Feed aggregator

United Torah Judaism chairman MK Yaakov Asher responded Friday to the growing willingness of Israeli opposition politicians to compromise on legislation governing the military draft of yeshiva bochurim, welcoming their sudden flexibility while making clear that the chareidi parties have not agreed to join any coalition headed by the anti-Netanyahu bloc.

Asher’s remarks followed statements by Yisrael Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman and other opposition figures indicating that they would consider concessions on the draft issue to facilitate the establishment of a government without Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

“It is encouraging to discover the flexibility of all the political players on the draft issue,” Asher said, reacting to the apparent change in position among politicians who have spent years opposing the chareidi parties’ demands.

However, Asher also questioned why the same willingness to compromise had been absent throughout the prolonged political battles over the status of yeshiva students.

“It is painful to think how much incitement and hatred between brothers could have been avoided had that same flexibility been demonstrated in recent years,” he said.

The United Torah Judaism chairman then addressed mounting speculation that the chareidi parties might be prepared to enter a government led by Gadi Eisenkot, particularly if an acceptable draft law could be negotiated.

Drawing on this week’s parsha, Chayei Sarah, Asher offered a pointed response to those already discussing a possible political partnership.

“In this week’s parsha, when the shidduch between Yitzchok and Rivka is being arranged, the posuk says: ‘Let us call the girl and ask her opinion,'” Asher observed.

“It would be appropriate to remember that when discussing political shidduchim that have not yet been proposed to one of the parties,” he added.

His comments were directed at the increasingly public discussion of a possible coalition agreement with the chareidi parties, despite the absence of any formal proposal or approval from their leadership.

Asher further emphasized that even if coalition negotiations eventually produce an offer acceptable to United Torah Judaism’s political representatives, the final decision will rest with the Gedolei Yisroel.

“And of course, every proposal will first be brought for the decision of the ‘mechutanim’ — the Gedolei Hador, shlita,” he said.

The remarks come amid a significant shift in Lieberman’s position. The Yisrael Beiteinu chairman has indicated that he is prepared to abandon his longstanding refusal to negotiate with the chareidi parties, provided the resulting government excludes Netanyahu and does not depend on parliamentary support from Ra’am or the Joint List.

Lieberman has also called for the formation of a 61-seat coalition without the Arab parties, suggesting that additional Likud lawmakers might eventually join such a government. His willingness to compromise on the draft has opened the possibility of negotiations that would have been politically unthinkable only weeks ago.

The change has already drawn criticism from Yoaz Hendel, chairman of the Reservists Party, who accused Lieberman of abandoning his commitments to military reservists in pursuit of political power.

Meanwhile, Democrats Party chairman Yair Golan reported progress in coalition discussions, saying negotiating teams from his party and Eisenkot’s Yashar faction had met several times during the week.

For now, however, Asher’s remarks leave the question of chareidi participation unresolved. Although he did not reject negotiations with the anti-Netanyahu bloc, he made clear that no coalition proposal has yet been presented to United Torah Judaism and that any eventual agreement would require the approval of the Gedolei Hador.

{Matzav.com}

A dramatic shift in Israel’s coalition negotiations emerged Friday after Yisrael Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman announced his willingness to compromise on the military draft issue, prompting senior figures in United Torah Judaism to openly consider joining a government headed by Gadi Eisenkot. The development could potentially bring Shas into the emerging coalition as well, although significant political and ideological obstacles remain.

A source within United Torah Judaism told Kikar HaShabbat that the party is seriously examining the possibility of entering a government led by the anti-Netanyahu bloc, provided an acceptable agreement can be reached guaranteeing the status of yeshiva bochurim.

“We’re not particularly surprised. We’ve been hearing these discussions since the elections. We’ve spoken with people in the change bloc, and we understood where things were heading,” the source said.

The official made clear that securing draft legislation remains the party’s overriding priority and could determine its willingness to cooperate with politicians who have long opposed the chareidi position.

“If they give us a draft law, we’ll go with them. Absolutely. That’s the most important thing right now. Once that is resolved, the budgets will also be released. We’re in politics, and in politics you do what needs to be done,” the source declared.

Lieberman’s unexpected flexibility represents a significant development given his years of opposition to military service exemptions for yeshiva students. On Friday morning, he announced that although he remains firmly opposed to establishing a minority government dependent on the abstention of the Joint List and Ra’am, he is prepared to make concessions on other contentious issues to prevent another election and keep Binyamin Netanyahu out of power.

“On all other issues, it is permissible and desirable to be flexible and compromise, and to understand that if you try to grab too much, you end up with nothing. That includes the issue of the draft law,” Lieberman wrote.

“I find it painful, and I know many others do as well. But in light of the many challenges we face today, the national interest of the State of Israel and the Jewish people must take precedence over every other consideration,” he added.

Conversations with Yisrael Beiteinu lawmakers and candidates indicate that party officials believe a draft compromise could be politically viable if advanced by the anti-Netanyahu bloc. Asked how such a concession could be reconciled with their election promises, party representatives argued that the alternatives would be a government dependent on Arab parties, renewed cooperation with Netanyahu, or another national election, none of which Lieberman considers acceptable.

United Torah Judaism chairman MK Yaakov Asher responded to Lieberman’s announcement with pointed criticism of the years of political confrontation surrounding the draft.

“It’s encouraging to discover the flexibility of all the political players on the draft issue,” Asher remarked. “It’s painful to think how much incitement and hatred between brothers could have been avoided had that same flexibility been demonstrated in recent years.”

Asher also emphasized that the party’s elected representatives would not independently decide whether to enter a coalition or accept proposed legislation. Any arrangement would first require the approval of the Gedolei Yisroel.

“Of course, every proposal will first be brought before the ‘mechutanim’ — the Gedolei Hador, shlita — for their decision,” he stated.

Despite the apparent opening, United Torah Judaism officials acknowledge that negotiations with Eisenkot could prove extremely difficult. Lieberman’s willingness to compromise does not necessarily mean that the parties can agree on the substance of a draft law, particularly regarding enlistment quotas and financial or legal penalties for yeshivos and their students.

Political observers believe the chareidi parties would be unlikely to support legislation containing substantial sanctions or rigid recruitment requirements. Any agreement capable of securing their participation would therefore likely require a considerably softer framework than proposals previously advanced by Lieberman and other opposition figures.

The central difficulty for Eisenkot is the parliamentary arithmetic. His bloc currently holds 48 seats, while United Torah Judaism controls seven. Even if the two sides reach an agreement, their combined strength would be only 55 seats, six short of the 61 required to form a majority government.

Bringing Shas into the coalition would solve that problem, with its six seats producing an exact 61-seat majority. However, Shas chairman Aryeh Deri has maintained his political alliance with Netanyahu, and his party formally recommended the prime minister during consultations with President Isaac Herzog.

Some figures in United Torah Judaism believe that joining an Eisenkot government could eventually make it easier for Shas to follow. Under that scenario, Deri might argue that his party was joining an arrangement already established by other chareidi representatives. The difficulty is that Eisenkot would still lack the necessary majority to establish such a government without Shas or support from elsewhere.

The coalition negotiations have also exposed growing divisions within the anti-Netanyahu camp. Eisenkot has considered establishing an emergency minority government supported indirectly by the Arab parties, but Lieberman has firmly rejected any arrangement dependent on Ra’am or the Joint List.

Other parties within the bloc have expressed similar reservations, leaving Eisenkot without a clear route to power despite receiving recommendations from 67 Knesset members during President Herzog’s consultations. Those recommendations included 19 Arab lawmakers whose support does not necessarily translate into participation in a governing coalition.

Naftali Bennett has not yet publicly clarified his position on the emerging proposals, although political assessments suggest he would also oppose a government dependent on Arab parliamentary support.

Meanwhile, Avraham Justman, Agudas Yisroel’s representative on the Central Elections Committee, said Friday that United Torah Judaism remains willing to negotiate with any prospective prime minister who can deliver a satisfactory legislative arrangement concerning yeshiva students. He stressed that general promises would not suffice and that the details would need to be incorporated into law.

President Herzog is expected to announce Sunday which candidate will receive the first opportunity to form a government. Eisenkot is widely considered the leading candidate for that mandate, but securing it would mark only the beginning of negotiations among parties whose positions on the draft, Netanyahu and the Arab factions remain sharply divided.

{Matzav.com}

Shas chairman Aryeh Deri reportedly acknowledged in a private conversation several months ago that Israel’s left-wing parties would be willing to meet virtually all of the chareidi parties’ demands, including legislation protecting yeshiva bochurim from military conscription, if doing so would enable them to establish a government.

The previously undisclosed remarks, reported Friday by BeHadrei Chareidim based on an account of a conversation with one of Deri’s acquaintances, have taken on new significance as negotiations intensify over the formation of Israel’s next government and the possibility of chareidi participation in a coalition led by Gadi Eisenkot.

