Brian Lehrer: It's the Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. We're not going to start today with a New York Times story that just broke that says, reportedly, the Trump administration is considering getting Eric Adams to drop out of the mayoral race by appointing him ambassador to Saudi Arabia. That's what The Times says. We will ask our first guest about that, probably near the end of this segment, and maybe a later guest, as we're going to talk to Jane Arraf, Middle East correspondent for NPR.

We'll begin today with an exit interview with Manhattan Congressman Jerrold Nadler. I'm so excited to talk to him. This week, Nadler announced that he will retire after next year from the seat he was first elected to in 1992. We'll talk about the big picture in a big-picture way about these three decades and more arc of history, maybe even further back than that, as member of Congress was not his first elected office. We'll talk about this present moment, including Nadler's reasons for retiring now, his change of heart on Zohran Mamdani for mayor.

Now Nadler supports his reelection. He didn't originally. I mean, his election and maybe more, and maybe Eric Adams as ambassador to Saudi Arabia. Congressman, it's always been our honor to have you on the show over the years. I want to say that, and I'll acknowledge that many a time because you live near our studios-- Oh, we actually don't have him on the line yet. All right. I'm going to tell all of you that many a time, because he lives near our studios, he would just walk over and come right in.

He's in Washington now, so we want to thank him for being as accessible as he's always been. Listeners, this will include you who has a question or a thought about anything relevant to Congressman Nadler's 32 years in Congress, or even before he was in Congress, or on anything current and relevant for him to comment on today. 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. As we get his line hooked up, I'll give you a little bit of history that you might not know about Jerry Nadler. Think of him as a city kid, right?

His father owned a poultry farm in New Jersey. Did you know that? We'll ask about that briefly and how a family that started on a poultry farm in New Jersey wound up in the city. He graduated from Columbia in 1969. We'll ask if he was active politically as a student in those very activist years. Remember Columbia student protests in '68 were among the most legendary in US history. To this day, I wonder if, even in college, whether he participated in the protest of '68 or not. He knew he wanted to run for office.

His path went through the New York State Assembly before Congress. He got into Congress in kind of an unusual way. His predecessor, some of you who are old enough might remember Congressman Ted Weiss, who represented his district before him. Weiss died the day before primary day in 1992, and the Democratic Party had to scramble and find a new nominee. That was Jerry Nadler, and if I understand it correctly, the history is that he actually got elected to two things on election day in November 1992.

He got elected to fill out the last few months of Weiss's term as well as to his own first term. Now we have Congressman Nadler on the line. Congressman, I want to say again, as I was just telling the audience, it's always been our honor to have you on the show over the years, and I acknowledge that many a time, because you live near our studios, you would just walk over and come right in. Thank you for being so accessible, and welcome back on this occasion to WNYC.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: You're quite welcome, and thank you for the coverage over the years.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, again, this can include you who has a question or a thought about anything relevant to Congressman Nadler's 30-plus years in Congress, or even before he was in Congress, or in anything current and relevant for him to comment on today. 212-433-WNYC, call or text 212-433-9692. Congressman, as we were hooking up your line, I was saying that people may think of you as a dyed-in-the-wool New York City person, but do I have it right that your father owned a poultry farm in New Jersey?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Yes, for a number of years. I was born in Brooklyn. When I was 18 months old, we were one of the first families in Sandyston Town. When I was four, my father bought a poultry farm in New Jersey, in Ocean County near Lakewood. In 1957, when I was 10, all the farms went bankrupt, all of them failed, and so we moved back to Brooklyn, and I lived in Brooklyn. I became a Manhattanite when I went to Columbia.

Brian Lehrer: What did your father do here after he lost the farm?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: First, he worked on a gas station, and then he got a little money and he formed his own company, leading auto supply company, which basically consisted of a truck with all sorts of things, all sorts of auto parts. He would drive to gas stations in Nashville and Suffolk counties and sell it. Since he was a trustworthy, nice guy, he's building up the business, and then he purchased or rented a store to keep more things. He kept the route out, kept the route out going until he had a heart attack.

Then he worked as an office manager for his brother, who had a big company, and two years later he died of a heart attack.

