans.

Today’s episode was produced by Jessica Cheung and Mooj Zadie. It was edited by Liz O Baylen with help from Rachel Quester, contains original music by Marion Lozano, Rowan Niemisto, Dan Powell, with sound design by Elisheba Ittoop, and was engineered by Chris Wood. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

That’s it for “The Daily.” I’m Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.