According to the account, Deri expressed confidence that the political parties currently opposing the chareidi position on the draft would quickly abandon their objections if they needed chareidi support to secure a governing majority.

“If we go with the left, we’ll get everything we want. Everything they say is a bluff designed to bring down the right. We could get a draft law if we went with the other side, but we have a responsibility to the Jewish people, and that’s why we go with the right,” Deri reportedly said.

The account comes as United Torah Judaism has declined to recommend either Eisenkot or Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for the premiership, leaving open questions about the party’s position in the emerging coalition negotiations.

It also follows comments by Yisrael Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman indicating that he would be prepared to consider compromises on the military draft issue, despite his longstanding opposition to broad exemptions for yeshiva students.

An editorial published by BeHadrei Chareidim has meanwhile urged the chareidi parties to consider joining an Eisenkot-led government if an agreement can be reached to legally secure the status of yeshiva bochurim.

The individual who recounted the conversation with Deri said he initially challenged the Shas chairman’s assessment, expressing disbelief that left-wing politicians would reverse their positions on such a contentious issue.

Deri reportedly responded by pointing to his extensive experience dealing with leaders of the Israeli left.

“What are you talking about? You’re naive. These people used to be my friends. I know the leftists. They’ll sell everything when they need to,” Deri said, according to the account.

The acquaintance then raised another objection, arguing that even if political leaders were willing to compromise, their voters would not tolerate concessions on the draft after years of campaigning against exemptions for chareidi yeshiva students.

Deri reportedly dismissed that argument as well.

“You’re wrong and naive,” he replied.

The reported conversation has emerged as members of the anti-Netanyahu bloc explore the possibility of forming a government with United Torah Judaism, potentially using a framework based on the military conscription proposal advanced by Lieberman in 2018.

Although discussions about such an arrangement are underway, no agreement has been reached, and significant differences remain between the parties over the terms of any future draft legislation.

The account of Deri’s remarks has not been independently confirmed, and the report does not indicate that he has changed his position regarding cooperation with Netanyahu’s political opponents.

A 24-year-old chareidi man from Yerushalayim spent four months in an Israeli military prison while his seriously ill mother lay dying, with repeated requests to allow him to visit her reportedly rejected by military authorities. By the time he was finally released, his mother had passed away, leaving him unable to see her or say goodbye during her final days.

The disturbing account concerns Moshe Levy, a resident of the Neve Yaakov neighborhood, who was imprisoned after attempting to resolve his military service status and obtain an exemption on medical grounds.

According to the report, Levy traveled to the Tel Hashomer military induction center on the advice of his attorney, bringing psychiatric documentation intended to support his request for an exemption. Instead of receiving the exemption he had sought, he was taken into custody and transferred to a military detention facility.

At the time of his arrest, Levy’s mother, Mazal Levy a”h, was already suffering from a serious illness. His family initially hoped he would be permitted to return home for Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, but those requests were unsuccessful.

As the weeks passed, his mother’s condition deteriorated further. She was eventually hospitalized, and her health declined to the point that doctors considered her condition critical.

According to Levy’s account, his mother repeatedly asked about him even as she became increasingly weak and struggled to speak. She wanted to know where her son was and why he had not come to see her.

Of her seven sons, six were able to remain at her side during her final illness. Moshe was the only one absent, confined to military prison.

The family continued appealing to military officials, submitting medical records and special requests seeking permission for Levy to leave the facility temporarily, even for a brief visit to his mother’s hospital bedside.

Those appeals were reportedly denied, including when her condition became life-threatening. As a result, Levy remained in custody throughout the final stages of his mother’s illness.

The tragedy reached its devastating conclusion on the day of her petirah. At approximately noon, one of Levy’s commanding officers approached him and indicated that something was wrong at home, instructing him to contact his brother.

Rather than informing Levy directly that his mother had died, the officer left him to learn the news from his family.

When Levy called his brother, he discovered that his mother had already passed away and that the family was preparing to leave for the levayah within minutes.

Only then, after four months of imprisonment and the death of the mother he had repeatedly asked to visit, did military authorities inform Levy that he could leave the prison and return home.

Initially, Levy was told that his release would last only through the shivah and that he would be required to report back to military prison afterward.

His attorney objected, arguing that there was no justification for forcing the grieving son to resume his imprisonment following his mother’s death. After further intervention by the lawyer, Levy was released without a requirement to return immediately after the mourning period.

However, his difficulties with the military authorities have not ended. Levy says his military status remains unresolved and that he continues to be classified as a draft evader. According to information he received from military officials, another arrest could expose him to more severe punishment.

Additional reporting by JDN indicates that the family had also sought assistance from hospital personnel and that requests for special leave were reportedly submitted by officers within the detention facility. Those efforts, according to the accounts, were likewise unsuccessful.

The case has attracted attention in the Israeli chareidi media amid the continuing controversy surrounding the arrest and imprisonment of yeshiva students over military conscription.

The family’s allegations concerning the repeated refusal to grant humanitarian leave have been reported by several Israeli outlets. An official military explanation for the denials was not available in the reports reviewed.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump declared Friday that Israel and the wider Middle East would have faced destruction had his administration not intervened militarily to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, delivering the dramatic assessment as Washington continued weighing the possibility of additional strikes against Tehran.

“Israel and, in fact, the entire Middle East, WOULD NOT EXIST TODAY if I did not stop Iran from having a Nuclear Weapon,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

“Nobody wants to say that, but everybody knows it’s true!” he added.

Trump’s remarks came one day after he issued another warning to Iran, making clear that American military forces remain prepared to resume attacks if Tehran fails to address Washington’s concerns over its nuclear activities.

During an exchange with reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday, Trump indicated that he would prefer to avoid another round of military operations but suggested that further action could become unavoidable.

“I would rather not destroy the rest of the country if possible, but maybe I’ll have to. You will know soon enough.”

The president followed that statement with an additional warning about the readiness of American forces.

“If we have to do the rest of the Iran thing, we’re very much locked and loaded,” Trump stressed.

The renewed threats come amid ongoing diplomatic efforts to determine whether Washington and Tehran can reach an agreement over Iran’s nuclear program without another military confrontation.

The New York Times reported Thursday that Iranian officials were reviewing proposals presented by international intermediaries concerning the country’s nuclear activities, raising the possibility that negotiations with the United States could resume.

Later Thursday, a senior Iranian official told Reuters that Tehran had transmitted a nuclear proposal to Washington through Qatar. However, the official said Iran would not enter negotiations unless the United States first accepted seven conditions established by the Iranian government.

Among Tehran’s demands are the removal of American economic sanctions, the release of Iranian assets frozen overseas, and compensation for damage sustained during the war.

Washington has taken a different position, insisting that Iran’s nuclear activities must be addressed from the outset of any negotiations rather than postponed until after other Iranian demands are satisfied.

Iranian security official Mohsen Rezaei reinforced Tehran’s position Thursday during a visit to Russia, saying the country would neither reopen the Strait of Hormuz nor participate in negotiations until its conditions were fulfilled. The waterway remains a major point of contention in efforts to prevent renewed fighting.

The latest diplomatic initiative follows the American and Israeli military campaign launched against Iran on February 28, which triggered Iranian retaliation against Israel and Gulf countries hosting American military installations. The conflict subsequently expanded to Lebanon and Yemen, with Iranian-backed groups becoming involved in the fighting.

Trump has repeatedly argued that Iran would have used nuclear weapons against Israel had American forces not intervened. In previous interviews, he has pointed to the American B-2 bomber strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities as decisive in preventing Tehran from acquiring such weapons.

Despite the renewed diplomatic activity, the two governments remain divided over the conditions for formal negotiations. American officials are reviewing the proposal delivered through Qatar, but no agreement has been announced on when talks might begin or whether Iran will abandon its preconditions.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump announced Friday that Stephen Miller will take over as White House chief of staff, replacing Susie Wiles in a major leadership change following the Republican Party’s sweeping losses in Tuesday’s midterm elections.

The president said Miller, currently his deputy chief of staff for policy and one of his closest advisers, will assume the position Monday, November 9. Wiles, who helped engineer Trump’s successful 2024 presidential campaign, will move into a senior role overseeing his political operation.

“I am pleased to announce that Mr. Stephen Miller, the current Deputy Chief of Staff of the Trump Administration, and one of my most trusted advisors, will become the Chief of Staff starting Monday, November 9, 2026,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“Susie Wiles, who has done an outstanding job, will be moving over to the Trump Political Operation. I want to thank her for her service as Chief of Staff — She has done a great job!”

The announcement represents one of the most significant personnel changes of Trump’s second term, coming just days after Democrats won control of both chambers of Congress and delivered a major electoral setback to the president’s party.

Wiles, 69, has been widely credited with imposing greater discipline on White House operations and maintaining coordination among senior administration officials. She served as Trump’s chief of staff for approximately 21 months after managing his successful return to the presidency in 2024. During her tenure, she was also diagnosed with breast cancer.

