Feed aggregator

TRENTON, N.J. — A long-running federal lawsuit between Bais Brucha and the Township of Toms River took a significant turn during a July 1 court hearing, as a federal judge ordered top township officials—including Mayor Daniel Rodrick—to surrender their government-issued electronic devices as part of the discovery process.

The litigation, which centers on Bais Brucha’s efforts to construct a legally permitted shul in Toms River, has been mired in discovery disputes for more than two years. According to Bais Brucha, the discovery phase has stretched for 26 months, delaying progress in the case and prompting increased scrutiny from the court.

The hearing, held in federal court in Trenton before Judge Zahid N. Quraishi and Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni Quinn, focused largely on the prolonged delays in discovery and the Township’s compliance with court-ordered obligations.

During the proceeding, the judges directed the Township’s legal counsel to immediately notify Mayor Rodrick and other senior township officials that they were required to turn over their government-issued electronic devices for forensic discovery. The devices are expected to be examined as part of the ongoing litigation.

According to Bais Brucha, however, Mayor Rodrick has not complied with the court’s directive and has yet to produce the requested devices.

Representatives of Bais Brucha say they are now evaluating their legal options in light of what they characterize as the Mayor’s failure to comply with the federal court’s order. They contend that the Township has repeatedly resisted discovery throughout the course of the litigation, contributing to the lengthy delays that have stalled the case.

The dispute over the electronic devices could become a pivotal issue in the lawsuit, with the court expected to determine what consequences, if any, should follow if the discovery order is not obeyed.

The underlying lawsuit concerns Bais Brucha’s efforts to move forward with the construction of a shul, a project the organization maintains fully complies with applicable law. The outcome of the discovery battle is expected to play a significant role in determining how quickly the broader case proceeds toward resolution.

The family of 16-year-old lifeguard Ryder Williams says they are working with the White House to arrange a visit after President Donald Trump announced that he intends to personally honor the California teenager for his courageous rescue of a 10-year-old boy caught in dangerous surf.

According to Ryder’s father, retired firefighter Shane Williams, members of the president’s staff have already reached out, although no official schedule has yet been finalized.

“The White House has contacted us but there’s been no official date or time,” Ryder’s father, retired firefighter Shane Williams, 54, told The California Post.

Trump extended the invitation after dramatic footage of Ryder’s rescue at Seabright Beach spread across social media, drawing nationwide attention. The president said he wants to welcome Ryder and his family to Washington, D.C., where he plans to personally present the young lifeguard with a prestigious civilian award recognizing his heroism.

Despite the sudden national spotlight, Shane Williams said the family is eager to return to everyday routines as Ryder gets ready to begin the school year on Aug. 6.

“We just want to get back to normal life and let him start high school and start playing water polo,” he said.

Ryder’s father also expressed appreciation for the recognition his son has received from President Trump.

“I would love to take my son there and I think he deserves that.”

Shane said Ryder is currently limiting media appearances to interviews coordinated through California State Parks. He added that so many people have been contacting the family since the rescue that he could not even recall which White House official had called because his phone had been “blowing up.”

He also declined to discuss when the family expects to travel to Washington or whether Ryder will meet again with the 10-year-old boy he rescued, explaining that any future announcements will come through California State Parks.

Ryder’s act of heroism took place on July 25, when an unexpected 8-to-10-foot sneaker wave swept 10-year-old Nathaniel Rai, of Dallas, into deep water off Seabright Beach.

The teenage lifeguard fought through pounding waves for approximately two minutes before reaching the unconscious boy in the water.

Another lifeguard, Aaron Bohnen, swam out to assist, and together the two rescuers brought Nathaniel back to shore, where lifesaving efforts successfully revived him.

Nathaniel is expected to make a full recovery from the terrifying ordeal.

The dramatic rescue occurred during an exceptionally busy day for Santa Cruz district lifeguards, who responded to 34 separate rescues along the coastline.

Nathaniel’s father, Sumit Rai, previously praised Ryder’s actions, telling The NY Post he was “so grateful” to the young lifeguard for saving his son’s life.

{Matzav.com}

Calls to prosecute Dr. Anthony Fauci have intensified following his dramatic appearance before a Senate committee, where he repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment rather than answer lawmakers’ questions. While many conservatives are demanding criminal charges, legal experts say sending the former White House chief medical adviser to jail may be far more difficult than his critics believe.

In the hours after Wednesday’s hearing, prominent MAGA figures and Republican allies argued that Fauci should face immediate legal consequences for refusing to testify.

“Why, when Fauci walks off of there today, is he not cuffed?” Steve Bannon, a former adviser to President Donald Trump, asked on his War Room podcast on Wednesday. “People are furious today to cut on this and see Fauci hiding behind the Fifth Amendment … He should die in prison.”

Conservative commentator Matt Walsh echoed that frustration in a post on X.

“Why isn’t he under arrest?” far-right podcaster Matt Walsh wrote on X. “Why isn’t he facing any real consequences? Why aren’t you actually doing anything?”

Appearing before the Senate committee investigating the government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Fauci invoked his constitutional right against self-incrimination more than 100 times. In prepared remarks, he argued that the hearing was designed to trap him rather than uncover the truth.

“The only conclusion I can reach is that the sole reason he is calling me before this committee is to get me to say something, anything, that could vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up, in his words, ‘behind bars,’” Fauci said.

Sen. Rand Paul, who chaired the hearing, has long maintained that Fauci played a role in concealing information about the possible origins of COVID-19.

As demands for Fauci’s prosecution grew louder, WIRED asked constitutional scholars and former federal prosecutors whether Congress could realistically put the longtime public health official behind bars.

One major complication is the preemptive pardon issued by President Joe Biden before leaving office. The pardon covers potential federal offenses committed by Fauci between 2014 and 2025, shielding him from prosecution for conduct during that period. It does not, however, apply to anything Fauci may have said or done after receiving the pardon.

Paul has argued that accepting a presidential pardon eliminates a witness’s ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment for matters covered by that pardon, citing an 1896 Supreme Court ruling.

“I think there is a very real chance that he could be prosecuted for that,” Paul told CBS News after the hearing. “A court ultimately would have to determine: Does the Fifth Amendment apply to someone who already has a pardon?”