Brian Lehrer: You graduated Columbia, which you already mentioned, that you went to in 1969. Were you active politically as a student in those very activist years? As I was saying to the audience, Columbia student protests in '68 were among the most legendary in US history.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: I went to Columbia in order to get involved in West Side politics. I turned down a scholarship to Yale because I wanted to go to Columbia to get involved in West Side politics, along with a number of classmates of mine since I was in high school, some of whom became well-known, Dick Morris, Dick Gottfried. We got very involved and built up our own political organization. Now, the disruptions on campus were quite different. I was active in the McCarthy campaign. I got back from the Pennsylvania-- I was in New Hampshire in charge of the campaign [crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: That's the 1968 Eugene McCarthy anti-war Democratic primary campaign for president. Eugene McCarthy, not Joe McCarthy, right?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: That's right. I was in charge of canvassing Manchester, which was amusing because Manchester had 14 wards. Each ward was like an election district or two here.

Brian Lehrer: Manchester, New Hampshire.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Yes. Then I went to the Pennsylvania primary, which was on April 23rd, the first day of the strike at Columbia. I got there the next day. It took me a day or so to get oriented and figure out what was going on. I was very much opposed to the SDS strike. I thought it was a terrible invasion of civility for students to block access to classes, to occupy Hamilton Hall. I was very much opposed to that. Then, after about a week, the university called in the police to clear the campus.

I went there and watched it. There was extreme brutality. I watched as policemen pulled kids down the steps in front of the library with their head hitting on every step. I got very angry. The next night there was a meeting in enrollment auditorium. There were about 800 kids there, myself included. It was the first time I thought something was worth leaving the McCarthy campaign for a while. The big question, we decided to form a strike committee. We decided that every 70 people could get 1 member of the strike committee.

We got a petition, and then the question was who should be eligible for both of the strike committees. The SDS position was anyone who agreed to obey the agreement of whatever the decision of the strike committee and agree to the six demands. Then people started saying, "What about people who agree to the five or six demands? The four, six demands?" I got up and spoke very forcefully against the SDS position and said that anybody who agreed to follow the instructions of strike and they should be permitted to vote, that that position prevailed.

On the strength of that speech, because I had not been active in campus politics at all, I was elected to the strike committee. The strike committee started out with the SDS in charge because they all knew each other, everybody. They had a central command. Everybody else was atomized. It took us a while, I don't remember how long, to figure out who our allies were and who agreed with us. We eventually formed, started winning votes on the strike committee against the SDS.

Then we found that the strike central, the executive on the strike, which was supposed to obey the instructions of the strike committee, started ignoring it because they were still following it, as the SDS said. I said, "Okay, we should withdraw from the strike committee as noisily and messily as possible and form our own counter-committee."

Brian Lehrer: Congressman, I have to jump in. Just because the line has deteriorated so much, I think it's difficult for a lot of the listeners to hear you. That's a really interesting story you were telling. I guess it goes to how even within protest movements, and we certainly see it today, too, sometimes there can be so much dissension from within that it becomes as big a topic for the participants as fighting against the people they're protesting against and fighting for the cause they're protesting for.

We're going to try to get you on a better line. My producer is going to deal with you with that and help with that. Listeners, I apologize for the rough start, technically, but we will get to Congressman Nadler in quality, I am sure, for this exit interview, including some of your calls and texts. While we're getting this straightened out, because I can't resist, here's that new article from The Times about Eric Adams maybe becoming the ambassador to Saudi Arabia. This just dropped a little while ago.

Headline talks between Adams and Trump advisor center on Saudi ambassadorship. The discussions are set to be part of an effort to get Mayor Eric Adams to end his mayoral campaign in New York City, clearing a path for Andrew Cuomo. It says close advisors have been crafting a plan for President Trump to nominate Mayor Eric Adams to be ambassador to Saudi Arabia in an effort to end the mayor's long-shot campaign for reelection in New York City, according to four people familiar with the discussions.

It says the conversations could still fall apart for a variety of reasons, the people caution, but Steve Witkoff, a billionaire real estate investor and advisor to Mr. Trump, has actively pursued the matter in recent days, meeting personally with Mr. Adams earlier this week in Florida and speaking with other people close to him. Very interesting. That's all we have on that. We'll invite Congressman Nadler to comment on that later in this conversation when we get to current issues, after we talk a little more history.