Miller, 41, has been among the administration’s most influential policymakers, working closely with federal departments and agencies to implement the president’s priorities. His responsibilities have included advancing Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda and coordinating the release of previously classified government documents concerning unidentified flying objects.

His elevation is widely viewed as a signal that Trump intends to adopt a more confrontational strategy as Democrats prepare to use their newly won congressional majorities to investigate the administration and challenge its policies.

A White House official, speaking to the New York Post before the personnel announcement, suggested that administration officials were preparing for an intensified political battle.

“There are still many who are gearing up for the challenge. It’s time to fight even harder,” the official said.

Wiles, meanwhile, expressed appreciation for her time at the White House and emphasized that her departure from the chief of staff position would not diminish her loyalty to the president.

“Serving President Trump in the White House has been the honor of a lifetime,” Wiles said on Friday. “I’m so proud to have been a part of what we’ve accomplished together from securing our border and cutting taxes to strengthening our economy and putting America First.

“More than anything, I’m grateful for the extraordinary people I’ve had the privilege of working alongside. While my role may be changing, my commitment to the President and the mission never will,” she added.

The personnel change follows several weeks of speculation about Wiles’ future. In mid-October, Trump publicly rejected reports that he was considering replacing her, insisting there was “zero chance” of such a move and praising her loyalty and performance.

Wiles also made history as the first woman to serve as White House chief of staff. Her departure comes after she completed treatment for breast cancer and announced in September that she was cancer-free.

Miller has been part of Trump’s political circle since the 2016 presidential campaign and is considered one of the principal architects of his administration’s strict immigration policies. His appointment places a longtime ideological ally in charge of coordinating White House operations as the president prepares for two years of divided government.

The New York Post also reported that additional administration officials could face scrutiny over the Republican election losses, including Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Adm. Brad Cooper, commander of U.S. Central Command, whose leadership roles during the Iran war have attracted political criticism.

No decisions regarding their positions have been announced.

{Matzav.com}

Special gatherings of Torah learning and tefillah have been announced in the Gerer and Vizhnitzer chassidic communities in Eretz Yisroel as chassidim continue to daven for the health and recovery of their respective Rebbes, both of whom have been experiencing medical difficulties.

In Ger, a special hour of Torah learning will take place this Motzoei Shabbos, Parshas Chayei Sarah, in all Gerer shtieblach and yeshivos, with chassidim of all ages gathering to learn as a zechus for the complete refuah of the Gerer Rebbe.

The initiative was announced Friday by R’ Itche Meir Tauman in a recorded message distributed throughout the chassidus. He called upon chassidim, young and old, to assemble following Maariv for a collective hour of Torah learning, invoking the words of davening, “Ki heim chayeinu v’orech yameinu,” emphasizing the merit of Torah study as a source of life and blessing.

According to information obtained by BeHadrei Chareidim, the gathering was arranged in response to the Gerer Rebbe’s medical condition and the desire of his family to increase zechuyos for his recovery.

The Rebbe’s son, Rav Nechemia Alter, reportedly proposed that the entire chassidus participate in a coordinated hour of learning, bringing together chassidim in every Gerer shtiebel and yeshiva to daven through the merit of Torah for the Rebbe’s complete recovery and renewed strength.

Meanwhile, the Vizhnitzer chassidus announced Friday that thousands of chassidim will participate in special tefillos on Sunday, Erev Rosh Chodesh Kislev, as the Vizhnitzer Rebbe continues to experience weakness while undergoing medical treatments.

The gathering will include the recitation of the fourth book of Tehillim, comprising chapters 90 through 106, as chassidim unite in tefillah for the Rebbe’s health.

The Vizhnitzer leadership announced that the communal Tehillim gathering will take place Sunday evening following public Torah shiurim.

An additional gathering for tefillah is scheduled for Monday afternoon at the tzion of the Vizhnitzer Rebbes, where chassidim will daven for the Rebbe’s recovery in the merit of his holy ancestors.

The public is asked to continue davening for the complete refuah of the Gerer Rebbe, Rav Yaakov Aryeh ben Yuta Henna, and the Vizhnitzer Rebbe, Rav Yisroel ben Leah Esther, b’soch she’ar cholei Yisroel.

{Matzav.com}

Thousands of Yidden from across Eretz Yisroel and around the world began arriving in Chevron on Friday for Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah, joining the annual gathering at the Me’aras Hamachpeilah as hundreds of police officers and security personnel were deployed throughout the city to protect the crowds.

Shabbos Chayei Sarah draws thousands of visitors to Chevron each year, as the parsha recounts Avrohom Avinu’s purchase of the Me’aras Hamachpeilah from Efron Hachiti as a burial place for Sarah Imeinu. The site is the kever of the Avos and Imahos, including Avrohom and Sarah, Yitzchok and Rivkah, and Yaakov and Leah. According to Chazal, Adam Harishon and Chava are also buried there.

The annual Shabbos has become a major occasion for Yidden seeking to spend time in the city of the Avos, daven at the Me’aras Hamachpeilah, and demonstrate their support for Chevron’s Jewish community.

With particularly large crowds expected throughout Shabbos, the Israel Police launched an extensive security operation involving hundreds of officers from the Yehuda and Shomron District, together with additional security forces.

Police personnel were stationed around the Me’aras Hamachpeilah and throughout Chevron’s Jewish neighborhoods, with the goal of maintaining security and allowing the large-scale Shabbos gatherings to proceed safely.

The operation is being directed by Chevron District Commander Chief Superintendent Eliyahu Zeitoun, whose officers began their preparations and deployments early Friday morning.

Later Friday, Yehuda and Shomron District Commander Major General Moshe Pinchi conducted an operational assessment, visiting police positions and reviewing the security arrangements ahead of Shabbos.

During his inspection, Pinchi commended the officers for their preparations and directed commanders to increase traffic-control efforts during the busiest arrival periods before shkiah.

He also instructed police to maintain close coordination with other security agencies throughout Shabbos, with particular attention to public safety, crowd management, and maintaining order in areas expected to attract the largest numbers of visitors.

Organizers have been preparing for an exceptionally busy weekend. Chabad of Chevron, led by Rabbi Danny Cohen and his wife, Batsheva, is arranging Shabbos meals for more than 7,500 guests, while overall attendance estimates range from approximately 20,000 to 45,000 visitors. Many are staying with local families, in nearby Kiryat Arba, or in temporary accommodations set up for the occasion.

The security preparations have also included joint exercises involving the IDF, Israel Police, Border Police, and Shin Bet. Forces practiced responding to multiple simultaneous emergencies in Chevron, Kiryat Arba, and the surrounding area amid heightened security concerns following a recent deadly shooting attack.

The Me’aras Hamachpeilah is also opening its full prayer complex to Jewish visitors for Shabbos Chayei Sarah, one of the limited occasions during the year when the entire site, including the Yitzchok and Rivkah Hall, is available for Jewish tefillos.

{Matzav.com}

Elon Musk’s business empire has suffered a staggering decline in market value following Tuesday’s midterm elections, with Tesla and SpaceX losing approximately $456 billion combined by Thursday’s close as investors reacted to Democratic victories in Congress and the possibility of tougher government oversight of the billionaire’s companies.

The selloff intensified Thursday, when SpaceX shares fell approximately 9% and Tesla dropped roughly 11% during afternoon trading. The declines came amid a broader retreat in technology stocks, but analysts pointed to the election results as an additional source of concern for investors in Musk’s businesses.

Democrats captured both the House and Senate, giving them new opportunities to investigate Musk’s companies, examine their government contracts, and pursue legislation imposing additional restrictions on their operations.

Musk had invested heavily in preventing that outcome. According to figures first reported by the Financial Times, he contributed more than $470 million to Republican candidates and political organizations during the election cycle, making him the party’s largest financial supporter. Despite that spending, many of the candidates he backed were defeated.

The Democratic gains extended into Texas, the home state of both Tesla and SpaceX, where two prominent Republican allies of Musk lost major races.

Democrat James Talarico defeated Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton in the U.S. Senate contest, while Gina Hinojosa unseated Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. The results created additional uncertainty for Musk’s extensive business operations in the state.

Analysts at Deutsche Bank warned Wednesday that the changing political environment could create obstacles for SpaceX as it pursues major expansion projects.

“While policy is naturally hard to predict, we could envision SpaceX facing some incremental headwinds in this type of backdrop,” the analysts wrote.

One particular concern involves the construction of massive data centers, which have become increasingly important to Musk’s artificial intelligence ambitions.

During her gubernatorial campaign, Hinojosa advocated temporarily suspending approvals for new data centers until Texas adopts stronger safeguards governing water consumption, electricity prices, local decision-making, and financial incentives. She also challenged the tax advantages offered to large computing facilities.

Those proposals could directly affect expansion plans being pursued by Tesla and SpaceX.

The companies are developing additional artificial intelligence infrastructure in Texas, including a proposed project known as Terafab in Grimes County. The sprawling complex is expected to incorporate both a data center and a semiconductor manufacturing facility.