Paul also announced that his committee intends to vote next week on whether to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress. A contempt conviction carries a possible penalty of up to one year in prison and a $100,000 fine. Even if the committee approves the measure, it would still require 60 votes on the Senate floor—a threshold viewed as highly unlikely without significant Democratic support.

Legal scholars note that similar constitutional questions have arisen before. Before leaving office in 2020, President Donald Trump granted pardons to several allies, including former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort. At the time, constitutional experts suggested those pardons could affect whether recipients could later refuse congressional testimony.

Steve Bannon himself offers another example. Although Trump pardoned him in 2021 on federal fraud charges connected to the “We Build the Wall” fundraising effort, that pardon did not shield him from contempt of Congress charges after he refused to comply with subpoenas issued by the House committee investigating Jan. 6. Bannon was later convicted and served a four-month prison sentence.

Legal experts interviewed by WIRED, however, believe Fauci’s circumstances differ significantly because he carefully limited his Fifth Amendment claims to statements he might make during Wednesday’s hearing—not to actions covered by Biden’s pardon.

“Pardons cannot apply to future conduct,” constitutional scholar Aziz Huq told WIRED. “Ergo, to the extent the concern was a prosecution for perjury or material omissions in statements to Congress, then those offenses would be a basis for Fifth Amendment invocation, and so not amenable to contempt.”

Former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade agreed that Fauci appears to be on firm constitutional footing.

“The answer is no. Each of us has a constitutionally guaranteed right against self-incrimination as long as we have a reasonable fear of criminal prosecution,” McQuade tells WIRED. “Just because Fauci got a pardon for crimes he ‘may’ have committed in the past does not give him a get-out-of-jail free card for any crimes he might commit after the date of the pardon.”

McQuade argued that because Fauci could reasonably fear being accused of perjury during the hearing, invoking the Fifth Amendment was legally justified. She noted that Supreme Court precedent protects even “innocent men” who fear being “ensnared by ambiguous circumstances.”

Huq cautioned that he could not offer a definitive opinion because he does not know the precise legal basis behind each instance in which Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment.

McQuade also pointed out that Congress has another option if it wants Fauci’s testimony. Lawmakers could grant him immunity, preventing his testimony from being used against him in future criminal proceedings.

“That immunity would be binding on the Justice Department as well,” McQuade added.

Although Biden’s pardon protects Fauci from federal prosecution for covered conduct, it does not shield him from potential state investigations. Just hours after the Senate hearing concluded, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced that his office would begin investigating Fauci.

“office is launching an investigation into Dr. Fauci. It’s past time we get the truth of what happened during Covid.”

Uthmeier’s office did not provide additional details about the scope of the investigation.

Fauci’s attorney, David Schertler—who was escorted out of the hearing by security at Paul’s direction—declined to comment to WIRED but defended his client’s decision in remarks to CBS.

“We are completely confident that Dr. Fauci has a valid Fifth Amendment privilege here and is on solid legal ground in asserting it.”

{Matzav.com}

Former Vice President Kamala Harris identified the presidents she considers the most effective in American history during an appearance at the National Urban League Conference—but notably omitted President Joe Biden, despite having served as his vice president for four years.

During a conversation with National Urban League President Marc Morial, Harris was asked to “rank the top 3 most effective American presidents in history.”

Harris began by praising Franklin Delano Roosevelt, crediting him with helping the country through periods of extraordinary hardship by expanding government investment in the American people.

She then highlighted Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, explaining that Kennedy laid the foundation for major initiatives that Johnson later carried forward.

“I credit Kennedy, of course, in terms of what he laid the groundwork for,” Harris continued. “And then Johnson followed up on.”

Harris rounded out her list by praising President Barack Obama, pointing specifically to his healthcare reforms and other accomplishments during his administration.

“What he did with the Affordable Care Act and many things.”

She argued that the Affordable Care Act addressed one of America’s most persistent problems.

“If we had one issue that’s been ailing America for generations, which is a healthcare system that has failed anyone other than the rich,” she stated.

Absent from Harris’ list was President Joe Biden, under whom she served after the two won the 2020 election.

The omission comes after Harris publicly criticized Biden’s decision to seek reelection in her 2025 memoir, 107 Days, where she argued that his decision to remain in the race proved to be a mistake.

“I knew it would come off to him as incredibly self-serving if I advised him not to run. He would see it as naked ambition, perhaps as poisonous disloyalty, even if my only message was: Don’t let the other guy win,” Harris wrote.

She also reflected on Biden’s age and declining stamina during the campaign.

“But at 81, Joe got tired,” she continued in the memoir. “That’s when his age showed in physical and verbal stumbles.”

Biden initially launched a campaign for a second term in 2024 but came under mounting pressure from Democratic leaders to withdraw after his widely criticized debate performance against President Donald Trump.

When Biden ultimately exited the race, he endorsed Harris, leaving her just 107 days to mount a presidential campaign before Election Day.

Harris has also criticized Biden’s decision to seek another term during a separate appearance on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show, where she said she believed she had a “certain responsibility” to push back against his 2024 reelection bid.

While the horrors of the October 7 massacre were largely associated with the thousands of Hamas terrorists who stormed Israeli communities by land, a senior Israeli officer who investigated the attack says an equally dangerous battle was unfolding off Israel’s coastline. Brig. Gen. (res.) Oren Solomon now says Hamas came dangerously close to carrying out a devastating maritime strike that, had it succeeded, could have triggered an unimaginable catastrophe. “Half of Ashkelon could have been vaporized,” he warned.

The world watched as terrorists breached the Gaza border fence and overran communities throughout southern Israel. But Solomon, who led the investigative team examining the Gaza Division’s performance during the war, says the naval front has received only limited attention despite the extraordinary danger it posed.

Speaking with Arutz Sheva, Solomon disclosed details from the Israeli Navy’s internal investigation, arguing that much of what occurred at sea has never been fully presented to the public. He said that while Hamas launched its assault on land with thousands of terrorists, drones, UAVs, and paragliders, it simultaneously activated a sophisticated naval force equipped with elite commandos, high-speed attack boats, and unmanned submarines carrying massive explosive payloads.

