Feed aggregator

Gadi Eisenkot, chairman of the Yashar! party, announced Tuesday that his political alliance intends to move quickly to establish a government without Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, replace the Knesset speaker and repeal legislation it considers harmful to Israeli democracy.

Speaking after a meeting of leaders from the anti-Netanyahu bloc, Eisenkot declared that Netanyahu no longer commands a parliamentary majority and insisted that the parties seeking to replace him are united in their determination to form a new government.

“We will act quickly. We have two objectives ahead of us: establishing a national emergency government and carrying out measures in the Knesset,” Eisenkot said, outlining plans to install a new Knesset speaker, introduce legislation and overturn existing laws that he argues threaten democratic institutions.

Eisenkot said the proposed government would operate according to principles agreed upon by the participating parties, including preserving Israel’s identity as a Jewish, democratic and liberal state, based on the values of its Declaration of Independence.

A central element of the proposed coalition’s agenda would be the introduction of a universal service obligation, requiring citizens to perform military, national or civilian service. Such a policy would have major implications for the chareidi community and the ongoing dispute over military enlistment exemptions for yeshiva bochurim.

The alliance’s stated principles also include treating Hamas as a terrorist organization and pursuing the destruction of its military capabilities and governing authority.

The five opposition party leaders who met Tuesday were Eisenkot, Naftali Bennett, Yair Lapid, Avigdor Lieberman and Yair Golan. Following their meeting in Herzliya, they agreed to recommend Eisenkot to President Isaac Herzog as their candidate to form the next government.

They also agreed to pursue the replacement of current Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, a Likud member, although disagreements remain over who should succeed him. Lieberman has expressed support for Lapid, while Eisenkot’s party is seeking the position for one of its own representatives.

The dispute over the speakership could prove important because control of the Knesset’s agenda would give the opposition greater influence over legislative proceedings even before a new government is established.

Eisenkot sharply criticized Netanyahu and Likud, declaring that the prime minister’s parliamentary support had fallen to just 46 lawmakers.

“Beginning Tuesday, Netanyahu is a caretaker prime minister supported by only 46 members of Knesset,” Eisenkot declared.

Notably, Eisenkot’s calculation excludes United Torah Judaism’s seven seats, an apparent indication that he is leaving open the possibility of cooperation with the chareidi party. However, no agreement with UTJ has been announced, and the proposed universal service requirement could present a major obstacle to such cooperation.

Eisenkot also accused Likud of attempting to discredit the election results and warned that his political opponents would launch a campaign of misinformation aimed at disrupting the opposition’s efforts to form a government.

He predicted a wave of “spins and ugly, dishonest briefings” in the coming days, insisting that the opposition parties would not be intimidated into abandoning their plans.

Referring to the approaching anniversary of the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin, Eisenkot declared, “We will remember what we learned: In the face of violence, incitement and the erosion of the foundations of democracy, we will stand firm, without fear. Anyone who thinks they can intimidate the forces of change does not properly appreciate our determination and our commitment to the citizens of Israel.”

Despite the public declarations of unity, significant disagreements remain within the anti-Netanyahu alliance, particularly over the role of Arab parties in a potential government and the identity of the next Knesset speaker.

Golan has supported cooperation with Arab parties, while other opposition leaders have resisted such an arrangement. The bloc is consequently exploring whether an alternative parliamentary majority could be assembled with support from chareidi lawmakers.

Eisenkot said negotiating teams from the participating parties would begin drafting common coalition guidelines immediately, with the objective of preventing another election and ending what he described as Netanyahu’s continued hold on power.

A new Israeli poll released Tuesday evening shows Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s Likud party gaining strength following last week’s inconclusive election, while a clear majority of Israelis oppose the formation of a minority government led by Gadi Eisenkot that would depend on Arab parties for parliamentary support.

The survey, conducted for i24NEWS, projects 54 Knesset seats for Netanyahu’s right-wing and chareidi bloc, compared with 48 for parties aligned with Eisenkot and 18 for the Arab parties. The results come as political leaders continue exploring possible coalition arrangements amid the prospect of another election.

The poll carries particular interest because i24NEWS produced the election-night projection that reportedly came closest to the actual results of the October 27 election.

According to the new findings, Likud would emerge as the largest party with 28 seats, an increase of one mandate, while Eisenkot’s Yashar! party would finish second with 20 seats.

The Beyachad party would receive 12 seats, followed by the Joint List with 11. The Democrats and Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu would each secure eight seats.

Among the chareidi parties, both United Torah Judaism and Shas would receive seven mandates apiece. Ra’am would also win seven seats, while Religious Zionism–Zehut and Otzma Yehudit would each receive six.

The projected distribution would leave Netanyahu’s bloc seven seats short of the 61 required for a Knesset majority, meaning that even with its improved standing, the right-wing camp would still need support from outside its traditional alliance to establish a government.

The survey also examined public attitudes toward the competing proposals for forming a government, revealing substantial opposition to an Eisenkot-led minority coalition dependent on Arab parties.

A decisive 74% of respondents said they opposed such an arrangement, while 22% supported it. The proposed government would include Ra’am, headed by Mansour Abbas, and depend on the Joint List either abstaining or providing outside parliamentary support.

By contrast, 60% expressed support for a unity government headed by Netanyahu that would bring together Likud, Eisenkot’s Yashar!, Beyachad and Religious Zionism. Another 34% opposed the proposal.

That proposed unity arrangement would be tied to commitments on four divisive issues: chareidi military enlistment, establishing a state commission of inquiry, ending Netanyahu’s criminal trial and advancing a judicial reform agreement.

When respondents were asked to select their preferred political outcome, however, the results were considerably more divided. Some 34% favored holding another election, while an identical 34% preferred a unity government under Netanyahu.

Only 16% selected an Eisenkot-led minority government, while 14% favored a unity coalition headed by Eisenkot.

The poll was conducted on November 2 by Direct Polls, headed by Tzuriel Sharon, for i24NEWS. It surveyed 559 Israeli adults using a digital polling system and respondent panel, with a reported margin of sampling error of 4.1 percentage points.

The findings arrive before the parties’ consultations with President Isaac Herzog, who will be tasked with determining which Knesset member has the best prospect of assembling a governing coalition. With neither major bloc approaching a parliamentary majority on its own, the negotiations could determine whether Israel establishes a unity government or returns to the polls.

A bitter confrontation has erupted at the highest levels of Israel’s security and legal establishment over an investigation into suspected foreign interference in last week’s Knesset election, with Shin Bet Director David Zini and Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara accusing each other of obstructing the inquiry.

The dispute centers on allegations of foreign involvement in the election and possible connections between hostile foreign interests and Arab Knesset members. Zini reportedly wants investigators to use expanded national security powers, while Baharav-Miara maintains that such measures cannot be authorized without sufficient evidence.

The controversy intensified Tuesday evening as Likud, Otzma Yehudit and Religious Zionism accused the attorney general of interfering with the investigation. Some coalition figures demanded that she be removed from the case entirely, while opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot warned against allowing political considerations to influence the security services.

Likud claimed that Baharav-Miara was preventing investigators from questioning Arab political figures, including Ahmad Tibi, Mansour Abbas, Sami Abu Shehadeh and another Knesset member whose name has surfaced in reports concerning the allegations.

“The reports this evening are an earthquake for Israeli democracy,” Likud declared, accusing the attorney general of blocking the Shin Bet from employing security-related investigative methods and attempting to keep suspicions of a national security offense from becoming public.

“Baharav-Miara is working to cover up and sabotage the investigation into the contamination of the elections. This is what selective enforcement looks like,” the party said.

Likud called on Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg and the Central Elections Committee to examine the allegations and provide the public with answers.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir went further, demanding Baharav-Miara’s immediate removal from any involvement in the investigation.

