Trump defends use of ‘shylock' term at rally amid antisemitism claims
Trump used the term in his speech in Iowa on Thursday, shortly after his signature One Big Beautiful Bill Act was passed by Congress earlier in the day.
Shylock is the name of the villainous Jewish moneylender in Shakespeare's "The Merchant of Venice," who demands a pound of flesh from a debtor.
Trump Admin Cracks Down On Antisemitism As Doj Official Exposes 'Violent Rhetoric' Of Radical Protesters
Over time, the name came to be used more broadly to refer to a loan shark or greedy moneylender. Today, some consider it an antisemitic slur, particularly when used in reference to Jewish people.
"No death tax, no estate tax, no going to the banks and borrowing some from, in some cases, a fine banker and in some cases, shylocks and bad people," Trump said, while referring to the bill's elimination of estate taxes and borrowing burdens.
Read On The Fox News App
The term did not provoke any reaction from the crowd, but his remark quickly blew up online, and he later defended using it when a reporter said it is widely considered an antiemetic phrase.
"No I've never heard it that way," Trump responded. "To me, a shylock is somebody that's a moneylender at high rates. I've never heard it that way. You view it differently than me. I've never heard that."
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which works to combat antisemitism, said the term evokes "a centuries-old antisemitic trope about Jews and greed that is extremely offensive and dangerous."
Suspect Charged With Murdering Israeli Embassy Staff Could Face Death Penalty
"President Trump's use of the term is very troubling and irresponsible," the ADL wrote in a statement Friday. "It underscores how lies and conspiracies about Jews remain deeply entrenched in our country. Words from our leaders matter and we expect more from the President of the United States."
Rep. Jerry Nadler, D- N.Y., who is Jewish, agreed and ripped Trump for using the term.
"The term 'Shylock' is one of the most recognizable antisemitic slurs in the English language," Nadler wrote on X. "It's a centuries-old trope that has fueled discrimination, hatred and violence against Jews for generations. I condemn Donald Trump's dangerous use of this blatantly antisemitic slur and his long history of trafficking in antisemitic tropes."
Nadler went on to say that Trump has exploited the rise of antisemitism to suppress free speech and that he isn't serious about tackling the problem.
Conservative political commentator John Podhoretz, who is also Jewish, shot back at Nadler.
"I condemn your endorsement of an anti-Semitic mayoral candidate which you did because you are a pusillanimous coward," Podhoretz wrote, in reference to Nadler endorsing Zohran Mamdani for New York City mayor. "At best Trump said Shylock the same week he destroyed Iran's nuclear program. What have you ever done for the Jews, Jerry?"
Click To Get The Fox News App
Trump has made tackling antisemitism — particularly on college campuses and through immigration enforcement — a top priority in his campaign. He signed an executive order in January mandating that all federal agencies identify and apply tools to address antisemitic harassment and violence in higher education. His administration has also launched investigations into universities including Harvard, Columbia, and UC Berkeley over allegations of antisemitism and has threatened to pull federal funding if they fail to act.
His daughter Ivanka converted to Orthodox Judaism in 2009 and is married to Jared Kushner, who is also Jewish.
Democrat Joe Biden, while vice president, said in 2014 that he had made a "poor choice" of words a day after he used the term in remarks to a legal aid group.