According to Solomon, Hamas spent years building what he described as one of its most advanced military capabilities. “These weren’t just naval commandos,” he said. “These were forces trained in diving, amphibious landings, and carrying out attacks by sea. In addition, Hamas developed unmanned submarines with remote navigation capabilities, carrying substantial explosive charges.”

He said that as the attack began at approximately 6:30 a.m., seven commando boats carrying roughly 45 terrorists departed the Gaza coast, each assigned to a separate objective. Two vessels were reportedly dispatched to attack an Israeli offshore natural gas platform, while others targeted strategic sites, including EAPC facilities. Another boat reached Zikim Beach, where terrorists murdered civilians who had sought refuge inside a bomb shelter and a public restroom.

Solomon believes the greatest disaster was narrowly prevented. “If the boats assigned to the gas platform had succeeded,” Solomon said, “we would have faced an event on an entirely different scale. A successful strike on an active gas platform could have caused an enormous disaster.”

He added that the danger did not end with the initial morning attack. Later that afternoon, Hamas launched an unmanned underwater explosive craft toward Israel, but the Israeli Navy intercepted it before it could reach its target.

“This is an incident that has barely been discussed,” he said. “Had that submersable struck the gas platform, half of Ashkelon could have been vaporized. It was a great miracle.”

Beyond recounting the events of that day, Solomon sharply criticized the official investigations that followed the war. In his view, they fail to accurately reflect what happened, placing the blame primarily on commanders in the field while shielding more senior military leaders from responsibility.

As one example, Solomon highlighted the actions of Ashdod Naval Base commander Col. Eitan Paz. He said that at approximately 4:30 a.m., Paz was informed by the Gaza Division commander that unusual developments had been detected overnight. At the same time, commanders were instructed not to alter normal military activity out of concern that visible preparations might alert Hamas.

Rather than relying exclusively on those orders, Solomon said Paz contacted Navy Headquarters to confirm the intelligence before independently raising the alert level. He mobilized reserve personnel, sent naval vessels to sea, reinforced security around strategic installations, and personally returned to command the base.

“These were tactical actions intended to balance the directive not to disrupt routine with the need to be prepared,” Solomon said. “The forces had also conducted an exercise just one month earlier that simulated an infiltration by commando boats, so when the attack began, they knew exactly how to respond.”

Despite those decisions, Solomon said Paz ultimately became the one held accountable.

“The commander of Ashdod Naval Base left his position, while the entire chain of command above him remained in place. That’s a question that needs to be asked.”

Solomon also contended that the Israeli Navy had gathered unusual intelligence in the days before October 7 that was never passed along to the Ashdod base commander. Additional warning signs received during the night, he claimed, likewise failed to result in the operational preparations that should have followed.

“What is no less serious than the failure itself,” he said, “is the attempt to cover it up. Some of the information simply did not appear in the investigations. A narrative was created that shifts responsibility downward while protecting the senior command. In my view, that is one of the gravest problems.”

According to Solomon, a separate review committee led by Maj. Gen. (res.) Sami Turgeman rejected the Navy’s investigation, along with several other central investigative reports, concluding that they fell short of the professional standards expected.

Solomon closed by warning that Israel cannot afford to learn only part of the lessons from October 7.

“There are incidents the public knows nothing about,” he said. “If we don’t study them thoroughly and present the full picture, they could happen again. We must not cover things up. We have to understand what really happened in order to prevent the next disaster.”

{Matzav.com}

As the busy bein hazmanim travel season reaches its peak, aviation officials are warning that flight disruptions at Ben Gurion Airport could worsen in the coming days, with additional delays—and even last-minute schedule changes or cancellations—becoming increasingly possible.

As Matzav previously reported, security officials estimate that roughly 10 more U.S. Air Force aerial refueling aircraft are expected to arrive in Israel in the near future, with most of them likely to be stationed at Ben Gurion Airport.

More than 30 American refueling aircraft are already parked at the airport. In the past, the Israel Airports Authority warned that even the presence of more than 20 aircraft of this type could significantly disrupt airport operations. This week, travelers have already begun experiencing the impact.

According to Ben Gurion Airport’s congestion index, average delays this week reached approximately 65 minutes at Terminal 3 and about 61 minutes at Terminal 1. On Thursday alone, more than 90,000 passengers passed through the airport, creating exceptionally heavy congestion.

Passengers also reported lengthy waits to retrieve their luggage, with some waiting more than two hours before their bags arrived.

In an unusual public statement, the Israel Airports Authority said the large number of military refueling aircraft has created substantial operational challenges. Officials described the situation as a “domino effect” that is slowing airport operations and disrupting flight schedules at one of the busiest travel periods of the year.

Authorities are now concerned that the arrival of additional military aircraft could further strain airport operations, leading to more delays and even last-minute changes to flight schedules.

For the many families traveling during bein hazmanim, that could mean extended waits, gate changes, delayed departures, or even canceled flights.

The airport has also been dealing with unrelated operational challenges. Earlier this week, officials reported a communications failure involving an air traffic radar system in Greek airspace, creating congestion in regional air traffic that affected flights to and from Israel.

The Israel Airports Authority is urging travelers to check directly with their airlines before leaving for the airport, arrive well in advance of their scheduled departure times, and be prepared for the possibility of additional delays over the coming days.

Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir confronted a convicted terrorist during a visit to an Israeli prison after the inmate complained about her prison conditions, telling her that the days when security prisoners enjoyed comfortable treatment were over.

During the tour, Ben Gvir met with the imprisoned terrorist, who voiced a series of complaints about conditions inside the facility.

Pinned to the minister’s shirt was a gold lapel pin shaped like a hangman’s noose, symbolizing his support for legislation that would authorize the death penalty for terrorists.

Because the inmate spoke Arabic, Ben Gvir communicated through an interpreter, who translated the minister’s remarks into Arabic and the prisoner’s responses into Hebrew.

The terrorist complained that prison conditions had become difficult, alleging that the food was poor, the water was unclean, inmates were not receiving proper medical treatment, and that they were not being allowed out of their cells. She also claimed that the conditions had caused her to suffer from depression.

Ben Gvir dismissed the complaints, responding that prison was never intended to provide comfort for terrorists.

“The food does not need to be good. This is not a hotel.”

He went on to say that those who commit serious crimes against the State of Israel and the Jewish people should expect to face the consequences of their actions.