“I demand that she be removed now, moved aside, and not allowed to interfere in the investigation into the manipulation of the elections,” Ben Gvir said.

“She is contaminating the investigation. She must not be allowed to extend her tentacles into it. The attorney general must step aside. The person who should manage the investigation is Shin Bet Director David Zini,” he continued.

Ben Gvir then made the explosive allegation that the election results had been improperly influenced.

“They stole the elections here! The people of Israel will not accept the theft of the elections!” he declared.

No conclusive evidence establishing that the election results were stolen has been publicly presented.

Religious Zionism also demanded action against the attorney general, arguing that the allegations concerning her conduct warranted immediate intervention.

“If the head of the Shin Bet is indeed claiming that Gali Baharav-Miara is obstructing an investigation that goes to the heart of Israeli democracy, then this is an earthquake,” the party said.

The party urged Justice Sohlberg to order Baharav-Miara’s removal from the investigation and demanded a comprehensive examination of suspected ties between hostile foreign elements and Arab lawmakers.

Education Minister Yoav Kisch joined the criticism, asking, “Gali, aren’t you tired of destroying Israeli democracy?”

Eisenkot, meanwhile, issued a sharply different warning, directing his criticism toward Netanyahu and Likud and cautioning Zini against allowing the Shin Bet to become entangled in political maneuvering.

“Those serving in Israel’s security establishment, law enforcement and public service serve the state, not the king. Woe to anyone who corrupts his authority and position for political considerations,” Eisenkot said.

He accused Netanyahu and Likud of attempting to destabilize the country’s democratic institutions following an election in which Netanyahu’s bloc failed to secure a majority.

“In their desperation, Likud and Netanyahu are attempting to carry out a pogrom against democracy and the rule of law. They are trying to drag all of us into a dangerous constitutional crisis. Unfortunately, not for the first time,” Eisenkot declared.

“That is precisely why they are neither worthy nor fit to continue holding power. That is why the majority of Israeli citizens voted against their continued tenure,” he added.

Eisenkot warned that the controversy could damage public confidence in the election results.

“At this difficult hour, politically and in terms of security, they are trying to sabotage public trust in the election results. Citizens of Israel, stand firm. This is a moment of truth for the future of the state as a liberal democracy,” he said.

Baharav-Miara responded to the accusations with an unusual public statement, insisting that investigators must establish a factual basis before questioning citizens or elected officials.

“Very unusually, and in light of erroneous reports, the attorney general wishes to clarify that in a state governed by law, citizens or elected officials cannot be investigated without evidence justifying it,” her office stated.

“If the Shin Bet or any other body possesses evidence justifying an investigation, it is invited to present it. Anyone who needs to be investigated will be investigated, but people will not be investigated without an evidentiary basis,” the statement continued.

The attorney general then accused the Shin Bet itself of delaying the inquiry by withholding materials from the investigative team established to examine the allegations.

“For two days, the Shin Bet has not transferred the investigative materials collected to the special investigative team established on the recommendation of Justice Sohlberg, in cooperation with the police and under the supervision of the State Attorney’s Office, thereby effectively delaying the handling of the matter,” her office said.

“The law enforcement system is acting quickly and professionally to uncover the truth based on the material in its possession, and investigative decisions will be made accordingly,” the statement added.

According to Haaretz, Zini has resisted transferring investigative materials to police and prosecutors, including intelligence concerning money allegedly received by a Joint List lawmaker. The report also alleged that he had excluded senior Shin Bet officials from aspects of the investigation and established direct communication with Sohlberg to bypass the attorney general.

Senior law enforcement officials sharply criticized Zini’s conduct. “He is operating like in North Korea. In a democracy, you do not investigate Knesset members without evidence,” officials were quoted as saying.

Additional reporting indicated that the dispute intensified when Zini sought to classify the entire affair as a national security investigation, a designation that would allow the Shin Bet to employ broader investigative powers, including surveillance and other security measures.

Baharav-Miara reportedly rejected the blanket classification, arguing that national security powers require evidence of relevant security offenses and that using such methods without proper authorization could jeopardize the admissibility of evidence.

During a lengthy meeting involving Zini, Baharav-Miara and Sohlberg, the parties reportedly disagreed even over how to describe the investigation publicly. Sohlberg ultimately proposed language acknowledging that the allegations could have a national security dimension without automatically classifying the entire matter as a security offense.

Separate reports indicated that Zini was seeking authorization to question Tibi, Abbas, Abu Shehadeh and a fourth senior Arab political figure. According to the reports, investigators had presented a stronger evidentiary basis concerning the fourth individual, whose identity has not been released.

The Central Elections Committee, meanwhile, has rejected suggestions that the suspected foreign interference necessarily means the election results will change. Officials have emphasized that even if wrongdoing is established, it does not automatically follow that the distribution of Knesset seats was affected.

Baharav-Miara insisted that substantial investigative steps had already been authorized at the Shin Bet’s request and that a joint team involving the security service, police and prosecutors would continue examining the allegations.

“Anyone who needs to be investigated will be investigated,” she said.

{Matzav.com}

Shas’s Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah has decided to recommend Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to President Isaac Herzog to form Israel’s next government, following Netanyahu’s public commitment to advance legislation protecting the status of yeshiva bochurim who are dedicated to learning Torah.

The decision, announced Tuesday, represents a significant development in the negotiations to establish a new coalition following last week’s Knesset election. It comes amid efforts by opposition parties to attract support from the chareidi factions, whose representatives could play a decisive role in determining who will form the next government.

According to Shas, the decision was reached after Netanyahu reaffirmed his intention to pursue a legislative arrangement addressing the status of bnei yeshivos and their military service obligations.

“In light of Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu’s clear and unequivocal statement reaffirming his continued support and commitment to regulating the status of Torah scholars, the Shas Council of Torah Sages has decided to recommend him to the President as its candidate to form the government,” the party announced.

The announcement followed a statement by Netanyahu criticizing opposition leaders who had met earlier in Herzliya and agreed not to rule out coalition negotiations with the chareidi parties.

Netanyahu accused the opposition of abandoning its campaign rhetoric against the chareidi community now that its leaders were seeking the parliamentary support necessary to establish a government.

“The hypocrisy we are witnessing now is outrageous. Suddenly, it’s no longer a ‘draft evasion law,’ but a ‘soft conscription law.’ Suddenly, they are no longer ‘parasites,’ ‘draft dodgers,’ or ‘destroyers of the state,’ but are being given a completely clean slate,” Netanyahu said.

The prime minister maintained that his position on the draft issue had not changed. He pledged to continue promoting legislation that would enable full-time yeshiva bochurim and kollel yungeleit to remain devoted to limud haTorah, while providing for the enlistment of chareidi men who are not studying in yeshivos.

Shas also condemned what it described as years of hostility toward the chareidi community by opposition politicians, accusing them of reversing their positions for political advantage.

In its statement, the party charged that left-wing leaders had conducted an unprecedented campaign of vilification and persecution against the chareidi public and lomdei Torah, whom it described as the foundation of the Jewish people’s continued existence.

Meanwhile, United Torah Judaism has not yet announced which candidate it will recommend. Netanyahu spoke Tuesday morning with UTJ chairman MK Yaakov Asher, who reportedly informed him that the party would wait for the return of Gedolei Yisroel from their trip abroad before making a decision.

During the conversation, Netanyahu reiterated his commitment to completing the draft legislation and warned against the establishment of a government dependent on parties he accused of supporting terrorism.

UTJ’s position has attracted particular attention because opposition leaders, including Gadi Eisenkot, Naftali Bennett, Yair Lapid and Avigdor Lieberman, are exploring ways to form a government without Netanyahu. Their discussions have included the possibility of securing support from chareidi lawmakers despite their previous opposition to arrangements protecting yeshiva students from conscription.