Congressman, I think we have you back, and you sound better already. Do I have it right that the way you first got into Congress in 1992 was unusual in that you weren't running, but your predecessor, Congressman Ted Weiss, died on the day before primary day?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Yes. I was running for reelection to the Assembly. I had a nut opponent. Ted was running for reelection to Congress. He had another opponent from the same crazy faction. Suddenly and unexpectedly, the day before the primary, he died. We didn't want the nut to win the congressional seats, so we told people, "Vote for Ted Weiss anyway." The headline in the New York Times was "Ted Weiss Dies." In the editorial was "Vote for Ted Weiss."

Ted won the primary posthumously, which of course set up a vacancy in the Democratic nomination, which under party rules had to be filled by a vote of a thousand members of the county committee within two weeks. There were five candidates, and I got 62% of the vote at the county committee. Technically, there were two meetings because I got elected in the special election for the two and a half months remaining in Ted's Manhattan-Bronx district. I got elected on the same day for a two-year term in the new Manhattan-Brooklyn district.

Brian Lehrer: You won two elections to Congress before you even entered Congress. Wise Guy Listener texts, "Shouldn't Eric Adams be ambassador to Turkey?" Some of you get that. If I asked you, Congressman Nadler, to name maybe three legislative accomplishments or battles you have fought in Congress that you would like your time there to be remembered for, could you do that?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Yes, I'm not sure I can hold it down to three. Let's see, legislative accomplishments. I'd say helping get $20 billion for New York after 9/11 and enacting the Zadroga Act, which provided for, which provides still for health care benefits for all survivors of 9/11. The Respect for Marriage Act codified same-sex marriage. I did that after Justice Thomas hinted in his opinion that that was the next to go. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act that tells employers that they must give a reasonable accommodation to the physical needs of pregnant employees unless there's an undue burden on the employer.

I got billions of dollars for New York, Second Avenue Subway, Moynihan Train Hall, Gateway Program, and let's see. I'm proud of the USA Freedom Act we enacted against my opposition in 2008, the Patriot Act, which was very anti-civil libertarian. It was part of the Bush administration's reaction to 9/11. I managed to enact, along with Bill Goodlatte, I think, a Republican, and Bobby Scott, the three of us enacted in 2015 the USA Freedom Act, which modified the Patriot Act in a civil libertarian direction.

It ended both collection of phone records by the NSA and prohibits the intel community from bulk data collection on US citizens. It's very privacy protection. I think those are some of the things. Let's see.

Brian Lehrer: Let's leave that there for now. That list, you can always chime in with something else. Anything you now think you got wrong or wish you had done better?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Yes, in 1998 or '99, I voted to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act, which is a New Deal financial control measure. I think that was a very bad mistake.

Brian Lehrer: Because? Explain Glass-Steagall.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: The Clinton administration was pushing it. I don't recall exactly what Glass-Steagall did, but I do remember I regretted that vote. I think that had Glass-Steagall not been repealed, you might not have had the 2008 stock market collapse.

Brian Lehrer: Yes, it was kind of a financial restraint law in certain respects. Now, you rose up to Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Many listeners will remember you played a key role in that capacity in the Donald Trump impeachment hearings. Both times, the Democratic House did impeach or indict him, and the Republican majority Senate voted not to remove him from office. Looking back now, was it worth it, or was it perhaps politically counterproductive?

That even if you really believe Trump was a threat to the Constitution and the rule of law, high crimes and misdemeanors, as they say, the political effect has been to give him and Republicans generally a heightened sense of grievance that contributed to his reelection last year. Any new thoughts that in 2025?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: No. I think you had to do that. You had to do it to protect the Constitution. When a president, in effect, says to a foreign leader, to President Zelensky, "I will release the arms aid that Congress voted only on condition that you announce an investigation of my political opponent," of Biden, to smear him, you can't allow that to go on. The second impeachment, which was for the insurrection on January 6th, had to happen. If you don't punish an insurrection, then the Constitution becomes meaningless.

I really fault Senator McConnell because he knew that Trump had done exactly what he did. He knew he was guilty. He said so in a speech on the floor. He said, "He'll pay a criminal penalty for that." Had he, instead of doing that, done his duty and gotten the votes for conviction on the impeachment, Trump would have been prohibited by the Constitution from running again. That's what he should have done. My only regret is that he didn't do that, but you have to protect the Constitution, otherwise, it becomes meaningless.