“Once this place was a hotel. Today it is no longer a hotel,” the minister told the inmate. “The hotel is over. This is the State of Israel.”

Ben Gvir concluded the exchange with a direct message to the prisoner.

“Anyone who commits a crime against the Jewish people should think about what they did. Don’t come back here.”

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu has reportedly made it clear that the legislation suspending the arrest of bnei yeshiva who have not reported for military service will not return in the next government, saying the measure failed to accomplish its intended purpose. Stressing that a new approach will be taken after the elections, Netanyahu stated, “Whoever does not study Torah will enlist – or go to prison.”

Speaking during a private discussion, Netanyahu said the temporary law halting the arrests of yeshiva bochurim who had not complied with draft orders did not produce the increase in Chareidi enlistment that the government had hoped to see. According to him, the arrangement has run its course and will not be reinstated.

According to a Kan News report, Netanyahu explained that the legislation—approved during the coalition’s intensive legislative push—was designed as a short-term measure to “lower the flames and increase the number of haredi recruits.” He acknowledged, however, that the initiative ultimately failed to deliver the desired results.

Netanyahu went on to say that once the elections are over, “a broad national government will be established that will immediately pass a full enlistment law that meets the IDF’s needs.” He said the new legislation would replace the current arrangement after the effort to resolve the issue through the arrest-freeze law proved unsuccessful.

The report follows earlier claims, published about two weeks ago, that Netanyahu has been attempting to create greater political distance between himself and the Chareidi parties as Israel heads toward elections. Sources close to the prime minister reportedly believe that, as the campaign intensifies, he will continue widening that gap while taking care not to undermine the overall strength of his political bloc.

The developments also come in the wake of a July 15 ruling by Israel’s Supreme Court, which issued a conditional order preventing implementation of the law that suspended the arrest of bnei yeshiva who failed to report for military service. The justices said the legislation conflicted with previous court decisions concerning equal burden-sharing, as well as the opinions of legal and professional officials who argued that such a policy encourages draft avoidance. The matter is expected to be reviewed by an expanded panel of justices at a later date.

Just two weeks before the start of zman Elul, Yeshivas Ner Zerach in Moshav Otzem is facing an unprecedented crisis after Israel’s Fire and Rescue Authority issued a closure order for the campus over alleged fire safety deficiencies, throwing the yeshiva’s opening for the new zman into serious doubt.

The order has raised major concerns about whether the yeshiva will be able to welcome its incoming first-year talmidim and begin the new academic term on schedule.

Kikar HaShabbos has learned that a critical meeting is scheduled for today between yeshiva representatives and officials from the Fire and Rescue Authority in an urgent effort to reach an agreement that would postpone the closure order and allow the yeshiva to continue operating while preparing for the upcoming zman.

In response to the unfolding situation, the yeshiva’s Roshei Yeshiva, together with current talmidim and alumni, gathered on Motzoei Shabbos for a special atzeres tefillah at the kever of Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman zt”l.

During the emotional gathering, participants recited Tehillim, Avinu Malkeinu, and additional tefillos, davening that the decree be rescinded and that efforts to resolve the crisis prove successful.

Yeshivas Ner Zerach operates under the umbrella of Yeshivas Orchos Torah and is headed by Rav Yaakov Virzhbinski. The yeshiva remains hopeful that a solution can be reached within the next 24 hours that will delay the closure order and enable zman Elul to begin as planned.

“This is a genuine gezeirah,” members of the yeshiva said. “It is impossible to open a new school year and receive the incoming first-year talmidim under these circumstances. If the order takes effect, it will deal a severe blow to our ability to open zman Elul in the normal manner.”

A source within the Fire and Rescue Authority said that if a closure order was issued, it was likely because inspectors identified deficiencies that could place lives at risk.

“If a closure order was issued for the building, there are apparently deficiencies there that could endanger human life.”

Despite the seriousness of the situation, yeshiva officials remain optimistic that today’s meeting will produce an arrangement allowing the required safety issues to be addressed while the yeshiva continues functioning uninterrupted.

{Matzav.com}

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is throwing his support behind California’s proposed billionaire wealth tax, claiming Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg could be forced to pay roughly $10.5 billion if voters approve the measure this November—and arguing the money could be used to protect healthcare coverage for millions of low-income residents.

The ballot initiative would impose a one-time 5 percent tax on individuals whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, provided they were California residents as of Jan. 1, 2026. Backers of the proposal estimate it could generate approximately $100 billion, which they say would help offset reductions in federal Medicaid and food assistance funding.

Promoting the measure on X, Sanders singled out Zuckerberg as one of its most prominent potential targets.

“If voters in California approve the 5% billionaire wealth tax in November, Mark Zuckerberg would owe $10.5 billion in taxes & healthcare would be saved for 3 million low-income people.”

Sanders then mocked the Meta founder’s remaining fortune.

“Poor Mr. Zuckerberg would only have $200 billion left to feed his family. How will he survive?”

The Vermont senator has long argued that imposing higher taxes on the nation’s wealthiest individuals could finance major government programs while still leaving billionaires with enormous fortunes. Earlier this year, Sanders challenged Amazon founder Jeff Bezos to publicly debate his proposed 5 percent billionaire tax, arguing the revenue could be used to expand Medicare, provide universal childcare, increase starting salaries for teachers, and deliver $12,000 to working families of four—even after Bezos paid the tax.

California’s proposed wealth tax has sparked fierce opposition from both business leaders and elected officials.

Google co-founder Sergey Brin has reportedly contributed $57 million to a campaign opposing the initiative, while Palantir Chairman Peter Thiel has also donated to the effort. Venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya has warned that such a tax could eventually be expanded beyond billionaires, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom has cautioned that it could encourage wealthy residents to leave the state.

Shortly after Sanders’ post gained traction, X users added a Community Note pointing out that Zuckerberg reportedly relocated to Florida after California lawmakers began pursuing the billionaire tax proposal. If that timeline is accurate, the note suggested, Zuckerberg may not actually be subject to the tax even if California voters approve it. The Community Note cited reports from IFC Review, Architectural Digest, and Fox Business.