Religious Zionism, headed by Bezalel Smotrich, also announced Tuesday that it would recommend Netanyahu to Herzog. The party called for the formation of a broad Jewish coalition under Netanyahu’s leadership, arguing that he heads both the largest individual party and the largest parliamentary bloc.

Otzma Yehudit, led by Itamar Ben Gvir, similarly confirmed that it would support Netanyahu for another term as prime minister.

According to the current seat distribution, Netanyahu’s bloc holds 53 mandates, while Eisenkot’s opposition alliance has 48 and the Arab parties control 19. Neither side has the 61 seats necessary to command a majority in the 120-member Knesset.

President Herzog is scheduled to begin consultations with the Knesset factions on Wednesday and Thursday before deciding which candidate should receive the first opportunity to assemble a coalition. Eisenkot is currently expected to receive the greatest number of recommendations, although that would not guarantee his ability to establish a government.

For the chareidi parties, the central issue remains the future of the draft law and the legal status of bnei yeshivos. Shas has now publicly committed its support to Netanyahu, while UTJ’s leadership continues to consult with the Gedolei Yisroel before determining its next steps.

{Matzav.com}

Iran has rejected Washington’s response to its latest peace proposal, declaring that the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz will remain closed unless the United States agrees to all seven of Tehran’s conditions for ending the conflict.

The announcement Tuesday came as President Donald Trump expressed optimism about reaching an agreement with Iran, even as he warned that American forces remain prepared to launch additional strikes against the country’s nuclear facilities.

Mohsen Rezaei, a senior Iranian security official, said Tehran was dissatisfied with the American response and would not consider reopening the waterway until Washington explicitly accepted and implemented its demands.

“America’s response to Iran’s rights and demands was not convincing, and they must fully and explicitly address Iran’s seven conditions and act upon them,” Rezaei wrote on X.

“Only in this case will the Strait of Hormuz be reopened,” he added.

Iranian officials have insisted that their seven-point proposal must serve as the foundation for any agreement. Among Tehran’s demands are financial compensation from the United States for damage sustained during the conflict, an end to American economic pressure and the removal of the U.S. naval blockade on Iranian ports.

Tehran is also demanding a cessation of military operations throughout the Middle East, including in Lebanon and Gaza, where Iranian-backed terrorist groups have been involved in fighting.

Other conditions include the release of billions of dollars in frozen Iranian funds and a reduction in the American military presence across the region.

Iran is further insisting that any agreement permanently end the war rather than merely establish a temporary ceasefire. Its proposal also seeks to exclude the country’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs from future negotiations.

The latest Iranian rejection follows several public statements by Trump suggesting that the prolonged confrontation could be approaching a diplomatic resolution.

Speaking to reporters Monday, Trump dismissed speculation that major fighting would resume immediately after Tuesday’s U.S. midterm elections, arguing that American military operations had already accomplished their objectives.

“We had a war with Iran. We won,” Trump said. “I don’t know if you even call it a war because we haven’t been doing any fighting for months.”

Trump subsequently suggested that an agreement could be reached to restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz while addressing the Iranian nuclear threat.

“Oil Prices are DROPPING LIKE A ROCK, down almost $10 a Barrel, A RECORD, because people feel that there will not be a War with Iran. Iran wants a settlement, as soon as possible. It could happen!” the president wrote on Truth Social.

The diplomatic impasse comes as Qatar and Pakistan continue efforts to broker an agreement between Washington and Tehran. Qatari mediators have reportedly presented revised proposals to both sides, with further responses expected as negotiations continue.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi recently indicated that Tehran could reopen the Strait of Hormuz within two days of an agreement if Washington first carried out the required measures. The shortened timetable represents a change from Iran’s earlier proposal, which envisioned a seven-day implementation period.

The tensions intensified Monday when American forces carried out limited strikes against Iranian targets on Qeshm Island, near the Strait of Hormuz. U.S. officials described the operation as a defensive response after Iranian Revolutionary Guard forces fired at an American aircraft.

Despite the renewed military activity, Vice President JD Vance said the administration remained encouraged by the diplomatic contacts and believed further progress was possible.

During an appearance Monday night on Fox News with Sean Hannity, Trump emphasized that any agreement must eliminate Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons.

“We cannot let Iran, an evil nation, who has killed many of our people, Soleimani is an example, no longer with us, but killed many of our people, we cannot let them have a nuclear weapon, and we won’t,” Trump stated.

The president also warned that American forces could quickly strike Pickaxe Mountain, a deeply buried Iranian nuclear installation that has remained a potential target.

“We bombed out all of their potential nuclear power. Now, we might have to go after Pickaxe [Mountain], but that’s not a big deal. We can do it in, literally, we can do that in one hour, okay, as soon as we want, at any time we want.”

Trump nevertheless maintained that the Iranian leadership was eager to avoid another major confrontation, saying Tehran’s representatives “want to make a deal very badly, there’s a very good chance we make a deal.”

A senior Army general dismissed by War Secretary Pete Hegseth is under federal investigation over allegations that he disclosed classified military intelligence concerning Iran and Ukraine to reporters at The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, raising the possibility of criminal charges and a military court-martial.

Former Army Lt. Gen. Brett Sylvia was removed from his position last week following an investigation into suspected unauthorized communications with journalists. According to Axios, investigators believe the general passed sensitive military information to reporters and subsequently acknowledged making unauthorized disclosures during recorded questioning.

Three individuals familiar with the inquiry told Axios that Sylvia failed four polygraph examinations and made admissions during two videotaped interviews lasting more than two hours combined.

“The president has no tolerance for leakers, so Sylvia’s termination is the first step in the accountability process, not the last,” one source told Axios.

The Justice Department is examining allegations that Sylvia began providing classified information to Wall Street Journal reporter Michael Gordon in the fall of 2025. Investigators reportedly identified several interactions between the two, including a meeting at the Pentagon and another at a Silver Diner restaurant in Arlington, Virginia.

An internal Defense Department investigative report obtained by Axios describes how Sylvia allegedly used information from a classified document to brief Gordon about American military assistance to Ukraine.

“Major General Sylvia relied on notes he took while reviewing a classified secret report to orally brief Gordon on assistance to Ukraine,” the report stated.

Investigators are also examining allegations that Sylvia disclosed sensitive information about American weapons inventories and discussions involving Iran.

A separate legal review reportedly identified disclosures concerning “munitions stockpiles and high-level interagency discussions with Iran,” according to an individual familiar with the findings.

The inquiry has also focused on Sylvia’s use of Signal, an encrypted messaging platform, and whether communications with journalists were subsequently erased.

According to the Pentagon report, Gordon contacted Sylvia through Signal in June or July, although the general reportedly said he could not remember the precise contents of the communication.

“Sylvia is unable to recall exactly what was in that message,” the report stated. “But he believed it had something to do with Iran. He stated that he did not respond to the message and instead deleted it.”

Investigators said Sylvia acknowledged deleting the entire Signal conversation, potentially eliminating messages and records of calls exchanged through the application.

The Pentagon investigation also identified communications between Sylvia and New York Times reporter Greg Jaffe concerning Hegseth’s decisions to dismiss senior military officers.

Neither Gordon nor Jaffe has been accused of wrongdoing. The allegations concern Sylvia’s handling of information obtained through his military position, and the claims have not been established in court.

The investigation has also generated questions inside the Pentagon about how senior military officials handled Sylvia’s dismissal. The Joint Staff initially released a complimentary farewell statement recognizing his service, only to withdraw it after senior Defense Department officials raised concerns about the circumstances surrounding his removal.

“You don’t get four polygraphs deep without the head of the Joint Staff being briefed at some point. Why wasn’t he flagged, what red flags flared up?” a source familiar with the investigation told Axios.

