From the New York Times, I'm Michael Boboro. This is the daily today, in a speech without precedent, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called for Israelis to hold an election and vote out their current leader. Soon after, my colleague Annie Carney sat down with Schumer to understand why he did it. It's Friday, March 22. You Annie this story begins with a speech, so let's start there. Tell us about this speech.

I rise to speak today about what I believe can and should be the path forward to secure mutual peace and lasting prosperity for Israelis and Palestinians.

So last Thursday, without much warning, Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, took to the Senate floor and started delivering what ended up being a really personal, really meaty speech about his jewish identity and about Israel.

I speak for myself, but I also speak for so many mainstream jewish Americans, a silent majority whose nuanced views on the matter have never been well represented in this country's discussions about the war in Gaza.

So he starts by describing himself and giving a sense of why he sees himself as a guardian of the people of Israel.

Of course, my first responsibility is to America and to New York. But as the first jewish majority leader of the United States Senate and the highest ranking jewish elected official in America ever, I also feel very keenly my responsibility as a Shomayr Yisrael, a guardian of the people of Israel.

But he quickly turns to the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and describes some of the suffering and displacement there.

Entire families wiped out, whole neighborhoods reduced to rubble, mass displacement, children suffering.

And he gets to his point very quickly, that Israel has a moral obligation to do better.

Palestinian civilians do not deserve to suffer for the sins of Hamas. And Israel has a moral obligation to do better. The United States has an obligation to.

Do better and that this is not in line with Israel's values. What's happening in Gaza, what horrifies so.

Many Jews, especially, is our sense that Israel is falling short of upholding these distinctly jewish values that we hold so dear. We must be better than our enemies, lest we become them.

That Israel's approach to its war against Hamas and Gaza is not in sync with what he sees as the very meaning of being a Jew and what Israel is supposed to represent.

That's right. And he also kind of frames it as this is not only hurting Palestinians, but it's hurting Israel.

Support for Israel has declined worldwide in the last few months, and this trend will only get worse if the israeli government continues to follow its current path.

He thinks that when they're prosecuting the war in this fashion, they are quickly losing global support, american support, their reputation on the world stage. And he thinks that Israel's future is in jeopardy if it doesn't have public support from the rest of the world.

The existence of Israel, he's saying, is in jeopardy.

Yes.

We cannot let anger or trauma determine our actions or cloud our judgment.

So Schumer, in this speech, carefully lays out that he thinks the only path out of this is a peace deal. He specifically says they need to work towards a two state solution.

The only real and sustainable solution to this decades old conflict is a negotiated two state solution. A demilitarized palestinian state living side by side with Israel in equal measures of peace, security, prosperity, dignity and mutual recognition.

And then he goes through four obstacles to such a peace deal.

Right now, there are four. Four major obstacles standing in the way of two states. And until they are removed from the equation, there will never be peace in Israel and Gaza and the West bank. The four major obstacles are Hamas and the Palestinians who support and tolerate their evil ways. Radical right wing Israelis in government and society.

The most shocking one that he lists.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmood Abbas is israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel I.

Will explain each in detail. The first major obstacle.

And what specifically does Schumer point to about Netanyahu?

Prime Minister Netanyahu has lost his way by allowing his political survival to take the precedence over the best interests of Israel.

He has filled his government with far right extremists that Schumer called out by name in the speech.

He has put himself in coalition with far right extremists like ministers Smotrich and Benghavir. And as a result, he has been too willing to tolerate the civilian toll in Gaza, which is pushing support for Israel worldwide to historic lows. Israel cannot survive if it becomes a pariah.

And Netanyahu has ruled out what Schumer is saying is the answer, which is a two state solution.

And he has shown zero interest in doing the courageous and visionary work required to pave the way for peace even before this present conflict, the way he's.

Carrying out this war. Even the Biden administration has criticized him for not doing more to mitigate civilian deaths.

He won't commit to a military operation in Rafa that prioritizes protecting civilian life. He won't engage responsibly in discussions about a day after plan for Gaza and a longer term pathway to peace.

And Schumer's view?

Netanyahu coalition no longer fits the needs of Israel.

After October 7, he is stuck in the past.

Nobody expects Prime Minister Netanyahu to do the things that must be done to break the cycle of violence, to preserve Israel's credibility on the world stage, and to work towards a two state solution.

And can't do the things necessary to move Israel into the future, past this.

War, five months into this conflict, it is clear that Israelis need to take stock of the situation and ask, must we change course?

Then he gets to what becomes the real big headline of this speech and makes it kind of the bombshell moment in U. S. Israeli relations that it became.