Skeptics of wealth taxes have also questioned whether such measures can generate sustained revenue over time. Earlier this year, podcast host Joe Rogan and financial commentator Caleb Hammer argued that while taxes targeting billionaires might produce a large initial windfall, many wealthy individuals could eventually move themselves or their assets elsewhere, significantly reducing the long-term revenue such policies are expected to generate.

{Matzav.com}

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) is putting an end to speculation that he may leave the Democratic Party, insisting he remains a Democrat despite increasingly vocal disagreements with elements of his own party—including what he described as calls for “full-on communism.”

In an interview with The New York Times, Fetterman criticized members of the Democratic Party whom he said support eliminating the nation’s borders, prisons, the presidency, and even the U.S. Senate, arguing that such positions amount to embracing radical left-wing ideology.

Responding to persistent rumors that he could eventually switch parties, Fetterman flatly rejected the idea and joked that if he ever did reconsider, he would personally notify the newspaper first.

“Never,” Fetterman told the outlet. “I’m not being cute. I vote 90-something percent with Democrats.”

The Times noted that questions about Fetterman’s political future have intensified ahead of the midterm elections, when control of the Senate could once again come down to a razor-thin margin.

The newspaper pointed to Fetterman’s increasingly independent streak, noting that the Pennsylvania senator has frequently broken with fellow Democrats, skipped party events, forged close relationships with Republican senators, and even created a joint fundraising committee with Republican Sen. Dave McCormick of Pennsylvania. The Times also highlighted Fetterman’s unconventional style, including his well-known preference for hoodies and shorts over traditional business attire.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) acknowledged that many Republicans would gladly welcome Fetterman into the GOP, though he emphasized that the decision rests entirely with the Pennsylvania senator.

“I have had conversations with him in the past, as have many of my colleagues, about the challenges he faces in his caucus,” Thune stated. “There are many of us who I think would welcome the opportunity to have him join the Republican conference. But, you know, ultimately that’s a decision that’s left up to him.”

Fetterman recently delivered the same message during an appearance on NBC News’ Meet the Press NOW, where he dismissed suggestions that he could become a Republican.

He also acknowledged that he parts ways with fellow Democrats on several issues, particularly Israel, but said his positions on other matters make it clear that he would not fit comfortably within the Republican Party.

According to Fetterman, Republicans are unlikely to welcome “a pro-choice, pro-gay, trans communities, federal union” lawmaker into their conference.

{Matzav.com}

Dr. Anthony Fauci has nearly doubled his personal fortune since retiring from the federal government at the end of 2022, earning an estimated $12.5 million through book deals, speaking engagements, academic appointments, awards, royalties, and a record-setting government pension, according to a New York Post analysis.

Financial disclosure records obtained by the government watchdog group Open The Books show that Fauci earned approximately $3.5 million during his first year after leaving public service. The disclosures span 141 pages and detail the former government official’s post-retirement income.

Since then, Fauci’s earnings have continued to climb through a combination of lucrative speaking fees, publishing deals, academic work, financial awards, and what the report describes as a taxpayer-funded retirement package worth roughly $350,000 annually.

Fauci retired from government service in December 2022 after serving as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) for 38 years. At the time of his departure, he was the highest-paid federal employee in the United States, earning an annual salary of $480,654—roughly $80,000 more than the President.

Public records obtained by Minnesota’s Alpha News revealed that Fauci received $75,000 for a speech delivered at the University of Minnesota in April. Industry estimates place his standard speaking fee between $50,000 and $100,000 per appearance. Since 2024, he has reportedly participated in at least 18 public speaking engagements, generating an estimated minimum of $900,000.

His next scheduled appearance is set for September in Wilton Manors, Florida, where tickets to hear him speak are selling for $160 each.

Reflecting on his post-government life in his 2024 memoir, On Call: A Doctor’s Journey in Public Service, Fauci wrote that he has remained active on the lecture circuit.

“In the year since I stepped down as NIAID director, I have had the opportunity to lecture and engage in fireside chats and moderated discussions throughout the country,” Fauci wrote.

Publishing industry sources previously told The New York Post that Penguin Random House’s Viking imprint paid Fauci approximately $5 million for the memoir.

Explaining why he chose to write the book, Fauci said he wanted to share what he had learned throughout his decades in public service.

“When I decided to step down from my position as director of NIAID, I asked myself what I could do over the next few years while I am still filled with passion and energy and blessed with good health. The answer came to me quickly and clearly: to share my experiences with the world and particularly the younger generation,” he wrote in the tome.

Fauci also said that desire ultimately led him to accept a faculty position at Georgetown University. While the average professor at the university earns roughly $233,000 annually, the report noted that Fauci likely commands a significantly higher salary because of his multiple academic roles and public profile.

The Post estimated that Fauci has earned at least $750,000 through his work at Georgetown. In addition, universities and medical organizations have honored him with several prestigious awards carrying substantial cash prizes, including Columbia University’s $50,000 Calderone Prize and the National Academy of Medicine’s $40,000 Lienhard Prize.

Fauci also continues to receive royalties from a McGraw-Hill medical textbook he has edited since the 1980s. Financial disclosures list those annual payments as somewhere between $100,000 and $1 million, although the exact amount is not specified.

His government pension is estimated at more than $350,000 per year—the largest federal pension on record. Since retiring, that pension alone has reportedly provided him with approximately $1.5 million.

Taken together, the Post estimates Fauci has earned at least $12.5 million since leaving government, boosting his estimated net worth to roughly $27.5 million.

Financial disclosures indicate Fauci’s wealth has risen dramatically over the past several years. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, his reported net worth stood at approximately $7.6 million in 2019. By 2023, it had climbed to about $15 million, during a period when taxpayers were also funding his transportation and security.

Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University professor and longtime friend of Fauci’s, said the former government health official remains deeply committed to teaching while living a quieter life in retirement.

“He is kind and generous with his time for students,” Gostin told The Post.

Gostin also described Fauci as “proud of his Catholic, Italian heritage” and noted that he is “still super fit but walks rather than runs,” now that he is 85 years old.

Fauci and his wife, Christine Grady, have become increasingly visible together since his retirement and are frequently seen attending Georgetown University events and walking near their $2.4 million home in Washington, D.C.

Fauci, who did not respond to The Post’s request for comment, wrote in his memoir that he deliberately avoided having an extravagant retirement celebration when he left the NIH.