Sylvia, a decorated career officer who previously commanded the Army’s 101st Airborne Division, had been serving as director for strategy, plans and policy on the Joint Staff, a senior position responsible for military planning and strategic advice to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The Air Force Office of Special Investigations conducted the internal inquiry, and the Pentagon subsequently referred the matter to the Justice Department for possible prosecution. The general could also face proceedings under military law, including allegations of “conduct unbecoming of an officer.”

The accusations have generated disagreement among some military officials. Earlier reporting indicated that colleagues questioned the allegations, while one individual familiar with Sylvia’s position said he denied leaking classified information despite acknowledging contact with journalists.

The case comes amid Hegseth’s broader campaign to identify unauthorized disclosures from the Pentagon. The administration has expanded the use of polygraph examinations, established a joint effort with the Justice Department to investigate leaks, and tightened rules governing journalists’ access to military facilities.

The Pentagon has maintained that safeguarding classified military information is essential, regardless of an official’s rank or position.

Assistant War Secretary Sean Parnell warned last week that “classified information is not personal property. Leaking it for personal, political or professional gain is a betrayal of the trust placed in those responsible for keeping it.”

President Donald Trump’s ability to carry out his agenda during the final two years of his presidency hangs in the balance Tuesday as Americans vote in midterm elections that could either strengthen Republican control of Washington or hand Democrats the congressional power to obstruct his policies and investigate his administration.

With Republicans defending narrow majorities in both the House and Senate, the election could dramatically alter the political landscape. A Republican victory would give Trump additional leverage to advance his priorities on immigration, taxes, trade and national security, while a Democrat takeover of either chamber could significantly complicate his plans.

Republicans entered the election holding a 218-214 advantage in the House and a 53-47 majority in the Senate, according to Reuters. Democrats would need a net gain of four seats in either chamber to secure control.

Although several national surveys have indicated that Democrats are positioned to gain House seats, Republicans remain hopeful that strong turnout among Trump supporters will produce a better result than polling suggests. The president’s allies have pointed to previous elections in which surveys underestimated Republican support.

Trump has devoted considerable attention to the midterms, urging his supporters to approach the election as though he were personally seeking another term.

“You have to pretend I’m on the ballot because when I’m on the ballot, we get almost 50% more voters out,” Trump told supporters during a Monday telephone rally, according to CBS News.

The president described Tuesday’s voting as “the most important midterm election in the history of our country,” arguing that Republican success would preserve the momentum of his administration.

Trump also acknowledged that the president’s party has traditionally struggled in midterm contests, although he maintained that Republicans had mounted an unusually aggressive campaign.

“For some reason, the sitting president doesn’t win the midterms,” Trump said Monday, according to CBS News. “But we gave this a very strong shot.”

A Republican victory in both chambers would allow Trump to portray the outcome as a public endorsement of his America First policies, particularly given the historical tendency of voters to punish the party controlling the White House during midterm elections.

Continued GOP control would also make it easier for the administration to pursue additional tax legislation, immigration measures, changes to federal spending and healthcare policy, and the confirmation of judicial and executive branch nominees.

An analysis by S&P Global Market Intelligence suggested that Republican majorities would give the White House greater freedom to advance tax reductions, immigration restrictions and trade initiatives while limiting congressional resistance to the administration’s priorities.

Republican control of the Senate would be especially important for Trump’s judicial appointments, including any potential Supreme Court vacancy during the remainder of his presidency.

Democrats, meanwhile, have focused their campaign on the cost of living, economic concerns and the war with Iran, hoping dissatisfaction with the administration will translate into congressional gains.

Election analysts have generally viewed the House as the Democrats’ stronger opportunity, while several closely contested Senate races could determine whether Republicans retain their advantage in the upper chamber.

Nevertheless, Republican strategists argue that polling may not fully capture the strength of Trump’s political coalition, particularly among rural and working-class voters who have sometimes been underrepresented in surveys.

Republican pollster Patrick Ruffini has pointed to previous Senate contests in Iowa, Michigan and Ohio, where polling during the 2018 through 2024 election cycles overstated Democratic support by an average of 6.2 percentage points. Other polling experts have cautioned that predicting turnout in midterm elections is especially difficult because participation tends to be lower than in presidential years.

More than 57 million Americans had already voted before Election Day, according to figures cited by Reuters, exceeding the approximately 46 million early votes cast in the 2022 midterms. The election is also on pace to become the most expensive in American history, with candidates and outside organizations expected to spend approximately $11.9 billion.

Should Democrats capture the House, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries would be positioned to become speaker, giving his party control of congressional committees, investigative hearings and subpoena authority.

Democrats could use those powers to scrutinize administration officials, federal spending decisions, immigration enforcement and other White House policies. They would also gain greater influence over budget negotiations and government funding legislation.

A Democratic Senate majority would pose an additional challenge, potentially slowing or blocking Trump’s judicial nominations, cabinet appointments and other confirmations. Any Supreme Court vacancy could become particularly contentious.

However, even a Democratic takeover of both chambers would leave Trump with substantial executive authority and the power to veto legislation passed by Congress.

The White House has already been preparing for that possibility. According to Reuters, senior administration officials, including Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, have examined ways to continue advancing immigration enforcement, tariffs, housing policies and spending priorities without relying on new congressional legislation.

Trump has also outlined how he would respond if Democrats gained control, suggesting that repeated presidential vetoes could eventually force negotiations.

“I guess I’ll become Mr. Veto,” Trump told the New York Post’s “Pod Force One” podcast in an interview excerpt released Sunday. “And then at some point, we’ll probably make deals.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent similarly argued last month that there would be “very little” a Democratic House could accomplish to derail the administration’s broader agenda.

Even with Republicans retaining both chambers, however, Congress could face difficult negotiations over federal spending and the debt ceiling in 2027. Analysts have warned that partisan divisions and disagreements within the Republican Party could still produce legislative stalemates.

The election will also influence the Republican Party’s direction ahead of the 2028 presidential race. A strong GOP performance would reinforce Trump’s standing as the party’s dominant figure, while significant losses could encourage potential successors and congressional Republicans to distance themselves from some of his policies.

Trump has made clear that he considers the election a critical test of his presidency and has invested considerably more time campaigning than he has in previous midterm cycles.

“I’ve never worked the midterms like I have this one,” Trump said in a recent interview with the New York Post’s Miranda Devine, according to CBS News.

“This is really because I think it’s so important,” he said. “We’ve done so well. The country is so hot. We want to keep it that way.”

Americans are heading to the polls Tuesday for the 2026 midterm elections, with control of Congress, numerous governorships, and thousands of state and local offices at stake. While results from some states could become clear shortly after voting ends, closely contested races may remain unresolved well into Wednesday or even for several days.

The first polls begin closing at 6 p.m. Eastern, setting off a series of reporting deadlines that will stretch past midnight. The busiest periods will come at 8 p.m. and 9 p.m., when voting concludes across much of the country and election officials begin releasing results from major battleground states.

For New York and New Jersey voters, the 9 p.m. closing time in New York will be particularly important, with the state’s gubernatorial contest and competitive congressional races among those attracting attention. New Jersey polls close an hour earlier, at 8 p.m.

All times below are Eastern Standard Time.

6 P.M. — FIRST RESULTS FROM INDIANA AND KENTUCKY

The earliest polls close in portions of Indiana and Kentucky, giving election watchers their first glimpse of voter preferences. However, statewide results cannot be called until voting concludes in the remaining areas of both states at 7 p.m.

Among the congressional contests attracting attention are Indiana’s 5th District and Kentucky’s 6th District.

7 P.M. — GEORGIA, VIRGINIA AND SOUTH CAROLINA ENTER THE PICTURE

Voting concludes in six states, including Georgia, South Carolina and Virginia, which have historically reported results relatively quickly.

During the 2024 presidential election, all three states had counted approximately half their ballots by the 8 p.m. hour. Georgia reached 90% of its count at 10:21 p.m., South Carolina at 11:14 p.m., and Virginia shortly after midnight.