SpaceX is also planning a “supercomputer” at its Starbase launch complex and company town, according to employment advertisements posted by the company.

Deutsche Bank analysts cautioned that tighter requirements for constructing data centers could slow the Starbase computing project and force SpaceX to spend more money meeting new regulatory standards.

Another potential source of trouble involves SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet service and its role in Ukraine’s war against Russia.

According to CNN, Musk and SpaceX have been directed to retain documents relating to restrictions placed on a military version of Starlink used by Ukrainian forces. The limitations reportedly interfered with Ukraine’s ability to defend itself against Russian attacks, and the records could become relevant to congressional inquiries.

The Democratic victories could also create difficulties for a possible combination of Tesla and SpaceX. Musk has publicly discussed merging the two businesses but acknowledged that any transaction would require shareholder approval. Increased regulatory scrutiny could make such a deal considerably more complicated.

The election fallout has also taken a substantial toll on Musk’s personal wealth. His fortune, which exceeded $1 trillion following SpaceX’s initial public offering in June, has fallen below $800 billion, according to Forbes, including a decline of approximately $90 billion over the past week.

Additional financial reporting indicates that the two companies lost approximately $456 billion in market capitalization over just two trading sessions, with Tesla closing Thursday at $343.69 and SpaceX at $123.62. The figures represent losses in stock market valuation rather than money directly spent or lost by the companies.

Despite the steep declines, Musk remains the wealthiest person in the world, according to Forbes.

Former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot appears positioned to receive the mandate to form Israel’s next government after securing recommendations from 67 Knesset members, including 18 representatives of Arab parties whose positions on Hamas have drawn sharp criticism.

The latest development came Thursday evening when Eisenkot’s Yashar! party formally recommended him during consultations at President Isaac Herzog’s residence, bringing the total number of lawmakers backing his candidacy to 67.

The recommendations place Eisenkot in a strong position to receive the first opportunity to assemble a governing coalition, although questions remain about whether he can translate that support into a stable parliamentary majority.

The participation of the Arab parties has become a central point of controversy. According to the report, the 18 Arab lawmakers supporting Eisenkot have refused to explicitly designate Hamas as a terrorist organization, raising concerns among critics about the political foundations of a potential Eisenkot-led government.

Representing Yashar! at the presidential consultations was Yoram Cohen, the former director of the Shin Bet, who described Israel as facing an urgent national crisis requiring an immediate change in leadership.

“We are in a critical emergency because of the results of the elections in the United States and Israel’s international standing. Some of the war’s objectives have not been achieved, security threats still exist, and unfortunately, there are efforts to dismantle democracy in Israel, delegitimize the election results, and wage battles between the branches of government,” Cohen said.

Cohen urged the president to move quickly toward establishing a new administration, arguing that Israel cannot afford prolonged political uncertainty.

“We must establish a national emergency government quickly in order to return Israel to safe shores and stability,” he declared.

He emphasized that the recommendations for Eisenkot represented a broad rejection of the outgoing government and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

“Israel is at a crossroads. A new, stable, and responsible government is an existential necessity. Sixty-seven Knesset members are expressing their lack of confidence in the outgoing government and Binyamin Netanyahu and are demanding new leadership for Israel,” Cohen said.

Cohen also outlined the immediate parliamentary objectives of the emerging political bloc, indicating that replacing the current Knesset speaker would be among its first priorities.

“We want to take steps to replace the Knesset speaker and pass several laws,” he explained.

According to Cohen, Eisenkot intends to begin coalition negotiations with parties that already share his political positions, seeking to establish an agreed framework before approaching additional potential partners.

“We will be able to reach common ground with them very quickly, and that will also serve as the basis for anyone joining us from any party that wants to move forward with us,” Cohen said.

He added that participation in the proposed government would depend on acceptance of a common set of governing principles.

The coalition would be established “on the principles we have set and the basic guidelines that all four parties will formulate together,” Cohen said.

The final tally following the presidential consultations showed 67 MKs recommending Eisenkot, compared with 46 supporting Netanyahu. The seven members of United Torah Judaism declined to recommend either candidate, amid continuing disagreements over legislation protecting yeshiva students from military conscription.

Six parties ultimately backed Eisenkot: Yashar!, Beyachad, Yisrael Beiteinu, the Democrats, Ra’am, and the Joint Arab List. Netanyahu received recommendations from Likud, Shas, Religious Zionism, Otzma Yehudit, and Zehut.

The Arab parties’ support does not necessarily mean they will participate in an Eisenkot government. Mansour Abbas, the leader of Ra’am, has called for the rapid establishment of a new administration while indicating that his party does not seek control over its security policies. Representatives of the Joint Arab List have likewise acknowledged substantial disagreements with Eisenkot, describing their recommendation primarily as an effort to prevent Netanyahu from returning to power.

Herzog must now determine which candidate has the best prospect of assembling a government capable of securing the confidence of at least 61 Knesset members. The president’s decision will mark the beginning of coalition negotiations that could prove considerably more difficult than obtaining the initial recommendations.

Two elevator technicians were injured early Friday morning in a workplace accident at a high-rise building on Masada Street in Bnei Brak, after one worker fell into an elevator shaft and his colleague was hurt while attempting to prevent the fall.

The more seriously injured worker, approximately 30 years old, sustained injuries to his head, neck, and legs and was listed in moderate condition. His 23-year-old coworker suffered light injuries. Both were transported to Beilinson Hospital in Petach Tikvah.

According to initial reports, the two technicians were carrying out repairs while standing on a ladder inside the elevator shaft. At some point, one of the workers lost his balance and fell. His colleague attempted to grab him but was unable to stop the fall and was injured during the incident.

Emergency responders from Hatzalah, Magen David Adom, and United Hatzalah were dispatched to the building to assist the injured workers.

Hatzalah operations officer Menachem Indig, together with EMTs Eli Bitton and Moishy Indig, reported that the 30-year-old technician had suffered multiple injuries after elevator cables fell on him from a considerable height.

“When we arrived at the scene, we found an elevator technician, a man approximately 30 years old, suffering from injuries to his head, neck, and lower extremities after being struck by elevator cables that fell on him from a great height. Together with Hatzalah and MDA EMTs and paramedics, we provided initial medical treatment, including immobilization and bandaging. He was evacuated in moderate condition in an MDA intensive care ambulance staffed by Hatzalah volunteers for further treatment in the trauma room at Beilinson Hospital in Petach Tikvah,” the responders said.

United Hatzalah EMTs Yaakov Yisroel Malka, Aharon Lehrer, and Moishy Kreutzer also treated the victims at the scene.

“We were told that the worker was repairing an elevator when he slipped from a ladder into the shaft, suffering moderate injuries to his head and limbs. A United Hatzalah ambulance crew provided medical treatment and transported another worker, a 23-year-old man who sustained light injuries, to Beilinson Hospital in Petach Tikvah. United Hatzalah’s resilience teams also operated at the scene due to the nature of the incident,” they said.

The accident prompted an additional response from United Hatzalah’s psychological support personnel, who assisted at the scene following the frightening incident.

The circumstances surrounding the fall have not yet been fully established. Initial accounts indicate that the worker lost his footing while performing repairs inside the shaft, while Hatzalah responders also reported that falling elevator cables struck him.

A separate local emergency report described the second injured worker as 29 years old, rather than 23. Both accounts agreed that one technician sustained moderate injuries and the other was lightly injured.

The incident follows other serious workplace accidents involving elevator equipment in Israel. In May, an elevator technician was killed in nearby Givat Shmuel after becoming trapped beneath a freight elevator during maintenance work at a commercial center.

Israel’s occupational safety authorities have repeatedly emphasized the importance of protective equipment, secure working platforms, and strict safety procedures when technicians perform repairs at heights or inside elevator shafts.

Israel is facing growing uncertainty over the future of its relationship with the United States following the Democratic takeover of Congress and President Donald Trump’s announcement that American military assistance to Israel will end by the close of 2026. The developments have raised serious concerns in Yerushalayim about the durability of American support, particularly as Israel confronts ongoing conflicts involving Iran, Lebanon, and Gaza.

A Wall Street Journal analysis describes a potentially historic turning point in relations between Washington and Yerushalayim, with growing criticism of Israel among Democrats now accompanied by increasing frustration within Republican circles, including among figures close to Trump.

The diplomatic uncertainty comes at a particularly difficult moment for Israel. Last month’s elections failed to produce a decisive parliamentary majority, leaving Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot competing to assemble the country’s next governing coalition.

Netanyahu had emphasized his close relationship with Trump throughout the election campaign, portraying his access to the American president as a major diplomatic advantage. But the political upheaval in Washington has complicated that argument, raising questions about whether even Netanyahu’s longstanding personal ties to Trump can protect Israel from a broader shift in American policy.