“I opted instead for a no-bells-and-whistles, carrots-and-hummus affair on the top floor of a campus building,” he wrote, adding that even the “affectionate remarks” from colleagues were carefully timed.

“I insisted that no one go on for longer than three minutes,” he claimed.

Not everyone shares that modest assessment of Fauci’s personality. Dr. Carole Lieberman, who regularly invited him to appear on Lifetime Medical Television during the 1990s, said she found him eager for media attention.

“He always said yes [to coming on],” Lieberman told The Post. “Every single time I called him he said yes, but it wasn’t really my talent for booking him, it was his narcissism.”

Nearly one-third of Democrats now identify as democratic socialists, according to a new CNN poll, highlighting the growing influence of the party’s far-left wing as progressive activists continue pushing for new leadership and a more liberal agenda.

The survey, conducted by SSRS for CNN, found that although democratic socialists remain a minority within the Democratic Party, they make up one of its most energized and committed voting blocs. They are also significantly more likely than other Democrats to support major changes in the party’s leadership and policy direction.

The findings come on the heels of several high-profile victories by progressive candidates, including New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and other democratic socialist candidates who recently won three Democratic congressional primaries in New York.

According to the poll, Democrats who identify as democratic socialists tend to be younger than 45, are more likely to be white, and generally report annual incomes below $100,000.

The survey also found that democratic socialists are especially enthusiastic about participating in this year’s midterm elections.

Among registered voters, 66 percent of self-identified democratic socialists said they were extremely motivated to vote, compared with 57 percent of other Democratic voters.

On internal party issues, democratic socialists were more likely than other Democrats to favor replacing the party’s current leadership, nominating younger candidates, and shifting the Democratic Party even further to the left on major policy questions.

Despite the movement’s growing influence within Democratic politics, another recent survey suggests that many Americans still do not fully understand what democratic socialism represents.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll released this week found that 47 percent of respondents said they do not understand democratic socialist policies, while 49 percent said they do.

That same survey found mixed views of the movement, with 27 percent saying democratic socialists have at least some worthwhile ideas, while 51 percent said the movement offers few, if any, beneficial beliefs.

Republicans have increasingly sought to make the rise of democratic socialism a central issue ahead of the midterm elections, arguing that its policies closely resemble communism.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly warned that communism represents one of the greatest dangers facing the United States.

Speaking during a campaign-style event in Michigan ahead of the state’s primary elections, Trump described communism as “the greatest threat to our country in history.”

“We can’t let them get their claws into this incredible — they call it an experiment,” Trump said.

The CNN survey questioned 1,225 adults across the United States by telephone and online between July 23 and July 27. The poll carries a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.

{Matzav.com}

President Isaac Herzog praised President Donald Trump for his role in securing the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas, sharply criticized the former chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, and condemned New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani as a promoter of antisemitic rhetoric during a wide-ranging interview with Fox News.

Addressing the dismissal of former ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan following allegations of criminal misconduct against him, Herzog claimed Khan sought arrest warrants against Israeli leaders to divert attention from the accusations he was facing.

“Karim Khan was supposed to come to Israel to meet with experts and senior leaders so he could better understand the reality on the ground and allow us to present him with the truth. Among others, he was scheduled to meet with me. On the very day he was supposed to board his flight, while he and his team were on their way to the airport, he suddenly filed requests for arrest warrants against Prime Minister Netanyahu, former Defense Minister Gallant, and other senior officials. Now, in hindsight, we know clearly that this was done to divert attention from the allegations against him.”

Herzog said Khan’s removal from office was a step toward justice and argued that the ICC should now go even further by abandoning the case against Israel altogether.

“When it comes to justice, words must be followed by action. The International Criminal Court in The Hague should dismiss the case entirely and not fall into the traps of lies and hatred that Karim Khan presented in order to cover for himself.”

Turning to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, Herzog accused him of rejecting the Jewish people’s right to national self-determination and said his rhetoric endangers Jewish residents.

“Mamdani does not respect the right of the Jewish people to self-determination and to have a state of their own. He represents hatred and antisemitic rhetoric. He must understand that he is endangering his own citizens—their security, their well-being, and their lives.”

Herzog pointed to the recent stabbing of an Orthodox Jew in New York as evidence of the dangerous climate created by anti-Israel and antisemitic rhetoric.

“We saw the stabbing that took place just a few days ago on a street in New York simply because someone was dressed as an Orthodox Jew.”

He expressed confidence that New York’s identity would endure despite Mamdani’s leadership.

“New York will continue to be what it is long after Mamdani, and I hope he does not cause irreversible damage.”

Discussing Iran, Herzog described the Islamic Republic as a longstanding global threat whose ambitions extend well beyond Israel and the Middle East.

“They take the food and money of their own people and invest it in terrorism around the world. That is a fact. When people ask why a country like this seeks to spread so much terror across the globe, the answer is ideology. This ideology accepts no other religion—not even moderate Islam. That is why it is so dangerous.”

The president said Iran’s ballistic missile program, its activities around the Strait of Hormuz, its nuclear ambitions, its repression of its own citizens, and its sponsorship of regional terrorist proxies all demonstrate the danger the regime poses to international peace and stability.

Looking ahead to the future of Gaza, Herzog said the next phase could become a major turning point if Hamas is stripped of its military capabilities.

“This could be a significant breakthrough if it happens. We must remember that President Trump’s 20-point plan was approved by the United Nations Security Council, and the next stage is the disarmament of Hamas.”

He stressed that any lasting solution requires Hamas to relinquish control of Gaza.

“One thing must be absolutely clear—Hamas cannot govern Gaza and cannot continue turning it into a launching pad for terror and hatred. The people of Gaza deserve a better future, but to achieve that they will have to take their destiny into their own hands, disarm this terrible terrorist organization, and move toward a better future for the people of Gaza and the people of Israel.”

Herzog also highlighted the close relationship between Israel and the United States, praising President Trump’s support for the Jewish state.

He said Trump’s backing has been demonstrated through both his statements and his actions, describing the president’s relationship with Israel as one of extraordinary friendship and noting that the two countries continue to see eye to eye on most major issues.

Herzog also credited Trump with playing a pivotal role in securing the release of the 255 hostages who were held by Hamas following the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist massacre. While acknowledging that many individuals contributed to the effort, he said Trump deserved significant recognition for driving the negotiations.