Most Florida polling locations also close at 7 p.m., including those in competitive congressional districts, although statewide winners cannot be announced until voting ends in the state’s western Panhandle at 8 p.m.

7:30 P.M. — NORTH CAROLINA AND OHIO JOIN THE COUNT

Polls close in North Carolina, Ohio and West Virginia, bringing additional Senate, gubernatorial and congressional contests into focus.

All three states have generally processed ballots at a relatively brisk pace. In 2024, they reached approximately 50% of their counts around 9 p.m. and approached 90% during the 11 p.m. hour.

The Associated Press called Ohio’s closely watched 2024 Senate election at 11:27 p.m.

Major contests during the 7 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. periods include Senate races in Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Ohio, along with gubernatorial elections in Georgia and Ohio and several competitive House districts.

8 P.M. — THE FIRST MAJOR WAVE OF RESULTS

One of the night’s most consequential reporting periods arrives at 8 p.m., when polls close fully or partially in nearly half the country.

Florida, Maine, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania are among the states to watch, with important Senate, gubernatorial and congressional contests on the ballot.

Florida is traditionally among the fastest states to report its results. In 2024, approximately 90% of ballots had been counted by 8:07 p.m.

Pennsylvania and New Hampshire typically require more time. Both reached the halfway point around 10 p.m. in 2024, with Pennsylvania reaching 90% shortly before 1 a.m. and New Hampshire approaching that level around 1:42 a.m.

Maine’s count was considerably slower, reaching 50% only at 12:54 a.m.

Most polling places in Michigan and Texas also close at 8 p.m., although statewide races cannot be called until voting concludes in their remaining time zones at 9 p.m.

Arkansas follows with an 8:30 p.m. closing time.

9 P.M. — NEW YORK, MICHIGAN AND WISCONSIN TAKE CENTER STAGE

Another major round of poll closings arrives at 9 p.m., with voting ending in numerous battleground states, including New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kansas and Arizona. Statewide voting also concludes in Texas.

New York’s gubernatorial election, along with competitive congressional races across the state, will be among the major contests drawing attention. Senate and gubernatorial races in Michigan, Texas and several Midwestern states could also help determine the political direction of the country.

Based on the 2024 election, Iowa, Nebraska, New York and Wisconsin may reach approximately half their total vote counts during the 10 p.m. hour. Minnesota took until 11:29 p.m. to reach that point.

New York and Iowa were approaching 90% counted before midnight in 2024, while Wisconsin, Nebraska and Minnesota needed until the early morning hours.

Michigan could take considerably longer. During the previous presidential election, the state did not reach 90% counted until 4:50 a.m.

Arizona closes its polls at 9 p.m. but does not release its first results until 10 p.m., meaning voters will have to wait an additional hour for the initial figures.

10 P.M. — ARIZONA RESULTS ARRIVE AS WESTERN STATES CLOSE

At 10 p.m., polls close in Montana, Nevada and Utah, along with portions of Idaho and Oregon.

Congressional races in those states will begin producing results, while Arizona’s first reported vote totals will offer an initial indication of the outcome of its gubernatorial and House contests.

Arizona’s voting procedures and ballot-counting requirements mean that particularly close races could remain unsettled beyond election night.

11 P.M. — CALIFORNIA AND WASHINGTON BEGIN REPORTING

The final polling locations in California, Washington, Idaho and Oregon close at 11 p.m. Eastern.

California’s gubernatorial contest, Proposition 40 and competitive congressional districts will be among the races receiving attention, along with House contests in Washington.

However, voters should not expect every close race on the West Coast to be decided Tuesday night.

Both California and Washington conduct much of their voting by mail, and ballots that arrive after Election Day can still be counted if they meet state deadlines.

California will accept qualifying ballots received through November 10, while Washington’s deadline extends to November 23.

In 2024, approximately 38% of California’s total vote and 33% of Washington’s remained uncounted at the end of election night.

Washington did not reach 90% counted until November 9, while California reached that level on November 14.

MIDNIGHT AND 1 A.M. — ALASKA BRINGS ELECTION NIGHT TO A CLOSE

Hawaii and most of Alaska conclude voting at midnight Eastern, with the country’s final polling locations closing at 1 a.m. in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands.

Alaska’s Senate and House races will be closely monitored, although the state’s extensive use of absentee and early voting means final results may take considerably longer.

In 2024, roughly one-quarter of Alaska’s ballots remained uncounted when election night ended.

The state is not expected to receive all eligible military and overseas ballots until November 18, meaning close contests could remain unresolved for more than two weeks. Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system could also require additional tabulation if no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes.

For voters following the national results, the first major indications of how the midterms are unfolding should emerge between 8 p.m. and midnight, although the final balance of power in Congress may depend on races that take days to settle.

{Matzav.com}

Widespread voting machine malfunctions disrupted Election Day in New York’s Westchester County on Tuesday, with ballot scanners rejecting paper ballots at polling locations and election officials resorting to emergency procedures to preserve votes for counting later.

The problems prompted concerns about the handling of ballots in one of New York’s most populous counties, particularly as voters cast their ballots in several closely contested races, including the battle between Republican Congressman Mike Lawler and Democrat Cait Conley in the 17th Congressional District.

Appearing on Newsmax’s “National Report,” Lawler described the situation as “very frustrating not only for us but for voters,” while calling on election officials to ensure that the technical difficulties would not prevent anyone from having their vote counted.

“This is a county of over a million people. It’s one of the largest counties in the state,” Lawler said. “And we need to make sure that every single vote is counted, that every single ballot is counted, that everybody stays online and exercises their right to vote.”

According to reports, ballot scanners at polling sites throughout Westchester were refusing to accept completed paper ballots. Election workers were instructed to secure the ballots in emergency storage bags so they could be processed once the technical problems were addressed.

The Westchester County Board of Elections acknowledged the widespread difficulties and apologized to voters, although officials initially provided no definitive explanation for the failures or a timetable for restoring normal operations.

“Let us be absolutely clear: Every eligible vote will be counted,” Democrat Commissioner Tajian M. Nelson and Republican Commissioner Douglas A. Colety said in a joint statement.

Lawler said Republican and Democratic election officials had agreed to consolidate the counting process at a central facility rather than attempting to tabulate the affected ballots separately at each polling location.

“So everything will be in one location so that we can oversee, we can monitor, we can make sure that every ballot is counted,” he said.

Election officials initially pointed to the thickness of the ballot paper as a possible explanation for the failures. However, the county subsequently removed that explanation from its public statement, leaving the precise cause unresolved. The difficulties reportedly began when polling places opened at 6 a.m., even though the scanners had functioned during early voting.

The New York State Board of Elections joined county officials and equipment vendors in investigating the malfunction. New York Attorney General Letitia James also announced that her office was monitoring the situation and reassured residents that they could continue submitting ballots safely.

The disruption has drawn particular attention because of the closely contested race in New York’s 17th Congressional District, where Lawler is seeking a third term against Conley. The district includes portions of Westchester and Dutchess counties, along with Rockland and Putnam counties, and is considered a potentially decisive battleground in the fight for control of the House of Representatives.

Lawler said the campaign has attracted more than $60 million in spending and expressed confidence that voters would return him to Washington.

“My constituents know me. We’ve delivered real results for them, including delivering the largest tax cut in American history, securing the border,” he said.

The Republican congressman also criticized Conley’s political record and connections to Virginia, accusing his Democratic opponent of supporting policies that would increase taxes.

Despite the equipment failures, Lawler urged residents not to abandon their plans to vote or allow election predictions to discourage them.

“Don’t believe the pollsters, the pundits, the media. Just vote. Get out and vote,” Lawler urged.