Brian Lehrer: The impeachment, the Russia investigation, the civil and criminal lawsuits that followed his first presidency, the Republicans call it lawfare, kind of a dirty way to disqualify Trump as a political opponent rather than trying to beat him at the ballot box. Is that a fair description at all, in your view?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: It is not at all. He committed very serious constitutional crimes. The insurrection was not only a constitutional crime, it was a criminal act, and he fomented it. He fomented a rebellion against the United States government, the first since the Confederacy seceded in the Civil War. He had to be impeached for that, and there was no choice. Now, I fault Merrick Garland for delaying a year. I don't know why he didn't appoint a special prosecutor to bring the cases until a year after the September 6th committee reported.

Had he done so in a timely fashion, the president probably would have been convicted in the criminal trial before he could run again-

Brian Lehrer: For the campaign.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: -as he should have been.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, who are just joining us, we're talking with Congressman Jerrold Nadler, who was first elected in 1992 and this week announced that he will retire at the end of the session. We'll get to current issues in a minute. How do you think Congress itself has changed since you entered in 1992? How the House does business or how the members from the parties work together or not? Or where would you start on how Congress has changed, if you think it has, and meaningful?

I ask partly because it was already rough and tumble when you got in. The year before you were elected, saw the Clarence Thomas, Anita Hill hearings, Newt Gingrich rose during your first years in the House, contributing to the Clinton impeachment. How different or less partisan, less polarized was it really then than now?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: It was less polarized. The modern polarization of the Republican Party began with Newt Gingrich, and it was carried forward after him, but you still had a considerable amount of cooperation on legislation between members of the different parties. The Republican Party today has become totally, almost not a political party. It's become like a cult group. In fact, Norm Ornstein, who studies these things at the American Enterprise Institute, said the United States needs a center-left party and a center-right party. It has a center-left party and a cult group. [crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: Let me jump in on that because I'm sure Republicans listening now will think you say cult group, but Trump won the election, including popular vote, and Republicans won more seats in the House and the Senate last year. Sounds like more than a cult, they would say.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: No, I don't mean that they can't get votes on the outside. What I mean by a cult group is that they're absolutely obedient, and there's no dissent from the president. The interior incentives are so strong that you never get dissent from the president, although a little now on the Epstein files, which is new, and that's historically not the case. You always had dissent within political parties, even when you had huge majorities.

When FDR had something like 390 or 400 Democratic House members and 70 or 75 senators, he couldn't get the Court-packing bill through. There was always independence. There is not now in the Republican Party.

Brian Lehrer: We'll continue in a minute, folks, with our exit interview with Congressman Jerrold Nadler, the dean of the New York delegation, who announced his intention to retire from Congress at the end of next year after joining back in 1992. We'll talk next about current issues, including his change of heart on Zohran Mamdani, his party's nominee for mayor, of course, and more. We'll start to fold in your questions and thoughts about the past and present as it relates to Nadler. 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692.

Call or text. Brian Lehrer on WNYC as we continue with our exit interview with Congressman Jerrold Nadler, the dean of the New York delegation, who announced his intention to retire from Congress at the end of next year. He was first elected in 1992. You know what? Let's take one memory phone call from somebody who voted for you in 1992. Susan in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hi, Susan.

Susan: Hi. [unintelligible 00:26:07]. Yes, I now live in Morningside Heights, but I was living in Soho in 1992, and I had just been recruited to run for County Committee, which is the lowest level political office in New York. I literally won two votes to one. There were three people who voted in that polling booth, so I won. I was told it's important to have the committee, and 90% of the time, you do nothing. So we were really excited we got to do something. We had five really good candidates we thought running. Bella Abzug was running against him.

Dick Gottfried, Ronnie Eldridge, and Franz Leichter, I believe. It was good, similar politics among most of them, I thought, but from the start, we were thrilled, my friends and I who were honored together to support Jerry. It's still a very wonderful memory. That was 32 wonderful years of you, Jerry. Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Susan, thank you for the memory. All right, onto this year's mayoral race. Congressman, you supported Scott Stringer in the Democratic primary, then endorsed Zohran Mamdani right after he won the primary. Why did you endorse him?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: I endorsed him for several reasons. First, he was a Democratic nominee. Second, what are the alternatives? You had the mayor, who's a crook, and you had Andrew Cuomo, whom I had said should resign from his governorship because he was a repeat sexual predator. There was very little choice there. You had the two people I just described, and you had a young assemblyman who was well motivated and had no real executive experience, which was a downside.