I believe a new election is the only way to allow for a healthy and open decision making process about the future of Israel.

He says that as the war winds down, Israel should have a new election. And he makes it clear that he thinks Netanyahu should be removed from power.

I also believe a majority of the israeli public will recognize the need for change. And I believe that holding a new election once the war starts to wind down would give Israelis an opportunity to express their vision for the postwar future.

The reason he is saying this now is because Israel doesn't have to hold an election until 2026, two years from now. Yes, that's a lot of time for Netanyahu to stay in power. And according to Schumer, watch Israel's reputation abroad erode. So what Schumer is saying is, hold that election much sooner, as soon as this war is over, and get rid of Netanyahu so Israel can correct course.

I mean, everything about that is highly unconventional.

It's unprecedented. And this is why Schumer is really careful with his language in this section of the speech.

Of course, the United States cannot dictate the outcome of an election, nor should we try. That is for the israeli public to decide.

Making it clear that israeli voters will decide. He's not trying to decide for them.

If Prime Minister Netanyahu's current coalition remains in power after the war begins to wind down.

But then later in the speech, he also makes it clear that if Netanyahu stays in power, the US will have no choice but to take additional measures to push back on him.

Then the United States will have no choice but to play a more active role in shaping israeli policy by using our leverage to change the present course.

And he is not specific about what those are, but makes clear that there will be more pushback from America if Netanyahu stays.

The United States bond with Israel is unbreakable. But if extremists continue to unduly influence israeli policy, then the administration should use the tools at its disposal to make sure our support for Israel is aligned with our broader goal of achieving long term peace and stability in the region.

Right. And I was listening to this section of the speech and he uses the word tools. And it definitely felt to me, and I wonder how you heard it, that the word tools meant money. American aid to Israel.

Almost certainly the US sends several billion dollars of military aid to Israel every year that is underpinning this war in Gaza. Schumer is critical to moving that aid through Congress. And this is him sort of saying that, not explicitly, he doesn't say money, he says tools, but that they have a lot of leverage over Israel. And this is also what makes the speech so remarkable in the first place, because Schumer is calling for these new elections and then following it up by saying we have other tools. If this continues in the direction it's.

Going right now from the ashes, may we light the candles that lead to a better future for all right.

And what did feel so historic about this speech, I think, to so many of us, is that Schumer is saying so many quiet things out loud. The first being that the US sees Bibi Netanyahu as a problem that needs to be removed. Big enough saying that. And on top of that, he says, we are willing and ready, if we need to, to essentially turn off the US financial spigot to Israel if the Netanyahu government doesn't leave or significantly change. And both of those just cannot be overstated for their enormity and their unprecedentedness.

It was a huge, historic, risky speech that Chuck Schumer made. I mean, I think this was probably one of the riskiest moments of his career, that he is putting himself out there to make this call and ramp up this pressure on Netanyahu.

People of Israel at home and in captivity deserve America's support.

Immediately after Schumer leaves the floor, Mitch McConnell, the minority leader, takes to the podium and blasts a speech.

It is grotesque and hypocritical for Americans who hyperventilate about foreign interference in our own democracy to call for the removal of a democratically elected leader of Israel.

Republicans try immediately to say, we need.

To be standing with Israel and we need to give our friends and allies our full support.

Democrats aren't being anti BB, they're being anti Israel. Chuck's Schumer's speech was an act of courage, an act of love for Israel. Democratic responses mixed. Some said he did a great job, he did something brave.

And others, I've got full faith and confidence in the israeli people to make the right determination about what their future should look like.

He crossed a line and this was inappropriate. President Biden was brief in responding, but he called it a good speech.

I'm not going to elaborate on the speech. He made a good speech. And I think he expressed a serious concern shared not only by him but by many Americans.

Many people interpreted that as the administration thinking that Schumer speaking out was helpful to their aims. And then there's Trump.

Because he was always pro Israel. He's very anti Israel.

Now, who called any Jew who votes for Democrats to be self hating and.

Hate Israel, any jewish person that votes for Democrats hates their religion. They hate everything about Israel and they should be ashamed of themselves.

And finally, on Sunday, Netanyahu made the rounds on some of the Sunday shows here.

I think Schumer's statements are wholly inappropriate. I think we're not a banana republic. The people of Israel will choose when they'll have elections, who to elect, and it's not something that will be foisted upon us.

And in fact, he continues to say, we're going to invade Rafa, we're going to keep up the aggression in Gaza. So clearly, he doesn't feel the need to react in terms of his policies to the speech in any way.

But we have to finish the job. We need total victory. There's no substitute for total victory.