Josh Krasna, a former Israeli diplomat and senior researcher at the Moshe Dayan Center, described the atmosphere in Israel as one of extraordinary alarm.

“There is unimaginable panic in Israel,” Krasna said. “Israelis were raised to believe that the Americans would always be our friends, and in a sense, this was a wake-up call.”

Although Israel continues to enjoy substantial support on Capitol Hill, the Democratic victories have increased the number of lawmakers likely to demand restrictions on military assistance, impose conditions on weapons transfers, or challenge Israeli military operations.

Danny Citrinowicz, a senior researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, warned that future American assistance packages could face significantly tougher congressional scrutiny.

“Future financial assistance could face strict limitations, and Congress will demand much closer oversight of the use of American weapons, particularly regarding Israeli policy toward the Palestinians,” Citrinowicz said.

Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, Citrinowicz suggested that the consequences could extend well beyond financial assistance. Future American administrations, he warned, might become less willing to veto resolutions critical of Israel at the United Nations and could draw a sharper distinction between defending Israel against attacks and supporting Israeli-initiated military campaigns.

The changing political atmosphere was also evident in a public exchange involving Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid, who proposed traveling to the United States to rebuild support for Israel.

Brad Lander, the newly elected Democratic congressman from New York, responded sharply to the suggestion.

“We are not thirsty for campaign tours and performances. We are hungry to see respect for international law and human rights.”

The growing divide reflects years of deteriorating relations between Netanyahu and significant portions of the Democratic Party. Critics of the prime minister have long argued that his close identification with Republican leaders came at the expense of Israel’s traditionally bipartisan standing in Washington.

Democratic opposition to Israeli policies intensified during the Gaza war, but the latest developments suggest that Israel’s difficulties are no longer confined to one political party.

On Election Day, Trump reportedly surprised Israeli officials by announcing during a Fox News interview that American military assistance to Israel would be discontinued “by the end of this year.”

The president presented the decision as an effort to neutralize a central campaign issue used by Democratic candidates who had called for ending American assistance to Israel.

Among those candidates was Abdul El-Sayed, who won Michigan’s Senate race after campaigning on a platform that included opposition to continued military aid.

Following the Republican defeats, Vice President JD Vance reportedly pointed to voter dissatisfaction with the Iran war and American relations with Israel as contributing factors in the election results.

Dan Shapiro, who previously served in senior American diplomatic and national security positions, offered a particularly stark assessment of Netanyahu’s political standing in Washington.

“Netanyahu has become toxic to almost every Democrat and also to many Republicans who associate the war with their defeat. This is an emergency for Israel. If it wants to preserve this relationship, it cannot happen with Netanyahu.”

The tensions have prompted comparisons with the 1956 Suez Crisis, when President Dwight Eisenhower’s administration threatened sanctions against Israel following its military operation in the Sinai Peninsula.

Iranian officials have also invoked the historical comparison, with a spokesman for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps drawing parallels between the current American position in the Strait of Hormuz and the diplomatic difficulties faced by Britain and France during the Suez confrontation.

Despite the severity of that earlier crisis, Israel and the United States eventually rebuilt their relationship, which subsequently developed into one of America’s most significant strategic partnerships.

The immediate focus in Israel is now shifting to President Isaac Herzog, who must decide whether to give Netanyahu or Eisenkot the first opportunity to form a government. Neither political camp emerged from the election with a clear majority, and both face difficult coalition negotiations.

Eisenkot has pledged to make repairing Israel’s relationship with Washington a central priority if he becomes prime minister.

“Under my leadership, we will renew and deepen the partnership, strengthen its bipartisan foundations, and work toward a Middle East defined not only by the absence of conflict, but by opportunities and cooperation,” Eisenkot said.

The uncertainty surrounding Trump’s announcement is particularly significant because the existing American-Israeli security assistance agreement provides approximately $3.8 billion annually through 2028. The president has not explained how the proposed termination at the end of 2026 would affect those commitments or outstanding weapons purchases.

Trump has nevertheless emphasized that Israel would remain free to purchase American military equipment even after direct assistance ends. He has also said that Netanyahu himself raised the possibility of eliminating the aid, arguing that Israel has developed sufficient economic strength to finance more of its defense requirements independently.

The financial complications extend beyond the current assistance agreement. A State Department document reviewed by the Wall Street Journal indicated that Israel had approximately $10 billion in outstanding American weapons orders, as of April, that would require financing beyond 2028.

Avner Golov, a former senior Israeli National Security Council official, suggested that the present crisis should force Israeli policymakers to reconsider longstanding assumptions about the country’s closest ally.

“On October 7, we learned a hard lesson that we need to listen to our enemies. Now we have learned that we need to do exactly the same thing with our friends.”

The Palestinian delegation to the United Nations is preparing a series of resolutions condemning Israel’s presence and construction activities in Yehuda and Shomron, eastern Yerushalayim, and the Golan Heights, with votes expected in the UN General Assembly before the end of November.

The diplomatic initiative comes as Israel’s political leadership is occupied with efforts to form a new government following the recent elections. Palestinian officials are seeking to take advantage of the political transition to increase international pressure on Israel and secure broader opposition to its policies.

According to a report published Friday morning, the proposed resolutions address several issues, including assistance for Palestinian refugees, protection of their property, and condemnation of Israeli construction in areas claimed by the Palestinians.

Particular attention is being directed toward the E1 area near Maale Adumim, where Israeli plans to advance construction tenders have generated international opposition. Palestinian officials are pressing for language explicitly criticizing development in the strategically sensitive area.

One of the most consequential proposals would call on the United Nations to formally declare that it does not recognize Israel’s presence in Yehuda and Shomron.

The Palestinians are also seeking international endorsement of policies that distinguish between Israeli territory within the pre-1967 lines and communities and activities in Yehuda and Shomron. The objective is to strengthen the diplomatic framework for treating the two areas differently in international agreements and government policies.

Intensive negotiations over the wording of the proposed resolutions have been taking place in recent days, with Palestinian representatives focusing particularly on securing support from European Union member states.

However, consultations among the EU’s 27 members this week exposed significant disagreements over the proposals. European representatives have reportedly been unable to reach a unified position on any of the resolutions under discussion.

Despite the lack of European consensus, diplomatic officials believe the Palestinian delegation intends to proceed with the General Assembly votes rather than delay the initiative in hopes of securing unanimous European backing.

Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, is meanwhile leading a diplomatic effort to counter the Palestinian campaign.

Israeli representatives have been holding discussions with foreign delegations in an attempt to soften the language of the resolutions, persuade countries to oppose them, and prevent the Palestinians from securing the broad international support they are seeking.

The Palestinian initiative comes amid an already tense international dispute over construction in E1. In October, the European Union publicly urged Israel to reverse settlement expansion in the area and warned businesses against participating in construction projects there.

European governments have repeatedly expressed support for a Palestinian state alongside Israel and opposition to Israeli construction beyond the pre-1967 lines. Nevertheless, those shared positions have not translated into agreement among all 27 EU members over the specific wording of the latest Palestinian resolutions.

The proposed measures would be voted on by the General Assembly, where resolutions generally carry political and diplomatic weight rather than the binding enforcement authority associated with certain Security Council decisions.

Congressional Democrats are preparing to challenge President Donald Trump’s proposed $1.5 trillion military budget when they take control of the House and Senate in January, setting up a major confrontation over defense spending, the administration’s military campaign in Iran, and the leadership of War Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Following their victories in Tuesday’s midterm elections, Democratic lawmakers are signaling that they intend to use their new congressional majorities to block additional military expenditures, investigate Pentagon operations, and demand greater accountability from senior defense officials.

Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the leading Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, outlined the party’s priorities in remarks reported Thursday by The Center Square, arguing that the administration’s military spending plans are excessive and would come at the expense of domestic programs.

“We must push for the development of a more realistic and sustainable approach to our national security, one that does not require a defense budget in excess of $1 trillion or one paid for with draconian cuts to critical domestic programs,” Smith said in a statement.

Smith also indicated that Democrats would pursue extensive oversight of Pentagon finances, including examinations of how military funding is allocated and whether existing resources are being managed efficiently.

The White House and Hegseth have defended the administration’s request, maintaining that a substantial increase in military spending is necessary to restore American military capabilities, rebuild depleted weapons inventories, and strengthen the country’s ability to deter hostile nations.

During a July 21 hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee, Hegseth warned lawmakers that approving anything less than the full amount would jeopardize the nation’s security.

“Not funding this department at 1.5 trillion, I believe, is the greatest threat that our nation faces,” Hegseth told lawmakers.

The war secretary argued that years of insufficient investment had weakened military readiness and that the proposed funding would help prepare American forces for future threats.

“We know the best way to create peace is to prepare for war, to deter it,” he told the committee.

Trump previously promoted the proposal in a January 7 Truth Social message, saying the increased funding would allow the United States to develop a “Dream Military” capable of keeping Americans “SAFE and SECURE, regardless of foe.”