Brian Lehrer: I want to play what you said on this show during the primary campaign about why you weren't supporting Mamdani. Listen to this because it's so negative and is even the opposite of one of your core reasons now, that he is a fresh face. Listen.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: I couldn't support Zohran Mamdani for a number of reasons. Number one, his criticism of Israel for committing genocide, which I think is wrong. His support, well before this war, for the boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaign against Israel, which is really a campaign against Israel's existence. That's one thing. Secondly, he's 33 years old and has never run anything. It's one thing to have wonderful opinions or not, but to run the city of New York, you have to have executive experience.

He's not run anything, and he has no experience with executive leadership at all. So I don't see how he could be mayor. When I was 33 years old, I was, I think, a very good state assemblyman. I would not have been qualified to be mayor.

Brian Lehrer: So, Congressman, how can you go from "He's not qualified to be mayor," in June, not to mention your historically strong feelings about Israel, which you also said here in that clip to "I'm ready for him."

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: First of all, I mentioned what was the alternative? Second of all, campaign is major executive [unintelligible 00:30:05] [inaudible 00:30:07] Part of executive is to pick, not to [crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: You know what, our connection is deteriorating again to the point where I think people can't understand you. My producer asks if maybe you were in a slightly different location or position just a few minutes ago when the line was better.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Yes, let me move back. I had moved from [inaudible 00:30:31] because [unintelligible 00:30:33] work because [unintelligible 00:30:35] upstairs. Hold on one second.

Brian Lehrer: All right. You know what we could do? We can take another caller with another memory from the 1990s. Joan in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hi, Joan.

Joan: Hi. Happy to be on a program that I cherish. I am 95. I was part of that election. I work strongly with Al Blumenthal, and Manfred Ohrenstein, and Ted Weiss, and Jerry Nadler. Jerry will know that I was at his back all the time to support art and arts education. He can't forget the work that we did together to make things happen.

Brian Lehrer: Joan, thank you very much. Another one. Nancy in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hi, Nancy.

Nancy: Hi, good morning. My memory or story is related to No One Left Behind, which was to bring Afghanis and Iraqis who had helped the US troops out of Afghanistan when the US troops left. My daughter was involved in that, and they had found a sponsorship for a man and his family. He had been a translator, and they sold everything in order to get a plane ticket to come to the US, and when they got to Kennedy Airport, they were told they were going to be sent back.

My daughter got on the phone, called Jerry Nadler's office, and he went out to Kennedy, and he arranged for the family to be escorted into Manhattan and from there to a community in upstate New York where they now live. My daughter's still in contact with them. He basically saved the lives of those people. A hero.

Brian Lehrer: Nancy, thank you very much for that memory. Now I think we have you back on another stable line, Congressman. Here's a caller with a question for you, George in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hi, George.

George: Yes, good morning. My question is, why did he continue to vote to supply arms to Israel under the Biden administration? The second question is, does he consider any criticism of the government of Israel as anti-Semitism? By the way, the Glass-Steagall Act was an act that was done back in 1933 to separate the commercial banks from investment activities. It was repealed under the Clinton administration in 1999 and allowed commercial banks to engage in these risky investment activities, causing that crash in 2008. That's just a little bit of--

Brian Lehrer: Thank you. At least contributing to it. Thank you for that clarification. That question. Did you get the question, Congressman?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Yes, I did. Some of the premise of the question is wrong. I have always supported Israel, but not uncritically. I have been very critical of Israeli actions in the last year and a half or two. I have said that Netanyahu is the worst leader in Jewish history, and I will vote to deny offensive arms aid to Israel. I think you have to let them have defensive weapons to stop missiles from Iran or from the Houthis. That aside, I will vote to stop arms aid because they are using it terribly. I think the government of Israel is committing war crimes.

I don't think it's genocide, but I think it's huge war crimes and I will not support arms to that other than, as I said, defensive anti-missile weapons.