Conley likewise encouraged voters to remain at their polling locations and cast their ballots despite the technical difficulties.

The county’s emergency procedures call for affected ballots to remain in secured, monitored orange bags until they can be processed. Local reports indicated that the ballots would be transferred to election officials for counting after polls close.

The breakdown could delay the release of final results in closely contested races, particularly if the machines cannot be repaired and election workers must use alternative counting procedures.

Officials emphasized that voting remained open throughout the county and urged residents to stay in line, follow poll workers’ instructions, and submit their completed ballots before polls close at 9 p.m.

{Matzav.com}

Likud MK Moshe Saada is dismissing the possibility of an alternative Israeli government bringing together opposition parties, chareidi factions, and Arab parties, claiming that even members of Gadi Eisenkot’s own Yashar party are unwilling to support such an arrangement.

In an interview with Arutz Sheva, Saada said he had personally spoken with individuals in Eisenkot’s party who made clear that they would oppose a coalition dependent on Arab political factions. He argued that the opposition lacks a realistic path to forming a government and will ultimately have to choose between joining a broad coalition headed by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and returning to the polls.

“People in Eisenkot’s party tell me they will not sit with them. They say this unequivocally, so it won’t happen,” Saada says, declining to identify the individuals involved. “I would recommend that Eisenkot speak with members of his own party and check whether they give him legitimacy to engage in this discussion. They know that even having this discussion is wrong and inappropriate.”

Saada maintained that recent changes in the opposition’s position on the draft of chareidi yeshiva bochurim would not make a coalition with the Arab parties any more feasible.

“It won’t happen. This is an empty spin with no substance. The chances of this spin becoming reality are zero,” he declares.

His objections, he explained, extend beyond the political feasibility of such a government. Saada contended that merely entertaining the possibility of cooperation with certain Arab factions gives legitimacy to political positions he considers unacceptable.

“My problem with this spin is the very existence of a discourse that normalizes sitting with supporters of terrorism. The fact that [Naftali] Bennett and Eisenkot allow such a discussion normalizes the legitimacy of supporters of terrorism,” he argues.

Saada specifically targeted the Ra’am party, alleging that its political platform includes positions fundamentally incompatible with the principles of a Jewish state.

“Apparently, neither Eisenkot nor Bennett bothered to read Ra’am’s platform. They talk about occupied Jerusalem becoming the capital of Palestine, the release of all prisoners – meaning including the Nukhba terrorists – and they regard the Law of Return as racist, which effectively means abolishing recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. None of this will happen, but the very discussion of it is what normalizes these positions.”

Asked about Naftali Bennett’s previous coalition, which included Ra’am, Saada argued that the October 7 massacre had fundamentally changed Israeli public attitudes toward political cooperation with Arab parties. He asserted that Israelis had come to believe that “they don’t want to live alongside us, but in our place.”

Saada also pointed to Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Lieberman’s opposition to a minority government as another obstacle to the opposition’s plans. He predicted that another election could deliver at least 70 Knesset seats to the right-wing and religious parties.

“The change bloc cannot form a government under any circumstances. There is only one option: a broad national right-wing government, as the prime minister is proposing, or elections. Eisenkot will have to choose between the two,” he says.

According to Saada, Eisenkot will initially attempt to assemble an alternative coalition before recognizing that the numbers and political disagreements make such a government impossible.

“Right now, Eisenkot isn’t ready. He will try to form a government, realize that it is impossible, and then have to decide whether to go to elections, in which case his party will collapse, or join a broad national government without boycotts – neither Otzma Yehudit nor anyone else should be excluded. The platform will be fully national and right-wing.”

Saada expressed doubt that Yair Lapid would agree to serve in a Netanyahu-led government, although he suggested that Bennett might eventually be more receptive to joining such a coalition.

“Lapid has five people. His party has been cut by almost 80 percent. It’s a party that barely exists anymore. I think he would prefer to sit in the opposition with Liberman, but we’ll see,” he says.

Turning to the contentious issue of drafting chareidi yeshiva students, Saada accused opposition politicians of abandoning their previous positions on military service in pursuit of a coalition with chareidi parties.

“It was clear to me that the change bloc was not acting out of principle, but out of a desire to bring down the government,” he says.

Saada, who has promoted the principle “Those who serve should receive,” said his proposed legislation would apply a uniform standard to all sectors of Israeli society, including chareidim, secular individuals who refuse military service on pacifist grounds, and Arab citizens.

Under his approach, government benefits would be linked to national or military service rather than granted according to communal affiliation.

“They want to join forces with the haredim and the Arabs, so ‘no service, no benefits’ is irrelevant to them. But that won’t help them, because ‘no service, no benefits’ is the right, moral, principled and Zionist approach. It’s time to end the discriminatory policy that harms the Arab public and give benefits exclusively to those who serve. Today, the haredim and the Arabs are the ones receiving preferential treatment,” he says.

On the prospect of a broad national unity government, Saada conceded that the participating parties would have to reach compromises. Nevertheless, he insisted that certain ideological positions could not be sacrificed in the process.

Among his priorities is continued Jewish settlement development in Yehuda and Shomron, which he considers essential to Israel’s security, particularly following the October 7 massacre.

Saada also said judicial reform must remain on the agenda of the next government. He revealed that he had previously held discussions with opposition representatives aimed at reaching agreements on changes to the judicial system, but claimed that understandings reached in those talks ultimately failed to secure approval from party leaders.

“There is no need to explain to Matan Kahana why the judicial system needs reform. The same applies to Elisaf Peretz and others,” he says.

In Saada’s assessment, negotiations over a unity government would be more likely to encounter disagreements over ministerial appointments than over the fundamental policies he considers necessary.

“But we’re not there yet. First, they need to go through a process of coming around to the understanding that Netanyahu will be the next prime minister. He leads the largest party and the largest bloc,” he says.

Saada predicted that Eisenkot would eventually conclude that joining a Netanyahu-led coalition would be preferable to facing voters again.

“Eisenkot will do the math and understand that in another election, they will collapse,” he says.

He also accused the opposition of employing questionable campaign tactics and argued that Eisenkot could suffer politically if voters believed he had broken his commitments concerning cooperation with Arab parties.

“Voters who trusted Eisenkot when he said they would not sit with the Arabs will realize they were lied to, and the public will punish them,” he concludes.

Meanwhile, the political maneuvering continued Tuesday as opposition leaders met in Herzliya and agreed to recommend Eisenkot to President Isaac Herzog as their candidate to form the next government. The opposition has 48 seats, compared with 53 for Netanyahu’s bloc, while the two Arab factions hold 19 seats.

Reports following the meeting indicated that opposition leaders were considering negotiations with the chareidi parties as a possible alternative to relying on Arab support. However, no agreement with Shas or United Torah Judaism had been reached.

Saada also made similar remarks in a separate interview with Radio 103FM, arguing that Eisenkot’s efforts to cooperate with either the chareidi parties or Arab factions would ultimately fail. In that interview, he said Likud would not abandon its existing political partners to facilitate a unity agreement.

President Herzog is scheduled to begin consultations with the newly elected Knesset factions on Wednesday, with the parties preparing to submit their recommendations for who should receive the first opportunity to assemble a governing coalition.

{Matzav.com}

IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir pledged Tuesday that chareidi young men who enlist in the Israeli military will be able to maintain their religious identity and way of life throughout their service, declaring that the army has no intention of changing who they are.

Speaking during a visit to the chareidi hesder yeshiva in Gan Yavne, Zamir said that increasing the number of soldiers serving in the IDF is essential to Israel’s security, but emphasized that the military must provide conditions that accommodate the religious requirements of chareidi recruits.

“The IDF does not seek to change your identity. Our goal is for you to enter the army haredi and leave the army haredi,” Zamir told the yeshiva students. “This is not just a statement, but a commitment on the part of the IDF and a personal commitment of mine.”