The Associated Press contributed to this report. Original article source: Trump defends use of 'shylock' term at rally amid antisemitism claims
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Democrat Katelyn Zach announces run for Missouri House seat in southwest Springfield
Katelyn Zach, a Springfield "community organizer and advocate for working families," announced Friday, Aug. 1 she will campaign as a Democrat for a Missouri House District in Springfield currently held by Rep. Melanie Stinnett. Stinnett, a Republican, was first elected to Missouri House District 133 in 2022, beating Democratic candidate Amy Blansit by about 400 votes, a margin of about 5 percentage points. Challenged in 2024 by Democrat Derrick Nowlin, Stinnett was reelected with more than 56% of the vote. She announced earlier this year she plans to run in 2026 for Senate District 30, currently held by term-limited state Sen. Lincoln Hough. In her campaign announcement Aug. 1, Zach, who has worked as a legislative assistant in the state capitol, said she wants to "bring bold, compassionate leadership to Jefferson City, and to flip a seat that's been out of touch with the needs of Missourians for far too long." 'I'm running because I believe every Missourian deserves a safe home, a great public school, access to affordable healthcare, and the freedom to make decisions about their own body,' Zach said. 'The people of Springfield are done being ignored by politicians whose only goal is climbing the ladder in Jefferson City. We're ready to build a future where everyone, not just the well-connected, gets a fair shot.' District 133 covers parts of central and southwest Springfield, generally west of Campbell Avenue between Chestnut Expressway and James River Freeway. Zach, who attended college in Springfield, said her campaign is focused on people, from youth and working families to small businesses, with the goal of "defending public education and reproductive rights to addressing the housing crisis and fighting for common-sense gun safety laws." More: Despite 2024 losses, Crystal Quade among women encouraging others to run for office 'I'm here to represent every voice in our community, no matter your political party or background,' Zach said in the release. 'I believe in leading with empathy, listening first, and fighting for solutions that actually help people.' Her campaign committee, Citizens for Katelyn Zach, lists former state representative and Democratic candidate for governor Crystal Quade as treasurer. She has candidate sites on Facebook and Instagram. This article originally appeared on Springfield News-Leader: Democrat Katelyn Zach announces run for Missouri House District 133 Solve the daily Crossword
USA Today
25 minutes ago
- USA Today
People abuse Medicaid. That's why Trump's Big Beautiful Bill makes it stronger.
My Democratic colleagues in Congress have spread misinformation about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, claiming that it is a disaster for families. That's simply untrue. Earlier this year, President Donald Trump tasked Congress with developing a bill that enacts his domestic policy agenda and kickstarts the American economy. This piece of legislation, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, was signed into law by the president on July 4. It accomplished its goal of providing tax relief for Kentucky families, securing our border, investing in our military readiness, unleashing American energy and strengthening Medicaid for our most vulnerable Americans. In Congress, I am honored to serve as the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. At the onset of the work on the One Big Beautiful Bill, we were tasked with finding $880 billion in savings from our committee's jurisdiction. The final version of the One Big Beautiful Bill includes over $1 trillion in savings from my committee's jurisdiction. To accomplish this, we worked to eliminate reckless Green New Deal environmental regulations, promote American energy dominance and eliminate waste, fraud and abuse within the Medicaid program. As you may have seen in the news over the past few weeks, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have spread misinformation about this bill, claiming that it is a disaster for Kentucky families. That's simply untrue. Let's take a moment to address a few of the false narratives that have been spread to scare the American people. Opinion: Trump isn't gutting Medicaid and food stamps. He's fixing our broken welfare system. Truth and lies about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and Medicaid Allegation: Single mothers, children, seniors and people with disabilities will lose access to health care. Truth: The Medicaid provisions included in the One Big Beautiful Bill ensure our most vulnerable Americans continue receiving the support they need. It strengthens the program by removing deceased recipients from the Medicaid rolls, requiring states to conduct more frequent eligibility checks for the expansion population, ensuring that individuals are not enrolled in multiple states and enacting commonsense work requirements for able-bodied Americans who choose not to work. Additionally, our bill expands access to home and community based services for low-income seniors and individuals living with a disability. Allegation: Work requirements are a 'ruse' to force people off Medicaid. Truth: According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, there are 4.8 million able-bodied adults currently on Medicaid who don't work. A survey showed this population spends roughly 184 hours a month watching television and socializing – that's 50% higher than