Brian Lehrer: Do you think even your Jewish constituents are becoming disillusioned by and alienated from Israel, meaningfully more than before, since the current war in Gaza? There's political analysis that says Mamdani's position on Israel would have been a net negative in the past. Maybe it was a net plus in 2025.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: I certainly think many of my constituents, including my Jewish constituents, are becoming very disillusioned, not with the existence of Israel, but with the actions of its government. In the way that I said my feelings are, I have always thought the basic foundation is that between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea are 15 million people, roughly half Jews and half Palestinian Arabs, which gives you three choices. Either you give the Palestinians the vote, in which case the Zionist dream of 2000 years of a Jewish state goes up in smoke.

Or you don't, in which case you're running an apartheid regime which is unacceptable. Therefore, the third remaining alternative is partition, is to have a two-state solution, which everybody's looked into this since the 1937 Peel Commission to the UN Resolution of 1947, and onward has come to the same conclusion. The current government of Israel is doing everything it can to make a two-state solution impossible. In addition to war crimes in Gaza, that's very problematic, to put it mildly.

Brian Lehrer: You cited generational change. Listener is texting this. If you can talk about why you cited generational change as one of the reasons that you're not running for reelection.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: I think that there has to be some generational change in the Democratic Party. I think that the experience with Joe Biden made people more conscious of that. It was the right time for me because really for two reasons. Number one, I will round out an even 50 years of elective office in the 34 in the House and 16 in the State Assembly. I'll be 79 years old. It still gives me time, 10 years, 15 years maybe, to do something else, have a second career. I don't know what that will be yet, but we'll see.

Brian Lehrer: I could argue that the activist base of the party says generational change, but is really after ideological change. They're not asking Bernie Sanders, who's older than you, to retire. Is it about age in your view, or more about policy?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: I think it's not both. We're not going to retire either. I think that since the Biden thing, there's just a demand for some generational change. Not everybody, obviously not Bernie Sanders. I haven't seen anybody demand Nancy Pelosi step down, but we'll see how that goes.

Brian Lehrer: Let me take one more listener comment. Let's see. Where'd this one go? Listener writes, "Please tell Congressman Nadler that he and the Senate must not vote to pass the new band-aid budget unless Trump stops his illegal takeover of cities, illegal defunding of previously congressionally allocated money, illegal deportations without due process. The time has come to stop dealing with the Trump regime," writes this listener, "and his sycophant Republican Party."

You are heading toward another potential budget disagreement that could result in a government shutdown at the end of this month. How much do you agree with that listener sentiment, and what you would like your colleagues in the House, the Democrats, to do?

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: I agree with that questioner, and I think most of my House Democratic colleagues agree, and I think most of Senate Democrats agree. I do think there's going to be a government shutdown, especially because the Republicans are insisting on this rescissions package, which is to say we pass a budget, a terrible budget as it was, but we pass a budget. Then the president comes in and says, "All right, now let's rescind a lot of money we voted for."

They're insisting on that now, and that is totally unacceptable. In addition to which they're claiming the power to impound funds, even though to not spend funds that Congress appropriated, they destroyed the Agency for International Development. They destroyed other things, and we cannot allow that. I do think there's going to be very much resistance, and I think we're going to head for a government shutdown, and I don't know where it's going to go from there.

Brian Lehrer: Last question and back to the mayoral race. I wonder if you have a reaction to this new story in The Times that just broke a little before you came on, that I mentioned. That the Trump administration is considering offering Mayor Adams the ambassadorship to Saudi Arabia to get him out of the race to help Cuomo beat Mamdani.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Oh, good Lord. I hadn't heard that, although we've been hearing for the last week or so that they were considering a big job for him. Yes, they are trying to clear the field for Andrew Cuomo to make it a one-on-one race to increase the odds that Cuomo can win. That just shows that Cuomo is the Trump candidate, and I think that that is not going to help him. I also think that it's not the business of the president of the United States to be intervening in the New York election this way.

Brian Lehrer: I'll repeat the line from the snarky listener who said they should really give him the ambassadorship to Turkey. Some of our listeners understand that.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Yes. [laughs]

Brian Lehrer: Congressman Nadler, thank you again for 32 years so far, I guess 33, really. This won't be the last time you're on, I'm sure, before the end of your final term at the end of next year. Thank you very much for coming on for this.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler: Thank you.

 

Copyright © 2025 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.