The visit took place amid the continuing controversy over the drafting of chareidi yeshiva students, an issue that has generated considerable tension between the Israeli government, the military establishment, and the chareidi community.

Joining Zamir at the gathering were Netzach Yehuda Association CEO Yossi Levy, Derech Chaim Yeshiva head Rabbi Carmi Gross, and senior IDF officers. The discussion focused on combining limud haTorah with military service, expanding enlistment, and addressing the country’s growing defense needs.

“For me, simply coming to a place of Torah study is a great privilege,” Zamir told the students, praising their decision to pursue a program that incorporates both Torah learning and preparation for military service.

The IDF chief maintained that the students represented an example of how a chareidi lifestyle could be preserved while participating in the country’s defense.

“You prove that it is possible to preserve your identity, share the burden, and take part in defending the State of Israel and its citizens,” he said.

Zamir referred to the concept of Sifra V’Saifa, combining the sefer and the sword, as an expression of the approach being pursued by the yeshiva.

“I see your decision to take part in the shared responsibility for Israel’s security alongside a deep commitment to Torah study and preserving tradition,” he said. “This is a unique combination that the IDF and the people of Israel need today more than ever.”

He also described the students as trailblazers whose decision to enlist could encourage others to follow a similar path.

“Each of you is a modern-day Nachshon ben Aminadav. You will be remembered as pioneers who paved the way for others,” he added.

Beyond offering assurances about preserving religious identity, Zamir acknowledged that creating separate military programs for chareidi recruits would not, by itself, be sufficient. He said officers responsible for these units must understand the religious sensitivities and daily requirements of the soldiers serving under them.

“Our responsibility does not end with creating suitable service frameworks. It requires us to recognize the needs of haredi servicemen, understand their world, and respect their faith,” he said.

According to Zamir, the IDF must develop commanders who are properly trained to work with chareidi soldiers, ensuring that their religious commitments are respected while they fulfill their military responsibilities.

During the visit, Zamir also discussed the IDF’s new multiyear strategic plan, known as Hoshen, or Choshen, which he said encompasses 12 major areas of military development, corresponding to the 12 Shevatim.

“Each stone in the Hoshen is unique in itself, but only together do they create a complete whole. Especially in these days, we understand more than ever that only together will we prevail,” he said.

Additional details about the visit indicated that the Netzach organization, which operates the chareidi hesder network, has expanded significantly over the past 13 years. According to the organization, it now operates 18 yeshivos serving more than 1,000 bochurim, with hundreds participating in programs that combine learning and military enlistment.

Students from the network’s Yerushalayim branch also demonstrated advanced radar-based technology they developed, designed to improve battlefield mapping and assist autonomous military systems.

Addressing the IDF’s manpower requirements, Zamir said the October 7 attacks and the prolonged fighting that followed had demonstrated the need for a larger military force. He argued that the lessons of the war must include expanding the number of soldiers available for future operations.

Concluding his address, Zamir called for cooperation among different segments of Israeli society in meeting the country’s security challenges.

“We will stand together, fight together, and prevail together, with a sense of mission, faith in the justice of our cause and the importance of our task, and a deep commitment to the State of Israel,” the IDF chief said.

{Matzav.com}

Former Israeli minister Ron Dermer launched a blistering attack on conservative commentator Tucker Carlson on Tuesday, accusing him of benefiting financially from foreign interests that promote antisemitism and questioning whether his political activities are consistent with the America First principles he frequently champions.

Dermer, a longtime confidant of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and a prominent figure in Israeli-American relations, took aim at Carlson in a sharply worded social media statement, suggesting that the commentator’s public image as a defender of American interests is at odds with his alleged financial connections.

“Tucker Carlson claims he’s America First while making millions from foreign actors amplifying his antisemitism,” Dermer wrote.

Tucker Carlson claims he’s America First while making millions from foreign actors amplifying his antisemitism.
His followers are being played for fools. They’re Tucker’s Suckers. pic.twitter.com/ytRJAhG9LS

— Ron Dermer – רון דרמר (@AmbDermer) November 2, 2026

The former minister also directed his criticism at Carlson’s audience, arguing that supporters who accept his political messaging are being manipulated.

“His followers are being played for fools. They’re Tucker’s Suckers,” he added.

Dermer’s remarks come amid growing criticism of Carlson’s treatment of Israel and Jewish issues. The former Fox News host, who now operates an independent media platform, has repeatedly challenged American support for Israel and featured guests whose statements about Jews and Israel have provoked accusations of antisemitism.

The Anti-Defamation League has criticized Carlson for giving prominent exposure to figures including Nick Fuentes, Candace Owens, and Darryl Cooper, accusing him of helping bring antisemitic conspiracy theories into mainstream political discussion. Carlson has maintained that his interviews and criticism of Israel are consistent with his commitment to questioning American foreign policy.

Dermer’s allegation concerning foreign financial support was particularly pointed, although he did not identify the foreign parties involved or provide documentation establishing the financial arrangements he alleged.

The remarks also drew attention from conservative commentator Mark Levin, a frequent critic of Carlson, who circulated Dermer’s statement and praised the former Israeli official. The Republican Jewish Coalition likewise shared Dermer’s comments, signaling support for his criticism.

Dermer served as Israel’s ambassador to the United States from 2013 to 2021 and subsequently held senior ministerial positions under Netanyahu, including responsibility for strategic affairs and negotiations surrounding the release of Israeli hostages.

Since leaving government, Dermer has been speaking publicly about rising antisemitism and the challenges facing Jewish communities. His latest criticism of Carlson reflects an increasingly contentious debate within American conservative circles over Israel, antisemitism, foreign influence, and the meaning of the America First movement.

Approximately 1,400 Israeli passengers were evacuated from a cruise ship docked at the Greek island of Syros on Tuesday evening after authorities received an anonymous warning that an explosive device had been planted aboard the vessel or on a nearby pier.

The ship, operated by Israel’s Mano Maritime cruise company, was prevented from departing the port as Greek security personnel launched an investigation into the threat. Passengers were ordered off the vessel while authorities searched for suspicious objects and worked to determine whether the warning was credible.

The incident disrupted a weeklong cruise through the Greek islands, leaving hundreds of Israeli vacationers waiting for clearance to return to the ship and continue their journey home.

The vessel had been scheduled to leave Syros and begin an approximately 24-hour voyage to Israel’s Haifa Port, where it was expected to arrive Thursday morning. The security operation raised questions about whether the ship would be able to maintain its original schedule.

Greek coast guard officers, bomb-detection dogs, and divers were dispatched to inspect the ship, identified as the Crown Iris, which sails under the Panamanian flag and is operated by the Israeli cruise company. Authorities concentrated part of their search on the vessel’s hull after the anonymous warning reportedly claimed that an explosive device had been attached to its underwater section.

Greek authorities subsequently confirmed that the ship was carrying 940 passengers and 597 crew members, for a total of 1,537 people. Initial inspections uncovered no explosives or other suspicious objects, although officials ordered additional examinations before permitting the vessel to leave port.

A specialized underwater operations unit from the Greek Coast Guard was also assigned to conduct a more extensive inspection, with personnel expected to arrive later Tuesday evening.

Reports differed over whether passengers had been evacuated. While some initial accounts described passengers being taken ashore as a precaution, other reports, including information attributed to Mano Maritime, indicated that passengers remained aboard while the searches continued.

The company reportedly believed the warning was likely a false alarm, although Greek authorities continued treating the threat seriously until security checks could be completed.

The incident occurred amid heightened tensions surrounding Israeli tourism in Greece. The Crown Iris has previously encountered pro-Palestinian demonstrations at Greek ports, and another protest reportedly took place Tuesday in Ermoupoli, the principal town on Syros. Authorities had also prohibited a planned demonstration against the ship’s arrival. There was no immediate evidence connecting the bomb threat to those protests.