Netanyahu's message to Schumer basically is, go fly a kite. I don't care what you say to me. I am not changing a thing about my approach to this war.

That's right. This is a watershed moment for Schumer and a turning point in the US relationship to Israel in the middle of this war. And in part because the reaction to the speech was all over the place. I was left with a lot of questions about why Schumer decided to do this in the first place. And that's how I ended up sitting with him in Brooklyn on Sunday afternoon to ask him, why did you give this speech? What were you hoping it would do? Who is it for? And how does it fit in with your long standing relationship with Israel and with your own jewish faith?

We'll be right back. So, Annie, tell us about this interview you end up having with Schumer in Brooklyn.

So we end up meeting at James Madison High School in Midwood, Brooklyn.

Nice to see you. Thank you. Do you want me to sign? Great. Thank you.

We walk in together and he has to sign in at the front desk.

Right.

This is his alma mater a few blocks away from the house he grew up in in the 1950s and 60s. What a moment to come back here.

Yeah.

To where it all began, sort of.

See, I guess that's the Golden Knights.

It was a heavily jewish neighborhood at the time.

Okay, now we can go this. The library.

So as we're walking around the school, he's reminding me of what it was like to grow up in this neighborhood.

Was right after World War II, and America was advancing as a Jew in.

The shadow of the Holocaust, recent memory.

There were ladies on my block who would show you the numbers on their arms from the camps.

That was a very present reality for him.

And yet, at the same time, for the jewish people, for me, so much part of my existence, Israel was there. Well, out of the Holocaust came Israel, and we were so proud of Israel.

And he talked about how exciting and enamored he was with the creation of a jewish state that came out of the Holocaust.

In the Holocaust, jewish people. We didn't fight back enough. And here is Israel fighting to create a homeland against overwhelming ODs.

And in 1967, when Israel was fighting a war with arab neighbors and was nearly wiped off the map, he was very invested.

When I walked around the halls of this high school, Madison High School, in 1967, I was walking with a transistor radio. It's June, we're ready to graduate. Attached to my ear because I thought Israel would be pushed into the sea. That's the connection. It's long before politics.

This was part of his identity in these formative high school years.

Right. The story he's telling, which is familiar to many american Jews, is of growing up at a time when the Holocaust is still casting a very long shadow, and Israel is such a potent symbol of jewish survival and strength. And for somebody like Schumer, the very idea of Israel, its very existence tugs at their heart. They don't live there, but it is a source of extraordinary inspiration.

That's right. Absolutely. And by the time he gets into politics in the late seventy s and early 80s, he's also very aware of the fact that Israel is a bipartisan issue. Democrats and Republicans alike steadfastly support Israel. They're committed to the close relationship and giving aid and military support to Israel. And he is really proud of the fact that he said, whenever I carried legislation for Israel, I always had a Republican. That was a credo. And that he thinks is key to Israel's success, that it's bipartisan.

Right.

So how do I know Bibi? I know him for a long time.

It's around this time that he first crossed this path with Bibi Netanyahu. He had gone to Harvard with Bibi's brother, who was an israeli war hero who died in combat and became a huge national figure. They didn't know each other personally, but he said that kind of helped foster a connection with, you know, in the.

Beginning, Bibi did a lot of good things for Israel. He was the economic minister and created almost an economic miracle. We were so proud that Israel was doing startups and tech and all these things. And when he first became prime minister, he was fine. Look, he was to the right, but not far right.

And when Netanyahu becomes prime minister, he wanted to back him. His gut was to stay with him and back Netanyahu, even as other democrats thought he was moving too far to the right. Right.

And Bibi's rightward drift becomes extremely pronounced. So much so that he opposes president Obama's plan to make peace with Iran through a nuclear deal. And Netanyahu actually travels to the US Congress to give a speech asking Congress, asking someone like Schumer to reject that nuclear deal.

Exactly. And Schumer at the time was the rare Democrat who broke with Obama over the Iran deal. You sided with Netanyahu against Obama.

Yes, and I talked to Netanyahu quite a lot.

He must have been thrilled with that vote.

He was.

And said it was a matter of conscience to protect Israel, and he voted against that deal.

I mean, suffice it to say, for a very long time, Chuck Schumer is a supporter of Vivi Netanyahu. So much so that he's even willing to break with his own democratic president because he agrees with Netanyahu that policies like the Iran nuclear deal are bad for Israel.

Yes, I'd say that maybe he had some criticisms, but Chuck Schumer was Netanyahu's best hope in terms of democratic leadership in the United States.

But somehow Bibi drifted way to the right. And one of the turning points was when he just embraced Trump so completely.