Trump, Herzog said, “pushed and negotiated brilliantly” to bring the hostages home.

A 30-year-old Florida man has been arrested after allegedly throwing a brick through the window of a synagogue in downtown Sarasota, later telling investigators he targeted the building because it was a Jewish house of worship.

According to the Sarasota Police Department, Brighton Leshinger, 30, of Sarasota, has been charged with felony criminal mischief to a religious property with a hate crime enhancement.

Police said the attack occurred at approximately 6 a.m. last Wednesday at a synagogue in downtown Sarasota.

Surveillance footage allegedly shows Leshinger with a blue towel wrapped around his head as he repeatedly hurled a brick through the synagogue’s front window until the glass shattered. He then fled the scene.

Authorities estimated the damage to the building at more than $5,000. Detectives later interviewed a nearby resident, whose information helped investigators identify Leshinger’s roommate as the suspect.

During questioning, Leshinger allegedly told police that he had seen antisemitic content on social media earlier that morning, which angered him.

According to investigators, Leshinger admitted to the attack, telling detectives, “I used a brick I found near the scene to break the front window of the synagogue.”

Police said he also acknowledged that he deliberately targeted the synagogue because it was a Jewish place of worship.

The investigation remains ongoing.

{Matzav.com}

Senior United Torah Judaism MK Uri Maklev cast doubt on Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s long-term commitment to the Chareidi parties, suggesting that after the next election he could instead try to build a coalition with Gadi Eisenkot. Maklev stressed that the Chareidi parties will act independently and do whatever best serves the Torah world.

Speaking in an interview with Kol Barama Radio, Maklev said he would not be surprised if Netanyahu’s first move after the election is to seek a governing coalition with Yashar chairman Gadi Eisenkot.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if Netanyahu’s first attempt is to form a government with [Yashar! chairman Gadi] Eisenkot,” Maklev said.

Maklev argued that Netanyahu’s primary concern is his own political future rather than loyalty to any ideological alliance, emphasizing that United Torah Judaism will make its own decisions based on the interests of the Chareidi community.

“Netanyahu first and foremost looks after Netanyahu – he is not committed to the bloc. As far as we’re concerned, we’ll do what’s best for us. We are a bloc of our own,” he added.

Addressing the emergence of new Chareidi political parties attempting to win support from the tzibbur, Maklev hinted that significant financial backing is fueling those efforts and suggested that the sources of that funding will eventually become public.

“The day will come when people will know where the big money is coming from. I know exactly where those funds are coming from. Once the facts are revealed, the public will understand, and there will be no need to keep talking about all these parties.”

Maklev also sharply criticized the Religious Zionism Party, accusing it of contributing to the growing public campaign against bnei yeshiva. He said the party’s position on combining Torah learning with military service has only intensified the controversy.

“When Religious Zionism says, ‘We don’t oppose Torah study, but you can do both,’ that is exactly the statement that created confusion and brought great incitement. As a party, Religious Zionism was the most problematic element within this coalition.”

Commenting on the law that temporarily froze the arrest of bnei yeshiva who had not complied with the draft, which was later struck down by Israel’s Supreme Court, Maklev defended the legislation and insisted that passing it had been the right decision.

“Passing the arrests law was not a mistake,” he said.

Maklev said the coalition always understood that the legislation would likely lead to a legal showdown with the Supreme Court, arguing that every time the court overturns a law passed by the Knesset, it further weakens its own public standing.

“We knew from the outset that we were heading for a confrontation with the Supreme Court. Every law that the Supreme Court strikes down only further undermines the legitimacy of the Supreme Court itself.”

{Matzav.com}

LISTEN:

​​For more info, email bitachon4life@gmail.com.

LISTEN:

Candace Owens has sparked a fierce online debate after releasing what she says is previously unseen security footage from the assassination of Charlie Kirk, claiming the video raises major questions about the official account of the killing and whether the man charged in the case was actually the gunman.

The 37-year-old conservative commentator, who is currently being sued by France’s First Lady Brigitte Macron over Owens’ claim that she was born a man, unveiled the footage Tuesday on her self-titled podcast. The release immediately fueled renewed speculation among conspiracy theorists, with Owens arguing that Tyler Robinson, the suspect accused of murdering Kirk, was not the one who fired the fatal shot.

https://twitter.com/i/status/2082738424671240495

According to Owens, the footage was provided to her by a government source and captures activity on the roof of Utah Valley University’s Losee Center during the final one minute and 20 seconds before Kirk was shot on Sept. 10, 2025.

The video allegedly shows a figure dressed entirely in black racing across the roof of the Losee Center before reaching a position overlooking the area where Kirk was speaking.

As the individual nears the roof’s edge, Owens says the person performs what she described as a “lateral crawl,” suggesting it resembles a military tactic in which the individual shifts from side to side while advancing toward the corner of the building.

The figure then lies flat and crawls on their stomach to the edge of the roof—approximately 160 yards from Kirk’s location during his “American Comeback Tour” event—before appearing to look over the side and retrieve something from either a bag or their clothing.

Less than a minute afterward, the individual is seen running across the rooftop toward another section of the Losee Center. Owens contends that this portion of the footage corresponds with previously released video that allegedly captured the suspect escaping by jumping from the building.

Owens also asserted that the footage was presented during Tyler Robinson’s weeklong preliminary hearing in Utah State District Court, held from July 6 through July 10. While court proceedings did include security video evidence, officials have never publicly confirmed the specific footage that jurors or attendees viewed.

Although Owens is the only person claiming the video is authentic, its release has intensified longstanding conspiracy theories surrounding Kirk’s assassination.

Among those embracing Owens’ claims was Alex Jones, who was ordered last year to pay $1.4 billion to the families of Sandy Hook victims after repeatedly making false claims about the 2012 school massacre. Jones argued that the newly released footage disproves the prosecution’s case against Robinson.

“The Official Charlie Kirk assassination story is now 100% dead!” the former InfoWars host declared in an X post with over 4.7 million views.

Jones and other online commentators argued that the footage appears inconsistent with prosecutors’ narrative, claiming the individual never removes a rifle from their pants, does not appear to limp, and is never seen assembling a firearm before the shooting.

