Trump nominee defends image of Jewish man with 'pitchfork and horns' at Senate grilling

One of President Donald Trump's nominees told senators that a magazine cover depicting a Jewish man with horns and a pitchfork was not antisemitic.

Charlton Allen, nominated to be general counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority, made the claim during a confirmation hearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday. Sen. Ruben Gallego, an Arizona Democrat, confronted Allen over a cover his publication ran in the 1990s.

Allen founded the Carolina Review, a conservative campus journal at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, in 1993. A 1996 cover depicted Aaron Nelson — a Jewish candidate for student body president — with devil horns and a pitchfork. Inside, the article read: "The difference with [Aaron] Nelson is simple. He's Jewish." The cover drew condemnation from the Anti-Defamation League and a formal censure from the university's chancellor.

Gallego displayed the image during the hearing and asked Allen point-blank whether he stood by it.

"…I would say don't run that cover. I think it was a mistake," Allen said — then claimed the quote inside was being taken out of context.

"That's kind of hard to take out of context," Gallego fired back, pointing at the image. "The pitchfork with the horns?"

Allen offered an explanation: UNC's rival is the Duke Blue Devils, and the cartoonist intended an analogy.

Gallego pressed him on whether it was a coincidence that the Jewish candidate ended up with horns and a pitchfork — while the article inside referenced his faith.

"You certainly remember this incident in detail," Gallego said, "for someone who wants to forget it."

Allen still refused the label.

"I would not say that it is antisemitic," he said. "We were the group that was calling for the equal treatment of all student religions."

"'The difference with Nelson is simple. He's Jewish,'" Gallego said, quoting the magazine. "What exactly was being communicated there? Because that seems fairly blatant antisemitism."

"I don't agree that it is antisemitic," Allen replied.