For Schumer, his views on Bibi start to change when Donald Trump is elected here and Netanyahu becomes extremely close with him and starts to pursue policies that Democrats see as not at all in keeping with their values. So BB, together with Trump, pursues diplomatic deals between Israel and its arab neighbors that do not take into account the future of Palestinians. His government expands settlements with Trump's support. And basically what this means is that Israel is taking the land that would be essential to creating a two state peace deal in the future.

Right.

And all of this infuriates Democrats who think these policies are making a two state solution impossible and taking away the leverage that Palestinians might have had.

He has now become so interested in self preservation that he does.

Bibi also faces corruption investigations, which force him to bring very right wing politicians into his government. And Schumer told me that he thinks he never would have made these alliances ten years ago. So really what happens during the Trump years, in Schumer's mind, is that BB just gives up on Democrats and what they want for Israel and the Palestinians and just wants to be aligned with Trump.

And I'll tell you, in a meeting I had, he comes in to see me, it's about 2018, 2019. And I said, BB, I agree with you. The greatest short term threat to Israel is the rockets Iran gives as Bala, and they put them in Lebanon and shoot them at Israel. But the greatest middle and long term danger is you lose America, particularly the half of America that's more progressive and or the half of America that's young. And by your embracing Trump, you are making that happen.

So in his mind, BB chooses Republicans and walks away from this history of bipartisan support.

That's right. And that becomes even more of a problem after October 7.

Well, just explain that, Annie.

Well, after October 7, there's broad support for Israel, who was just the victim of a terrorist attack against defenseless citizens. But as the war continues and the Netanyahu regime starts to take these aggressive actions in Gaza, that support starts to dwindle.

Because I look at the numbers and rapidly decreasing in terms, when you ask people, do you support Israel or Palestinians? It's getting all too close.

And in his mind, his fear that Israel will lose the support of America seems to be playing out in a really acute way. He can see it in his party, who's really divided over what's happening in Gaza and the humanitarian crisis there.

I am worried if Israel loses support from America, its future could well be over.

And his fear, what he fears is that there could come a tipping point when the majority of this country does not support Israel and it's alone in a hostile Middle east without the necessary financial backing from the United States.

So as the highest elected jewish official in America, one of the leading Jewish, whatever you want, people in America, I felt an obligation to do this. This was not political.

And this is why he says he ultimately sat down to write this speech.

This is so part of my core, my soul in Yiddish, my menushuma.

In his mind, the goal here is to try to save Israel from Bibi's actions, which he thinks imperil its future.

Once Schumer decides to write this speech, Annie, and to encourage Israelis to hold an election and in that election vote out Netanyahu. I'm curious, how does Schumer tell you he thinks about the precedent that that sends, that the US will try to influence a foreign country's decision about who should lead it.

I asked him about that and he said he was aware that this section of the speech was the most delicate line he had to toe.

No, I thought it was.

Did you consider not personalizing it with Netanyahu and just calling for policy changes?

I didn't think that would be enough. And he's the fount of the prop to just call for policy changes. I thought it wouldn't pierce. It wouldn't do anything.

It wouldn't do anything.

It wouldn't do. Yes. It's so urgent and so important. I didn't think it was appropriate to call for him to step down, but I thought the next step thing over and say why? I think he's a bad leader.

Writing this speech with the notion of being careful about appearing to interfere front of mind. And he thought where he landed, going further than simply calling for policy changes, but stopping short of calling for a resignation and calling for new elections. He thinks he towed the line and didn't cross it.

Got it. Now, clearly, many people, including Netanyahu, disagree about whether Schumer crossed the line. But I'm curious if those people were his audience. I mean, who is Schumer really talking to with this speech? Does he think he's speaking directly to Israelis and asking them to demand a new election and that they're going to listen? Or actually, is he really talking to a more domestic audience, in particular his fellow Democrats who are increasingly upset about this war and potentially, it looks like willing to hold it against their party's leaders?

He put this pretty simply when I asked him.

It's intended for all people who love Israel and feel so conflicted by what's going on now. The purpose of the speech is to say you can still love Israel and feel strongly about Israel and totally disagree with Bibi Netanyahu and the policies of Israel.

He said that it was aimed above all at american Jews and non Jews who love Israel. And what he wanted to do here was separate Netanyahu from Israel and make it crystal clear to people that you can be anti Netanyahu, you can totally disagree with how he's conducting the war in Gaza, and you can still be as pro Israel as ever. He wanted to create this separation between Netanyahu and Israel and make Jews and non Jews alike feel like it's still okay to be pro Israel.

