A Controversial Vetting Process Unveiled: The Story Behind Josh Shapiro's Memoir
In a recent revelation, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro's upcoming memoir has sparked intrigue and raised eyebrows. ABC News has confirmed that Shapiro alleges in his book that the team vetting potential running mates for Vice President Kamala Harris during her 2024 presidential campaign asked him an unusual question: whether he had ever been an agent of the Israeli government.
The New York Times was the first to report on this claim, which has since gained traction. In his memoir, "Where We Keep the Light," set for release on January 27th, Shapiro shares his experience of being questioned by Dana Remus, a former White House counsel and member of the vetting team. According to excerpts reported by The New York Times, Shapiro was asked point-blank if he had ever been an agent for Israel, a query he found offensive.
But here's where it gets controversial: Shapiro was also asked if he had ever spoken with an undercover Israeli agent. His response? "How the hell would I know?" if they were undercover, he wrote.
Shapiro, who is Jewish and has openly expressed his support for Israel while also criticizing the current Israeli government, was subjected to a unique line of questioning. He was asked about his handling of campus protests regarding Gaza and his general views on Israel. Shapiro wondered if these questions were directed solely at him, the only Jewish candidate, or if all non-federal officeholders were being grilled about Israel in the same manner.
ABC News has reached out to spokespeople for Shapiro, Harris, and Remus for comment on these allegations.
This incident comes at a time when the Democratic Party is divided over the Israel-Hamas war and the U.S.-Israel relationship, particularly regarding Israel's conduct in Gaza. Shapiro, a reported contender for Harris' running-mate spot, faced scrutiny from progressives for his pro-Israel views and his previous volunteer work in Israel, including on an Israeli army base. He also faced questions about his college writings expressing doubts about the possibility of a peace agreement between Israel and Palestine.
Shapiro and his team clarified that his volunteer work did not involve military activities and that his views on the conflict had evolved towards supporting a two-state solution. Despite this, the vetting process for running mates is known to be rigorous, aiming to anticipate and address potential public questions about candidates.
In her memoir, "107 Days," Harris wrote about her conversations with Shapiro during the vetting process. She discussed how they addressed the attacks he faced regarding Gaza and the impact it might have on their campaign's enthusiasm. They also talked about the opinion piece Shapiro wrote in college, with Shapiro expressing that he had evolved beyond his youthful opinions and was now committed to a two-state solution, even publicly criticizing Netanyahu.
However, Harris ultimately decided against choosing Shapiro as her running mate, citing concerns about his ambition and potential frustration with the vice presidential role. Shapiro, undeterred, campaigned as a surrogate for Harris even after not being selected.
The alleged vetting question has drawn criticism from Jewish officials in the Biden-Harris administration, who argue that it perpetuates antisemitic tropes suggesting dual loyalties among American Jews between the U.S. and Israel. This incident echoes similar allegations made against President Donald Trump during his 2024 presidential campaign.
Aaron Keyak, a former deputy special envoy to monitor and combat antisemitism at the State Department and a board member of the Combat Antisemitism Movement, expressed surprise at the blatant nature of the rhetoric. He questioned the purpose of asking such a question and whether it was intended to send a message or intimidate Governor Shapiro.
Keyak, who is Jewish, shared that he too faced unique questions during the vetting process for his role in the Biden administration, questions that he later learned non-Jewish appointees did not encounter. While he couldn't disclose the specifics, he noted that the implications of these questions were similar to those allegedly asked of Shapiro.
This story raises important questions about the boundaries of political vetting processes and the potential impact of such inquiries on candidates and their communities. What are your thoughts on this controversial episode? Do you think the vetting team overstepped their bounds, or was this a necessary step to ensure a thorough understanding of potential running mates? We invite you to share your opinions in the comments below.