Administration officials say the additional resources would support expanded weapons manufacturing, improvements in military technology, greater operational readiness, and the replacement of munitions consumed during the conflict with Iran.

The Pentagon’s financial management is also expected to receive increased attention. Although the department accounts for approximately 17% of annual federal spending, it has never successfully completed a comprehensive financial audit, according to The Center Square.

Congress has not yet completed work on the fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, which sets military policy and authorizes expenditures, or the separate appropriations legislation that provides the actual funding.

The House and Senate versions of the authorization legislation each provide approximately $1.15 trillion, while the defense appropriations proposal would allocate roughly $1.07 trillion.

Republican leaders had intended to satisfy an additional $350 billion requested by the administration through budget reconciliation, a procedure that can allow qualifying legislation to pass the Senate without overcoming the usual 60-vote filibuster threshold.

But the Republican-controlled Congress has only about eight weeks remaining before Democrats assume power, leaving limited time to finalize the legislation during the lame-duck session.

If lawmakers instead approve a temporary extension of existing spending levels and postpone the major funding decisions until January, the incoming Democratic majorities could prevent the administration from securing the additional $350 billion.

Democrats would face greater legal and political obstacles in attempting to stop Trump’s military operations in Iran directly. Legislation ordering the president to end the campaign could be vetoed, and overriding that veto would require two-thirds support in both chambers.

Congressional Democrats could nevertheless exert considerable influence by refusing to approve new funding for the conflict, although previously appropriated military resources could remain available for continued operations.

Trump could respond by vetoing broader defense spending legislation containing restrictions on Iran, potentially creating a confrontation over the Pentagon’s budget.

Smith has identified the military campaign as one of his foremost oversight priorities.

“The list of potential oversight topics is long, but the illegal war against Iran is top of mind for me and the American people,” Smith said, according to The Center Square.

He also intends to increase demands for public testimony from senior Pentagon officials, arguing that Congress needs more information about military operations, spending decisions, and the administration’s national security strategy.

The Pentagon’s budget dispute is unfolding as Hegseth faces mounting political pressure following Republican losses in the midterms. Questions about his leadership and the administration’s handling of the Iran war have fueled speculation about his future in the Cabinet.

Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, introduced eight articles of impeachment against Hegseth in September and is preparing to renew his effort when the House returns next week. The allegations include violations of congressional war powers and improper conduct involving American military operations overseas.

Hegseth has rejected demands that he resign and has vowed to continue defending the administration’s military policies.

“Just like the president, we don’t back down. And that especially applies now,” Hegseth said in a video message outside the Pentagon.

Trump, meanwhile, defended Hegseth during an interview with ABC News on Thursday, saying he has “every intention” of retaining him as war secretary.

“I get these calls, you know, about him. I don’t understand why,” Trump said, referring to complaints about Hegseth.

Smith has also indicated that his committee’s investigations could extend to military contracts, alleged favoritism in Pentagon spending, American strikes in the Caribbean and Latin America, and the deployment of military personnel to American cities.

He has proposed restoring a dedicated oversight and investigations subcommittee to examine those issues and said he intends to hold public hearings on the Iran war, regardless of whether the conflict is still underway when Democrats assume control of Congress.

President Donald Trump blamed Democrats’ sweeping midterm election victories for Thursday’s sharp stock market selloff, accusing the party of triggering massive losses on Wall Street just two days after winning control of both chambers of Congress.

The president argued that the election results had shaken investor confidence and damaged retirement accounts, even as he predicted that the American economy would eventually recover and reach new heights.

“The Stock Market suffered one of the Worst Days in History based on the results of the Election,” Trump wrote Thursday in a post on Truth Social. “Such a sad thing to watch! It took so much work to get us to a level that no one has ever seen before, and then this.

“Your 401(k)s have, therefore, dropped. Remember, it wasn’t Republicans, it was Dumocrats,” Trump added. “Do not fear, however, we will soon, one way or the other, be BIGGER AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Wall Street suffered substantial losses during Thursday’s session, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbling 1,833.06 points. The technology-heavy Nasdaq Composite plunged 5.52%, pushing it more than 10% below its record high from the previous month, while the S&P 500 declined 4.36%.

Technology companies, particularly those tied to artificial intelligence, semiconductor manufacturing, and data center construction, were among the hardest hit as investors reassessed the potential consequences of the Democratic takeover of Congress.

According to CNBC, market participants have grown concerned that Democratic lawmakers could introduce policies that slow the expansion of AI infrastructure, an industry that has helped drive economic growth and stock market gains in recent years.

Semiconductor giants Broadcom and Nvidia suffered especially severe declines, with their shares falling approximately 10% and 9%, respectively. Qualcomm and Oracle also recorded significant losses as the technology sector endured a second consecutive day of selling.

Tim Holland, chief investment officer at Orion, said investors appeared reluctant to maintain their exposure to AI-related companies until the implications of the election became clearer.

Investors are “stepping away until they get a better sense of the implications of the midterms around the AI capex cycle in particular, which is the biggest economic tailwind we’ve had going for us for the last, call it, three years,” Holland told CNBC.

“It’s about tone and tenor from the party that did really well, incredibly well, at the federal level and at the state level,” Holland added.

The sharp decline followed a very different market reaction Wednesday, when stocks surged in the first trading session after the midterm elections. The Dow gained more than 1,500 points that day, recording its strongest performance since April 2025, when Trump announced a temporary suspension of reciprocal tariffs.

The S&P 500 and Nasdaq also finished Wednesday higher, although their gains were considerably smaller than the Dow’s.

Tuesday’s elections delivered major victories for Democrats, who recaptured both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The party flipped at least 39 House seats and at least seven Senate seats, giving it control of the legislative branch for the final two years of Trump’s presidency.

Additional market reporting showed that Thursday’s selloff wiped out roughly $5.4 trillion in combined market value from companies in the S&P 500 and Nasdaq, while the Nasdaq recorded its worst single-day performance in approximately 18 months.

The selloff was particularly severe among companies involved in building artificial intelligence infrastructure. Investors were weighing the possibility that newly elected Democratic officials could impose restrictions on data center construction, including in states where the industry has been expanding rapidly.

The downturn also reflected broader concerns about the enormous sums being invested in artificial intelligence and whether those expenditures would produce sufficient returns. Losses spread beyond technology stocks as the trading session progressed.

Despite Thursday’s steep decline, the major indexes remained higher for the year, with the S&P 500 up approximately 7.4%, the Dow up 7.2%, and the Nasdaq up 4.6% since the beginning of 2026.

Democrats are preparing an aggressive legislative and investigative campaign against President Donald Trump when they assume control of both chambers of Congress in January, with plans to challenge his healthcare policies, tariffs, and military operations in Iran during their first 100 hours in power. But despite their midterm election victories, the party faces a major obstacle: Trump retains the authority to veto legislation, and Democrats do not have the votes to override him without significant Republican support.

The incoming Democratic majorities are developing a rapid-fire legislative agenda intended to demonstrate their priorities immediately after taking office. Their proposals could encounter resistance not only from the White House but also from Senate procedural rules that generally require 60 votes to advance legislation over a filibuster.

Overturning a presidential veto requires approval from two-thirds of both the House and Senate, a threshold Democrats cannot reach independently. Consequently, even legislation approved by both chambers could be rejected by Trump unless enough Republicans break with the president.

Trump has already warned Democrats that winning congressional majorities does not give them unrestricted power to implement their agenda.

“They are in control, but they’re really not in control,” Trump told Fox News following Tuesday’s elections. “They can send over 50 different, great bills that they’re all excited about, and I send them back with a nice stamp veto.”

According to a Thursday report in the New York Post, Democratic leaders intend to move quickly when the new Congress convenes, potentially bringing major proposals directly to the House floor rather than allowing them to spend weeks or months moving through the traditional committee process.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, who is positioned to become speaker, has identified healthcare affordability and Trump’s trade policies as central targets of the initial legislative push.

Among the proposals being considered are reinstating enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies, reversing nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid spending reductions, and rolling back tariffs imposed by the Trump administration.

Jeffries has pledged “bold, dramatic change” following the elections, portraying the Democratic victories as a mandate to confront the administration’s policies.

“Fighting for an affordable America, that’s what unites Democrats all across the country,” Jeffries said while describing the party’s agenda ahead of the election.

Democratic leaders are hoping that swift congressional action will put pressure on Trump to either negotiate or publicly reject legislation addressing issues such as healthcare costs and consumer prices.

However, the party’s own ideological divisions could complicate those efforts. Progressive lawmakers are advocating broader changes than some moderate Democrats are prepared to support, creating potential disagreements over which proposals should receive priority.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and other progressive figures are promoting measures that would lower the Medicare eligibility age to 55, broaden federal benefits, and establish stronger restrictions on artificial intelligence development.

While Democrats may struggle to enact legislation over Trump’s objections, their control of Congress will provide substantial authority in areas that do not require the president’s signature.