This is kind of important, so I want to linger on it for a second. Annie Schumer's telling you that what he's really trying to do is give Americans a kind of new structure and vocabulary for thinking about Israel in this moment. And that structure and vocabulary is there's an Israel separate from Netanyahu. And so if you're angry at Israel in this moment, you should really be angry at Netanyahu, not Israel.

That's right. He's asking them to blame Bibi, not Israel. That Israel is better than this, is better than BB. And to see it that way, it's almost the same way that people who love America but hate Donald Trump would have felt during the Trump administration that they still believe in this country, but they don't believe in Trump.

That feels like a very complicated request that Schumer's making, because the reality is that Israelis have repeatedly made BB Netanyahu their leader. So much so that if you're an American, especially a younger american, and Schumer wants those younger Americans to separate Bibi from Israel, that would be pretty hard to accomplish because he's been leader of Israel for as long as some of these young Americans have been alive. So how is Schumer thinking about whether what he's asking for is really possible?

I mean, yes, it's a little bit of wishful thinking. Like, it's true that a lot of Americans don't really know the Israel of Schumer's childhood that he's able to remember, but they are not. He's doing this in the middle of a six month long war where people are just horrified by the conditions in Gaza and the israeli government is the one that is carrying on this offensive. But a lot of Jews, a lot of american Jews are really conflicted because at the same time, they understand that Israel has a right to defend itself against Hamas. And I think that Schumer is trying to give voice to these conflicted, maybe middle of the road politically american Jews who don't know what to think about Israel right now and do probably love Israel the way he does, but also feel awful about the images they're seeing from Gaza.

So this call from Schumer for a new leader of Israel is kind of his way of resolving that internal conflict that people are feeling. But of course, it's not clear if that election will be called. And even if it were called, it's not clear whether Israelis would elect a new leader. So I guess my question is what then? Schumer's speech does mention these other tools that the US has at its disposal. When would Schumer be willing to use those tools?

Yeah, I asked him about the question of what then? You don't want to cease fire, but is there like 30,000 more Palestinians dead?

Well, I'd say, look, Israel.

No, I said, what's your red line? What is the civilian death toll that would have to be reached for you to say, we're pulling this funding? You said in your speech, if something doesn't change, then there's a threat of american rich.

I didn't say conditions and I didn't say leverage. I just said America is going to look at it as a thing.

You didn't say exactly what.

No, because I didn't want to.

You didn't want to. But what would the scenario be where that would.

Well, you'd have to see it. I couldn't speculate.

And he didn't want to say, well.

Then why even give the speech if Schumer is not willing to talk about the real consequences for Israel if there are no elections and if Israelis don't end up removing Netsanyahu from office, if he can't explain that, why give this speech?

I asked him that. And he kept coming back to the fact that for him this came from a deeply personal and emotional place and a moral obligation that is central to him to speak up for Jews and to stand up for the state of Israel. And he really dreads that Israel's future, its very existence, could be vulnerable in the same way that it was when he was growing up. And in a way that he's worked throughout his entire career to help fend off. And in a way, now Schumer, at the pinnacle of his power as Senate majority leader, could be incapable of helping to fend off in the future.

No, I couldn't look myself in the mirror if I didn't do it. And then three, four months from now, the US has turned on Israel and people, even my colleagues are putting things, conditions and stuff which will hurt Israel. I can't do it. Couldn't do it.

And I think that's his deep terror about Israel's future and that's why he felt called to do this speech. Now he said, before it's too late.

Oyani, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

Thank you, Michael.

On Thursday, Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson said that in the coming days he plans to invite Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress, an invitation that would first have to be approved by Senator Schumer. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know.

Today, Apple has maintained monopoly power in the smartphone market not simply by staying ahead of the competition on the merits, but by violating federal antitrust law.

On Thursday, the US government sued Apple for violating antitrust laws through practices that it says were designed to keep consumers reliant on Apple's iPhone and unlikely to switch to a competing device.

We allege that Apple has employed a strategy that relies on exclusionary, anti competitive conduct that hurts both consumers and developers.

The lawsuit alleges that Apple has blocked rival software developers and mobile gaming companies from offering better options on the iPhone, resulting in higher prices for consumers. In response, Apple said it would vigorously defend itself in court and warned that if successful, the government's lawsuit would hinder its ability to make the technology that customers want. Today's episode was produced by Will Reed and Michael Simon Johnson with help from Eric Krupke. It was edited by Mark George and Paige Cowitt, contains original music by Dan Powell and Marion Lozano, and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Lansberg of Wonderley. That's it for the daily I'm Mike Bobaro. See you on Monday.