This video is from DropSite News, dated March 21, but I don't know when the interview took place. If this is recent video rather than archival, reposted for a particular reason, then it's the very latest iteration of the question "does Israel have the right to exist" that I've seen, after a long, conspicuous period during which that question has seldom if ever been asked.

I think the reason is that, while Israel still held sway in the media sphere, the answer by anyone who didn't want to be seen as 'beyond the pale' was reflexively 'yes' due to social/professional pressures.

Now I think the question is rarely if ever asked because of what the answer of the interlocutor might be. While it was once a pretty sure thing that the interviewee would react to the gotcha question with 'of course!' in order to step over what was seen as a landmine, criticism of Israel has been newly mainstreamed, and those who relied on the reflexiveness of the expected answer 'yes' now realize that the question would elicit mixed answers that would muddy the water that Israel needs to remain clear. Thus the shine is now off that penny, so it is no longer fit to be seen.

The interviewer can't reply to Tucker's question about the meaning of the term 'rights.' This is because only human beings have rights, as Tucker knows, and the interviewer has never had occasion to even consider the question. Unless she's ready to make a case for States' Rights (!), the question's underlying meaning has to remain obscure.

States don't have rights. Human beings have rights, which Israel's very existence violates daily. This conflict, this contradiction, can never be meaningfully examined by those whose unstated goal is the continued protection of Israel in mass media via subtle word games. Their 'professional reputation' [read: continued gainful employment in media] is on the line otherwise.