Congressional committees will be able to conduct investigations, issue subpoenas, and summon administration officials for hearings. A Democratic Senate could also delay or reject Trump’s judicial nominees, potentially complicating his efforts to fill vacancies on the federal bench.

Among the subjects expected to attract scrutiny are financial dealings involving Trump family businesses, federal immigration enforcement practices, and the administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, who is expected to lead the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, signaled the confrontational approach Democrats may adopt with a brief warning on election night.

“Lawyer up.”

The party could also initiate impeachment proceedings against Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, whose handling of military operations has drawn criticism from Democrats and some Republicans. Even if the House voted to impeach him, however, conviction and removal would require a two-thirds majority in the Senate.

Democrats are also considering congressional war powers measures intended to restrict Trump’s military campaign against Iran. Such legislation could face a presidential veto, requiring substantial bipartisan backing to become law.

Despite the anticipated confrontation, Jeffries has indicated that Democrats would remain open to negotiating with the White House on issues where common ground can be found.

Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont has also urged his colleagues to avoid allowing investigations and political disputes to consume the party’s agenda at the expense of the economic issues that helped propel Democrats to victory.

“We can’t turn this into just a vengeance tour,” Welch said.

Democratic leaders have also spent months preparing for the transition. Jeffries established five policy working groups addressing healthcare, housing, groceries and consumer goods, energy and utility costs, and caregiving. Each group pairs moderate and progressive lawmakers in an effort to develop proposals capable of winning support across the Democratic caucus.

The planned investigations are expected to extend beyond the issues already identified. Democratic lawmakers are examining possible inquiries into cryptocurrency ventures associated with Trump’s family, federal contracting decisions, government spending, and the activities of the Department of Government Efficiency.

Republicans and White House officials have rejected allegations of wrongdoing and warned that Democratic investigations could become politically motivated efforts to undermine the administration.

The incoming majority will also have to settle internal disagreements over how aggressively to pursue impeachment and other confrontational measures. Some Democrats favor an expansive oversight campaign, while others are urging the party to concentrate on healthcare, inflation, and other economic concerns that dominated the election.

For now, Democratic leaders are preparing legislation and committee investigations simultaneously, setting up an immediate confrontation with the White House when Congress reconvenes in January.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump’s ambitious plans for a presidential library that could raise nearly $1 billion are drawing growing scrutiny from Democrats preparing to take control of Congress, with lawmakers threatening investigations into corporate contributions, lawsuit settlements, and potential conflicts of interest involving the project.

According to a CBS News report published Thursday, the Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Foundation anticipates collecting $950 million by the end of 2027, including approximately $600 million during that year alone. The projections were contained in an October 2025 application to the Internal Revenue Service obtained by the network.

The foundation is overseen by Trump’s son Eric Trump and his son-in-law Michael Boulos, and its fundraising efforts are expected to intensify as the president enters the final two years of his administration.

“He undoubtedly recognizes that the library development season opens now, and he will go for it,” a senior administration official told CBS News.

Democrats, who won control of both the House and Senate in Tuesday’s midterm elections, are signaling that the foundation’s financial arrangements could become a major target of congressional oversight when the new Congress convenes in January.

“The donors bankrolling his personal vanity project will have to answer to a new majority in Congress,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., told CBS News.

A significant portion of the money associated with the foundation has come from settlements reached with major corporations that previously faced lawsuits brought by Trump.

ABC News agreed to pay $15 million following a defamation dispute, while Meta committed $22 million to the library as part of a settlement concerning the suspension of Trump’s social media accounts.

Paramount reached a $16 million settlement involving Trump’s lawsuit over CBS’s editing of a “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris. Elon Musk’s social media platform X also agreed to resolve separate litigation for $10 million.

Trump’s financial disclosure filed in June reported $56.5 million in payments to the foundation from ABC, Meta, and Paramount. Another $8 million from X was disclosed as having been paid directly to the president.

Questions have nevertheless emerged about the status of some of those contributions. In responses to congressional inquiries, ABC indicated that its payment remained in escrow, while Meta confirmed that its settlement money had been earmarked for the library without clarifying whether the funds had actually been transferred.

The foundation also received a $50 million contribution in January from Japanese investment conglomerate SoftBank, intended to finance an exhibition examining relations between the United States and Japan.

The donation has attracted attention because the Department of Energy subsequently announced plans to lease federal property in Ohio to a company affiliated with SB Energy, a SoftBank subsidiary, for construction of a major artificial intelligence data center.

Administration officials have maintained that the project was already being developed before SoftBank made its contribution. The federal lease agreement was finalized approximately one month after the donation.

Another issue involves PublicSquare, a company whose board includes Donald Trump Jr. The foundation has used a donation-processing platform operated by the company, although a representative said Trump Jr. played no role in establishing or managing the fundraising page.

The proposed presidential library itself has also generated controversy, particularly over its design, location, and possible commercial uses.

In March, Trump presented architectural renderings of a 47-story tower in downtown Miami, complete with gold-colored escalators, an Air Force One aircraft, and a statue commemorating his response to the July 2024 assassination attempt.

The president later indicated that the development would “most likely” function as a hotel rather than a conventional presidential library, raising additional questions about the project’s ultimate purpose.

Those questions have become part of a federal lawsuit challenging Florida’s decision to donate a 2.63-acre parcel in Miami valued at more than $67 million for the development.

The plaintiffs argue that transferring such valuable property for a project associated with a sitting president could violate constitutional prohibitions against certain financial benefits provided by states to federal officeholders.

The Justice Department has sought dismissal of the case on the grounds that Trump is immune from the lawsuit. A federal judge has temporarily suspended discovery while considering the government’s arguments.

Another unresolved question concerns a Boeing 747 aircraft donated by Qatar. Trump had previously discussed eventually transferring the plane to his presidential library, although Eric Trump has since indicated that the aircraft’s inclusion is no longer an immediate priority.

White House spokesman Davis Ingle rejected criticism of the development, predicting that the completed library would be “one of the most magnificent buildings in the world” and would serve as a lasting tribute to Trump’s presidency.

A onetime Trump adviser, however, suggested that the library’s fundraising operation reflects the president’s longstanding business approach.

“The library is one of the last few places he can squeeze people for money,” the adviser told CBS News. “That’s what a businessman does. He just creates opportunities.”

Additional reporting indicates that the incoming Democratic majority is preparing a wider examination of Trump’s financial dealings, extending beyond the library to businesses, donors, and government contractors with ties to his administration.

Representative Robert Garcia of California, the leading Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, issued a blunt warning following the election results: “Lawyer up.”

The foundation is expected to file financial disclosures covering 2025 by November 15. Its earlier IRS application projected that compensation expenses for foundation personnel would rise from $400,000 in 2025 to $1.2 million in 2027, although the organization’s bylaws prohibit paying trustees for serving in that capacity.

The library’s fundraising operation is led by Meredith O’Rourke, a longtime Trump fundraiser. Meanwhile, the foundation’s use of PublicSquare’s donation platform has attracted additional attention because securities filings show that Donald Trump Jr. began receiving $42,000 per month in consulting fees from the company in August 2024. His spokesperson said he had no involvement with the library’s fundraising page.

The Miami property dispute remains before U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz II, who has halted evidence-gathering while considering the administration’s request to dismiss the lawsuit. Lawyers challenging the land transfer have indicated that they would likely appeal if the case is thrown out.

{Matzav.com}

United Torah Judaism MK Yitzchok Pindrus insisted Thursday that his party’s refusal to recommend Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to form Israel’s next government does not mean it is abandoning its longstanding relationship with the religious right. However, he emphasized that UTJ is not committed to any candidate and will base its political decisions primarily on securing a solution to the military draft crisis facing yeshiva bochurim.

Speaking with Arutz Sheva-Israel National News at the President’s Residence, Pindrus sought to clarify UTJ’s position following its decision to withhold an endorsement during consultations over the formation of the next coalition. He explained that the party remains deeply committed to Israel’s religious community, regardless of which political leader ultimately receives its support.

“We will not abandon them for a moment. The leaders of the Torah world are deeply concerned about the religious community in the State of Israel and our partnership with them,” he said. “Right now, we are not recommending anyone, but if we enter negotiations with anyone, there is no doubt that the religious community in Israel will remain an integral part of our agenda.”

When questioned about the possibility that UTJ’s refusal to back Netanyahu could help topple the prime minister’s political bloc, Pindrus rejected the premise of the question.

“How did you get to Netanyahu? How did you get to the right? How did you get to that?” he responded.

The MK also addressed reports that opposition figures Avigdor Lieberman and Gadi Eisenkot have been attempting to persuade the chareidi parties to consider joining an alternative governing coalition.

“Netanyahu is courting us too. It’s all fine. We’re not aligning ourselves with anyone just yet.”

Pindrus made clear that the overriding consideration for UTJ is finding an acceptable arrangement that would protect yeshiva bochurim from military conscription and the enforcement measures currently being pursued against them.

