Palestinian journalist Rula Jebreal ignited a firestorm of criticism among Democratic lawmakers after referring to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as an “AIPAC monkey” during a recent podcast appearance. The controversial remark, made while discussing Jeffries’ support for Israel, quickly circulated across social media platforms, prompting widespread condemnation and accusations of racism from members of Jeffries’ own party.
"To be clear, there isn’t a non-racist way to call Leader Jeffries—a Black man—a ‘monkey’ or ‘errand boy.’" Congressional Black Caucus
The incident occurred during Jebreal’s appearance on commentator Wajahat Ali’s podcast, “The Left Hook.” The conversation shifted to Jeffries and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a prominent pro-Israel advocacy organization. Jebreal initiated her criticism by discussing the meaning of Jeffries’ first name. “His name is Hakeem. ‘Hakeem’ is an Arabic name which means ‘healer.’ He’s not a healer, he’s a divider,” Jebreal stated. She then accused Jeffries of being controlled by AIPAC, leading to the use of the contentious phrase. “He is a bought and paid by AIPAC monkey,” Jebreal declared, immediately adding that she did not intend the remark “in a racist way.” She further described Jeffries as an “errand boy,” expressing that critics of his Israel policy were “done and tired.”
Podcast host Wajahat Ali promptly intervened, pointing out the deeply offensive nature of describing a Black person as a monkey. He informed Jebreal that the term carries “terrible racial connotations,” noting her apparent recognition of the problem as she uttered the phrase. Jebreal attempted to clarify her intent, asserting she was referencing the traditional imagery of the three wise monkeys—seeing no evil, hearing no evil, and speaking no evil. “There are these three monkeys — one, I cannot hear, I cannot see, I cannot speak — it reminds me of these three monkeys,” she explained.
This explanation, however, failed to appease the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), which issued a forceful rebuke. “To be clear, there isn’t a non-racist way to call Leader Jeffries—a Black man—a ‘monkey’ or ‘errand boy,’” the CBC stated in response. The caucus also directed criticism toward Ali for allowing the exchange to transpire on his program, arguing that a lowering of standards for political discourse can normalize openly bigoted language. “We have to stop platforming and trafficking in anti-Black racism, whether it’s on the political right or the left,” the group added, emphasizing the need for consistency in condemning such language across the political spectrum.
Representative Ritchie Torres (D-NY), also a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, added his voice to the chorus of condemnations. “Calling a Black man a ‘monkey’ is racist. Full stop,” Torres wrote. He stressed that political ideology should not alter the standard applied to such offensive language, suggesting that figures on the left would readily denounce similar remarks if they originated from the political right. Torres further commented, “If Wajahat Ali and Rula Jebreal were on the far right, no one on the far left would have any trouble condemning them for dehumanizing a Black man in racist terms,” concluding with, “The silence is deafening.”
The backlash intensified on Friday, September 5, 2026, as additional Democratic lawmakers publicly criticized Jebreal’s language, and national news outlets began covering the escalating dispute. In response to the growing outcry, Jebreal subsequently issued an apology. “I am disgusted and horrified that Hakeem Jeffries is taking money from AIPAC amidst Israel’s genocide in Palestine,” she wrote, reiterating the political criticism that initially prompted her controversial comments. She continued, “That said, a term that I used to describe him was inappropriate and offensive and should never have been used. I apologize unconditionally.”
The apology, as reported by the New York Post, specifically addressed the language used but did not retract Jebreal’s underlying criticism of Jeffries’ approach to Israel or his relationship with AIPAC. Instead, it served to withdraw the offensive terminology while maintaining the substance of her political critique.
This dispute unfolds amidst broader and escalating tensions within the Democratic Party regarding Israel, the ongoing conflict in Gaza, and the perceived influence of pro-Israel organizations in American politics. House Minority Leader Jeffries has faced criticism from some progressive activists over his unwavering support for Israel. Concurrently, he and other Democratic leaders are under pressure from segments of their party who advocate for a more confrontational stance toward the Israeli government. These disagreements have increasingly manifested in Democratic primary elections, congressional debates, and public confrontations involving activists, commentators, and elected officials. However, in Jebreal’s case, the immediate controversy has predominantly focused on the racist connotations of the language directed at Jeffries, rather than the merits of the underlying Israel debate itself. The Congressional Black Caucus explicitly highlighted this distinction, firmly rejecting any notion that political disagreement could justify the use of terminology it deemed racist. Jebreal's acknowledgment of the inappropriateness of the phrase, while retaining her core political criticism, underscores the ongoing complexities of navigating both sensitive policy debates and the standards of public discourse.