Court documents filed against Robinson in September 2025 state that investigators observed him walking with an “unusual gait” characterized by “very little bending in his right leg,” which authorities said was consistent with concealing a rifle inside his pants.

Those original charging documents made no mention of the weapon being assembled on the roof. However, prosecutors later alleged in filings submitted this July that Robinson used a red-and-black screwdriver to assemble a Mauser Model 98 .03-06 bolt-action rifle before carrying out the attack.

During Robinson’s preliminary hearing, prosecutors argued that the evidence overwhelmingly supports moving the case to trial. Robinson has pleaded not guilty to seven criminal counts, including murder, in connection with Kirk’s death.

The case is scheduled to return to court in September.

Owens was once one of Charlie Kirk’s close associates, serving as Communications Director for Turning Point USA from 2017 until 2019. Since then, she has become a vocal critic of the organization and has repeatedly suggested that Turning Point USA played a role in Kirk’s assassination.

Turning Point USA did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding Owens’ allegations.

Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow, attended Robinson’s preliminary hearing in July and has previously urged Owens to stop promoting theories about her husband’s death.

“Stop,” she said in 2025. “That’s it. That’s all I have to say. Stop.”

{Matzav.com}

The Cornell University student who sparked nationwide outrage after saying he was “not interested in working for a Jew” says his parents have thrown him out of their Virginia home, prompting him to launch an online fundraising campaign that has already attracted thousands of dollars from supporters—even as Cornell confirmed he will be returning to campus this fall.

Austin Franco, 19, who drew widespread condemnation after refusing a job interview with New York startup VryfID because its founders are Jewish, announced on X last week that his parents were forcing him to leave their home.

“My parents are kicking me out.”

While Franco says he is no longer welcome in his family’s house, Cornell University indicated it has no plans to expel him. The university confirmed that the rising junior remains enrolled despite the controversy surrounding his antisemitic remarks.

Franco has since created a GiveSendGo fundraising page, which has collected more than $8,000. That campaign comes in addition to another fundraiser that has reportedly raised roughly $25,000 on his behalf.

In his appeal for donations, Franco described his situation and asked supporters for financial assistance.

“I will be kicked out of my home on August 1st. Any support you can provide would be greatly appreciated, as would any advice,” the 19-year-old wrote.

“I have reiterated that my parents do not share my views, and it seems they no longer wish to provide me with a home to live in. I know the road ahead will be difficult, but this is the path I chose.”

Franco also insisted he has no regrets over the positions he has taken, portraying himself as someone standing by his convictions despite the consequences.

“I do not regret anything I have done. If I were to die today, I would at least know that I did so believing in myself. Thank you, and may God be with you.”

The reported eviction comes despite Franco having grown up in a comfortable home. His family resides in a 6,300-square-foot house in a Virginia suburb about 30 miles northwest of Washington, D.C. The property features five bedrooms and five-and-a-half bathrooms. His mother, Diana Franco, had previously shared family photos on Instagram—including pictures from Austin’s 18th birthday trip to Paris—before making her account private.

Franco’s father, Alexander, is a patent attorney and Cornell graduate, while his mother works as a senior product manager for a banking regulators’ trade association.

In a statement, Franco’s parents distanced themselves from their son’s views, saying they believe he has been influenced by extremist material online and stressing that the rest of the family strongly rejects his beliefs.

“We have seen our adult son fall under the influence of extremist online content. It should go without saying that the rest of our family finds the views he has expressed morally repugnant, and he did not derive them in any way from us,” they wrote.

“We love our son very much and are doing everything we can to counter the online influences that have afflicted him.”

Speaking afterward, Franco disputed his parents’ explanation, insisting his beliefs were shaped by personal experiences rather than internet content.

“I can’t peer inside their minds and they can’t peer inside mine, but it’s not a result of just being online. I’ve had in-person experiences as well,” he said.

He argued that blaming the internet for his opinions is no different than criticizing someone for reading a newspaper.

“All the internet is, is essentially an extension of prior means of communication, what used to be the printing press.

“It’s like if my parents … were like, ‘Oh boy, he’s always reading the newspaper, he’s getting all these terrible ideas from the newspaper.’ When you say that, it sounds completely ridiculous, right?”

Asked how he felt about being forced to leave home, Franco offered only a brief response.

“I’m not sure if I have a good answer for that.”

He said he plans to move into an apartment near Cornell’s campus in Ithaca.

The controversy began after Franco sent an antisemitic message through the Handshake employment platform to the Jewish co-founders of VryfID, Gabe and Aiden Einhorn, explaining that he would not interview because he did not want to work for Jewish employers. Since then, he has continued publicly defending his views.

Dr. Carole Lieberman, a psychiatrist and author who has written extensively on terrorism, said Franco reflects a broader trend in which antisemitism is increasingly being worn as a badge of honor by some extremists.

“Anti-semitism has not only become mainstream, it’s become something to be proud of for some,” she said. “People like Austin Franco see themselves as martyrs for the cause.”

Franco, however, maintained that he has done nothing wrong and argued that his comments fall within his right to free expression.

“People may say things that are unkind, but they have the right to say it,” he said. “It would be illegal for an employer to say, ‘I’m not going to hire you because you are white.’ It would not be illegal for an employee to say, ‘I’m not going to work for you because you’re white.’”

Earlier this week, Franco appeared on “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” where Morgan sharply criticized him during a contentious interview, calling him “thick” and “arrogant.”

Reflecting on the exchange, Franco claimed Morgan’s reaction demonstrated that the broadcaster believed he was losing the debate.

“That indicated to me that he realized I was making him look bad,” Franco said.

Cornell President Michael Kotlikoff publicly condemned Franco’s remarks while emphasizing that the university remains committed to protecting free speech, even when the views expressed are offensive.

“As a university built on the solid foundations of our nation’s democratic freedoms, Cornell has an obligation to fiercely defend freedom of speech — even when we find that speech abhorrent,” he wrote.

Despite the backlash, Franco said he has no concerns about returning to Cornell. Although he hopes to pursue a career in politics after graduation, he said he does not identify with any particular political party.

“If you don’t want to talk with me or engage with me, you’re totally welcome and within your rights to do that, just as I have the freedom to associate with who I want to with respect to work,” he said.

{Matzav.com}