employed beneficiaries. Your Turn: Medicaid handouts only create dependency. Able-bodied adults should work. | Opinion Forum Our bill enacts basic work requirements to require individuals to be employed, participate in job training, go to school or volunteer in their communities for just 20 hours per week to receive Medicaid. Notably, the One Big Beautiful Bill exempts people ages under 19 or over 65, pregnant women, tribal members, caregivers of children and seniors with disabilities and parents with dependents under 15. I believe most people would agree it's appropriate to expect able-bodied, unemployed adults on Medicaid to work or give back to their communities to receive fully subsidized health insurance. Kentuckians' support for these policies is strong, as this year, the Kentucky General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to overturn Gov. Andy Beshear's veto and institute a similar state-level work requirement. Allegation: Over 35 Kentucky hospitals are at risk of closing as a direct result of this bill. Truth: The allegation that 35 rural hospitals will close is a blatant mischaracterization at best. This number stems from a list of hospitals that generally receive high levels of Medicaid funding or experienced three consecutive years of negative total profit margin. This claim fails to mention the $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Program created by the bill to support rural health providers care for their patients. This will bolster funding for our most vulnerable hospitals and allow them to keep serving their communities. Trump's bill refocuses Medicaid to cover the most vulnerable Our legislation eliminates restrictive Biden-Harris era state requirements, forcing ineligible individuals to remain enrolled, and lifts Americans out of poverty by encouraging reentry into the workforce. By cutting top-down mandates, we refocus Medicaid dollars to cover the most vulnerable and give states' budgets the ability to further invest in hospitals. Spending in the Medicaid program continues to chart an unsustainable path, growing at twice the rate of inflation between 2018 and 2023. If not addressed, the program will no longer have the capacity to serve its intended purpose. In order to preserve this safety net for generations to come, Republicans have committed to policies that empower states to care for our most vulnerable Americans – pregnant women, children, individuals living with a disability and low-income seniors. The One Big Beautiful Bill is a commonsense win that strengthens Medicaid for Kentucky's most vulnerable, and I'm proud to have supported its passage. Congressman Brett Guthrie has served the people of Kentucky's Second District in Congress since 2009. He currently serves as chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. This column originally appeared in the Courier Journal.
Newsweek
26 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Nobel Prize Winners React to Idea of Trump Winning Economics Award
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Past winners of the Nobel Prize in economics have reacted to the suggestion that President Donald Trump's trade agenda has earned him a nomination for the prestigious award. During a Thursday appearance on Fox Business, Peter Navarro, White House trade adviser, said described the effects of the president's sweeping tariff policies as "a fundamental restructuring of the international trade environment." "A lot of people talk about Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize," Navarro added. "I'm thinking that, since he's basically taught the world trade economics, he might be up for the Nobel in economics." U.S. President Donald Trump walks across the South Lawn of the White House after returning on Marine One on July 29, 2025 in Washington, DC. U.S. President Donald Trump walks across the South Lawn of the White House after returning on Marine One on July 29, 2025 in Washington, Do Past Winners Make of the Idea? Newsweek spoke with winners of the prize—officially the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel—about the prospect of Trump receiving a nomination or winning the award. Newsweek has contacted the White House for a response to the opinions expressed by Nobel laureates in this article. Eric Maskin (2007) "I think it is unlikely that Donald Trump will be awarded a Nobel for economics," said Maskin, who was jointly awarded the prize in 2007 for contributions to mechanism design theory. "The prize is given for discoveries in economics, not for economic policies," he told Newsweek. "And even if it were awarded for a policy, it is far too early to know for sure what the impact of President Trump's tariffs will be." Maskin added that there exists "good reason" to assume that, should the high rates of tariffs imposed by Trump remain in effect, "the long-run effects on the U.S. and the world will be negative—but we will see." Roger Myerson (2007) "The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is a science prize, and so it has been awarded for advances to general understanding in economics," said Roger Myerson, co-recipient of 2007 award alongside Maskin and Polish-American economist Leonid Hurwicz. He noted that the award is not given out for economic policy, noting that former Federal Reserve Chairman and 2022 winner Ben Bernanke was recognized for his scholarly work on the Great Depression, and not his actions during the 2008 financial crisis. 2007 Nobel Prize in Economics laureate Roger Myerson speaks at a symposium with co-winner Eric Maskin at the House of Sweden in Washington 26 November 2007. 