“We are committed to finding a solution, as I said, including on matters concerning the religious community, but right now, above all, on the issue of yeshiva students who are being persecuted,” he said.

Asked whether UTJ would oppose an effort to remove Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, a move that could become part of the political maneuvering surrounding the next government, Pindrus declined to announce a position of his own.

“We will receive instructions, and that is what we will do.”

The interview also touched on the possibility of cooperation with Lieberman, whose previous statements and policies targeting the chareidi community have made him a particularly controversial figure among chareidi voters.

Pindrus suggested that past political hostility should not automatically rule out future cooperation, pointing to criticism his own party has received since declining to endorse Netanyahu.

“I was told that there are media outlets now speaking against us because we didn’t recommend Netanyahu, including some very serious things. So what, should we not forgive them? It’s all fine,” he replied.

During Thursday’s consultations with President Isaac Herzog, UTJ representatives reinforced that position, insisting that the next government must address the treatment of lomdei Torah. Pindrus argued that the longstanding principle of Toraso umnaso must remain the foundation of any arrangement governing military service for yeshiva bochurim.

The delegation, which included Pindrus, Yitzchok Goldknopf and Moshe Rosenthal, was questioned by Herzog about whether the party would accept a framework requiring chareidi men who are not studying to enlist. Pindrus maintained that UTJ’s traditional position applies to those whose Torah study is their full-time occupation.

Goldknopf went further in distancing the party from automatic allegiance to Netanyahu, declaring that UTJ was not obligated to any political bloc.

The decision has significantly complicated Netanyahu’s efforts to remain prime minister. Following the completion of presidential consultations, Gadi Eisenkot emerged with recommendations from 67 Knesset members, compared with 46 for Netanyahu, although neither candidate has secured a governing majority.

Herzog is expected to announce Sunday which candidate will receive the first opportunity to form a government. That candidate will initially have 28 days to assemble a coalition, with the possibility of a 14-day extension.

For UTJ, the central question remains whether either prospective prime minister can deliver an acceptable arrangement for yeshiva bochurim, with Pindrus making clear that the party is prepared to negotiate but will not commit itself politically before receiving guidance from the Gedolei HaTorah.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has firmly denied reports that he is preparing to leave President Donald Trump’s administration following the Republican Party’s midterm election defeat, declaring that he intends to remain in his position until the president completes his term in office.

Speaking to The New York Times on Thursday, Rubio dismissed speculation that he was considering stepping down to position himself for a possible presidential campaign in 2028. Remaining in the administration until the end of Trump’s presidency had “always been my plan,” he said.

“I don’t know where these things come from, to be honest with you,” Rubio said when questioned about reports that his departure could be imminent.

“I love the work I’m doing,” he continued. “And plus I always laugh when they say he’s going to leave his job. I go, ‘Which one?’”

Rubio, who serves as both secretary of state and White House national security adviser, was responding to a report in Britain’s The Independent suggesting that he might resign in the aftermath of Tuesday’s elections to begin preparing for a potential bid for the Republican presidential nomination.

The British newspaper, citing senior Republican figures in Washington and government officials in London, reported that Rubio’s departure was becoming increasingly likely following the Democratic Party’s capture of both chambers of Congress.

Rubio, however, rejected attempts to draw him into a discussion about his political ambitions beyond the Trump administration.

“I literally will not talk about 2028 anymore,” he told The New York Times during an interview conducted in his White House office. “I just won’t do it.”

The secretary of state was also pressed about Vice President JD Vance’s explanation for the Republican Party’s disappointing election performance, particularly his contention that the administration’s war with Iran had contributed significantly to the losses.

In a lengthy social media statement Wednesday, Vance argued that dissatisfaction over the Iran conflict, economic concerns, and the administration’s relationship with Israel had influenced voters who previously supported Trump but backed Democrats in the midterms.

Asked whether he agreed with the vice president’s assessment, Rubio initially declined to weigh in on the political fallout, explaining that he was not “really involved in domestic politics.”

He nevertheless offered a strong defense of Trump’s leadership, saying the president “deserves a tremendous amount of credit” for making difficult decisions that he believes serve the country’s interests, even when those decisions carry political risks.

“Ultimately, that is the price of leadership – is the willingness to do things that may not be politically popular or expedient but are necessary for your country and its long-term future,” Rubio said.

The resignation rumors prompted unusually forceful denials from administration officials. The State Department rejected the reports as fabricated, while the White House insisted that Trump’s senior advisers remained united behind his agenda.

Bloomberg also reported Thursday that Rubio and his advisers had discussed his political future following the elections, citing people familiar with those conversations. According to the report, Rubio had not reached a decision about leaving and no departure timetable had been established.

Rubio is widely regarded as a possible contender for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination, alongside Vice President Vance. He has previously indicated that he would support Vance if the vice president decided to seek the nomination.

Rubio’s prominence in the administration has been enhanced by his unusual combination of responsibilities as secretary of state and national security adviser, giving him considerable influence over American foreign policy. He also joined Trump at a campaign rally in Kansas on Sunday, just two days before the elections.

The secretary of state is scheduled to address the Federalist Society’s National Lawyers Convention next week, providing another opportunity for public remarks as speculation about his political future continues.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is refusing to back down in the face of mounting impeachment threats following the Republican Party’s midterm election losses, accusing his opponents of attempting to destroy him politically as President Donald Trump publicly defended his leadership of the Pentagon.

In a defiant video posted Thursday on social media, Hegseth lashed out at Republican Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who has threatened to pursue impeachment proceedings unless the secretary voluntarily leaves office.

Hegseth charged that “a disgruntled, defeated congressman, along with all his Democrat allies, has also dropped sham articles of impeachment against yours truly.”

“Just like they tried against President Trump twice. You see, their policies don’t work, so their obsession with political theater disguised as power drives them to try to destroy their opponents. It’s all about the politics of personal destruction. Didn’t work against President Trump, and it won’t work with me. You can rest assured of that,” he added.

Massie has made clear that he intends to continue his effort to remove Hegseth. According to CNN, the Kentucky Republican is preparing to force a congressional vote on impeachment, leaving open only one possibility that would persuade him to abandon the initiative.

In a Wednesday social media post, Massie declared that “there is one contingency in which I won’t reintroduce the articles of impeachment: Hegseth resigns.”

The congressman followed up Thursday with a warning that his own impeachment proposal could prove relatively mild compared with the investigations Hegseth might face under Democratic control of Congress.

“My Hegseth impeachment resolution is a much gentler version of what’s coming when Dem’s control Congress. They’ll have hearings & trials.”

Democrats emerged from Tuesday’s elections with majorities in both the House and Senate, placing the Trump administration on course for considerably more aggressive congressional oversight when the new Congress convenes.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, who is expected to become the next House speaker, added his voice to the demands for Hegseth’s departure.

“Why is Pete Hegseth still around?” Jeffries wrote Thursday on X.

President Trump, however, showed no indication that he was preparing to dismiss his defense chief. Asked in the Oval Office about possible changes in Pentagon leadership, Trump offered an unequivocal endorsement.

“Pete Hegseth has done a fantastic job,” the president told reporters, according to The Hill.

The growing political pressure on Hegseth comes amid criticism of the administration’s handling of the war with Iran, which has emerged as a major issue in the aftermath of the Republican election defeat. Reports have identified public dissatisfaction with the conflict as an important factor in the party’s losses.

Vice President JD Vance acknowledged the political consequences Wednesday, writing on social media, “The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night,”

Vance pointed to polling of voters who backed Trump in 2024 but supported Democrats in the midterms. According to his assessment, those voters placed particular importance on ending the Iran conflict, controlling inflation, prioritizing American interests, and reconsidering Washington’s relationship with Israel.

Trump subsequently agreed that the war had carried a political cost, while maintaining that the military operation had achieved an essential national security objective.

“I thought it was good. I knew that when I went in. We stopped them from having a nuclear weapon, and they’ll never have a nuclear weapon,” the president said.

Massie’s impeachment effort could reach the House floor as soon as next week, before Democrats formally assume control of Congress in January. He plans to use a privileged resolution, a parliamentary procedure that can force lawmakers to address the measure within two legislative days, although Republican leaders could attempt to table it or send it to a committee.

Several Republican lawmakers have privately indicated that they believe the impeachment resolution could attract enough support to pass, according to Fox News. The allegations include Hegseth’s handling of the Iran conflict without congressional authorization and other disputed military operations. Impeachment by the House would not automatically remove Hegseth; a Senate conviction would still be required.

The pressure is also coming from within Republican ranks outside the House. Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina has questioned whether Hegseth remains the right person to lead the Pentagon, warning that the secretary faces “a reckoning” following the election.

Despite Trump’s public expressions of confidence, reports indicate that the president has privately asked advisers whether Hegseth should remain in his position. Pentagon officials have dismissed suggestions that the secretary intends to step aside, insisting that he remains committed to serving through the remainder of Trump’s presidency.