2007 Nobel Prize in Economics laureate Roger Myerson speaks at a symposium with co-winner Eric Maskin at the House of Sweden in Washington 26 November 2007. Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images "As president of the United States, Donald Trump has made decisions that will also have great economic impact on millions of people's, for better or for worse," Myerson told Newsweek. "But if Peter Navarro wants to make the case for him as a candidate for a Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, it should be based on Donald Trump's contribution to our understanding of what is a good economic policy." Myerson said that many of Trump's recent policies had challenged conventional economic wisdom, but that to make a strong case for the award the president would need to "publish papers that engage with the economics literature and identify the different assumptions that have led him to choose his policies." "If President Trump truly has important insights to offer about economic policy-making, his publishing a thoughtful rigorous development of his ideas could be an important contribution to economic sciences," he added. "I should warn him, however, that the number of important contributions to economic sciences is greater than the number of prizes that the Nobel Committee is able to recognize." James Heckman (2000) "Let me put it this way: He is more deserving than Barack Obama," said Heckman, referring to the 2009 Peace Prize given to the former president only nine months into his first term. He said that a peace prize for Trump could be justified, "if he succeeds in bringing peace to the Middle East." However, Heckman, who was awarded the economics prize in 2000 for his work on econometrics, said he was "sure" Trump could never win this award "because of his abrasive commentary." "The bias against his politics is immense everywhere and he is not as polished as most laureates are," he told Newsweek. Heckman agreed with Navarro that Trump had attempted to restructure global trade, but said the "jury is out" on the impacts of this. "But who knows. The times they are a-changing and [Bob] Dylan won for literature." William Nordhaus (2018) Responding to Navarro, whom he called "an unreliable source of theory and commentary," Nordhaus told Newsweek he was skeptical that Trump's trade policies had achieved anything besides undermining America's global leverage. "The way I understand Trump's 'successes' is this: The United States has over the decades built up an enormous reservoir of soft and hard power as well as good will around most of the world—a vast amount of social capital," said Nordhaus, who won the award in 2018 "for integrating climate change into long-run macroeconomic analysis." Yale Professor William Nordhaus speaks to attendees during a press conference after winning the 2018 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences at Yale University on October 8, 2018 in New Haven, Connecticut. Yale Professor William Nordhaus speaks to attendees during a press conference after winning the 2018 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences at Yale University on October 8, 2018 in New Haven, Connecticut."Trump has drawn upon that social capital and is using it like a spendthrift teenager to achieve virtually nothing of value and to destroy many critical parts of the global institutional infrastructure," Nordhaus said. He added that Trump could be a "leading contender" for the Ig Nobel Prize. Past winners of this satirical prize, awarded annually since 1991, include Russian President Vladimir Putin and Edward Teller, the Hungarian-American physicist known as the "the father of the hydrogen bomb," as well as Donald Trump himself, a co-winner of the 2020 award for Medical Education due to his perceived mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic. What Others Are Saying White House trade adviser Peter Navarro told Fox Business on Thursday: "This is a fundamental restructuring of the international trade environment in a way where the biggest market in the world has said you're not going to cheat us anymore. We're going to have fair deals." "Everything he's doing has defied the critics," Navarro added. "The tariffs have been tax cuts rather than inflation, and it's working beautifully." White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, during a recent press briefing, said: "President Trump has brokered, on average, about one peace or ceasefire per month during his six months in office. It's well past time that President Trump was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize." Jeffrey Frankel, economist and professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, told Newsweek that the prospect of Trump receiving the economics prize is "beyond absurd" and that there is "no chance whatever that he would be seriously considered." "Regarding policies enacted, Trump's tariffs may go down in history because the effects will be so bad and, much as the Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1930 did, may teach a generation or two about the harms of tariffs and the value of listening to warnings from professional economists, when they are virtually unanimous," he said. "I must say, I put the probability of Trump winning the Nobel Prize as well below the probability of the U.S. invading Sweden," he added. What Happens Next? As well as the White House press secretary, Trump has been tapped to receive nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize by Pakistan, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and, most recently, Cambodia. Prize announcements for all Nobel prizes typically occur in October, followed by award ceremonies held in December.