The security scare also coincided with a series of similar threats affecting European aviation. At least seven flights across Europe received bomb warnings Tuesday, forcing diversions, security inspections, and temporary disruptions at several airports. No explosive devices were discovered in those incidents.

As of the latest reports Tuesday evening, Greek authorities had not identified the individual responsible for the warning, and the Crown Iris was awaiting final security clearance to begin its return voyage to Haifa.

{Matzav.com}

The SAT has undergone sweeping changes over the past four decades that have substantially reduced its emphasis on advanced vocabulary, lengthy reading passages, and the ability to interpret complex written material, according to a new study from Johns Hopkins University. The findings are raising questions about whether the college admissions examination has become less academically demanding even as concerns mount over declining reading proficiency among American students.

The research, conducted by the Johns Hopkins Institute for Education Policy and commissioned by Thomas Aquinas College, examined SAT reading materials from 1980, 1987, and 2026. Researchers identified major differences in the structure and content of the examination, including dramatically shorter passages, fewer vocabulary questions requiring independent knowledge, and a reduced emphasis on interpreting persuasive and argumentative writing.

The report documented “extensive modifications to the SAT reading section over the past four decades,” concluding that the changes “diminish the emphasis on the students’ ability to read and analyze difficult texts.”

One of the most striking findings involved the length of reading selections. Passages appearing on the 2026 practice examinations were less than one-third as long as those used in the earlier tests. At the same time, questions requiring students to demonstrate their knowledge of vocabulary without relying on surrounding text fell from approximately 60 per examination to just 10.

The researchers also discovered a major change in the types of reading comprehension skills being assessed. Earlier versions of the SAT frequently required students to evaluate arguments, understand persuasive techniques, and interpret references that depended on background knowledge. Today’s examination relies much more heavily on explanatory passages that provide students with contextual information to help them determine the meaning of unfamiliar language.

The changes have prompted criticism from educators who believe that college-bound students should be expected to handle challenging literary works and demonstrate a substantial command of the English language.

“The makers of the SAT seem to believe that the ability to tackle long and complex literary works isn’t an important skill for college students anymore,” John Goyette, Vice President of Thomas Aquinas College, said in a statement. “Sadly, given the state of modern higher education, they’re probably right.”

The findings add to a broader debate over changes to standardized testing and academic expectations. Earlier generations of students were required to study extensive vocabulary lists and prepare for stand-alone antonym questions that tested their knowledge of words without offering contextual assistance. Those questions have since disappeared from the examination.

Although the Johns Hopkins researchers did not determine that the modern SAT is conclusively easier overall, they emphasized the educational significance of the changes, explaining that “the shift is significant because reading, vocabulary, and comprehension are mutually reinforcing.”

Other recent studies have also examined whether the examination’s difficulty has changed over time. A 2026 University of Cincinnati study used ChatGPT to evaluate SAT mathematics questions from different years and estimated that their difficulty had declined by 0.21 standard deviations compared with 2012. A separate artificial intelligence-based analysis of examinations dating back to 2011 suggested that questions began becoming less difficult around 2017.

Researchers have been studying changes in SAT scores and test difficulty for decades. Analyses dating to the 1970s examined shifts in student performance beginning in the 1960s, while later comparisons of examinations administered in 2005 and 2010 found increases in scores on certain sections.

The College Board, which administers the SAT, challenged the suggestion that shorter passages or revised question formats necessarily mean that students are taking an easier examination. In a response to the New York Post, the organization emphasized that the Johns Hopkins researchers had not established an overall decline in difficulty and pointed to evidence that shorter passages can still require sophisticated reading skills.

The organization also defended the examination’s scoring patterns, stating that “if it were true that the SAT is easier than it once was, we’d see changes in score distributions and the proportion of students earning top scores—which we don’t.”

The latest report provides additional details about how substantially the examination has been redesigned. The older tests contained 85 verbal questions, compared with 66 on the current practice examination. The 1980 and 1987 versions each included 45 analogy and antonym questions, categories that have disappeared entirely from today’s SAT. Modern questions also offer four possible answers instead of the five choices used in earlier versions.

The average length of reading passages has fallen from 304 words in 1980 and 340 words in 1987 to approximately 97 words in the 2026 practice test. Instead of requiring students to read longer selections and answer multiple questions about them, the newer format typically presents a brief passage followed by a single question.

However, the researchers identified one finding that complicates claims that the examination has simply been made easier. Their analysis found that the average measured complexity of the newer passages was actually higher than that of the older material. The researchers therefore characterized the changes as a shift in the skills being assessed rather than definitive evidence that the SAT has become easier.

Thomas Aquinas College, which has relied on SAT scores for more than five decades to evaluate prospective students, commissioned the research because of concerns about whether the examination still measures the abilities required for its demanding curriculum. The college places particular emphasis on reading and discussing major works of literature, philosophy, and other academic disciplines.

Goyette said the institution wanted to understand whether SAT scores remain a reliable indicator of students’ readiness for that kind of education. The researchers recommended a future study in which the same students would answer questions from both older and newer examinations, allowing investigators to compare their difficulty more directly.

The debate comes as educators nationwide grapple with declining reading performance, changing study habits, and concerns about students’ ability to concentrate on lengthy written material. The increasing prominence of digital media and short-form online content has intensified questions about whether schools and colleges are adapting their expectations to students’ abilities or adequately preparing students to meet more demanding academic standards.

{Matzav.com}

A surprising political scenario is emerging in Israel following last week’s inconclusive Knesset elections: the chareidi parties could find themselves outside the next government while still securing passage of legislation protecting yeshiva bochurim from military draft sanctions.

The possibility was raised Monday night by Mishpacha editor Aryeh Erlich during an interview with Avi Mimran on Kol Chai Radio, as political leaders explore potential coalition arrangements amid the continuing deadlock.

Erlich suggested that one of the most practical outcomes for the chareidi community could be a national unity government involving Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Gadi Eisenkot, with Shas and United Torah Judaism remaining in the opposition but negotiating an agreement to resolve the longstanding military draft crisis.

Such an arrangement, he argued, could allow the chareidi parties to achieve their central legislative objective without assuming responsibility for the government’s broader policies or becoming embroiled in the political controversies that would accompany coalition membership.

The discussion comes as opposition leaders reconsider their political options following election results that left neither major bloc with an obvious path to a parliamentary majority.

Erlich pointed to the position taken by Yisrael Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman, who has ruled out joining a government headed by Netanyahu while also rejecting reliance on Arab parties.

According to Erlich’s calculations, those restrictions leave the opposition with a narrow potential route to power: cooperation with the chareidi factions.

“The entire change bloc has 48 seats,” Erlich explained. “Add the 13 seats of United Torah Judaism and Shas, and you reach exactly 61 seats — a theoretical coalition of the change bloc and the chareidim without the Arab parties.”

The arithmetic places the chareidi parties in a potentially influential position despite the difficult election results for Shas, which emerged with six seats compared with UTJ’s seven.

However, Erlich acknowledged that joining forces with parties traditionally associated with the anti-Netanyahu camp would present serious difficulties for chareidi voters and their political representatives.

He noted that many religious and traditional Israelis have stood alongside the chareidi community during years of political conflict, making any arrangement that effectively sidelines the broader right-wing bloc an emotionally painful prospect.

At the same time, Erlich argued that loyalty to the religious electorate should not automatically translate into unconditional political support for Netanyahu, particularly given the government’s inability to resolve the draft crisis.

He cited the recent arrest of a chareidi chosson during his sheva brachos celebrations as an especially painful example of the consequences of the unresolved situation.

According to Erlich, the incident intensified frustration over years of political assurances that failed to produce effective protections for yeshiva students.

He also warned that any draft legislation advanced by a government including the chareidi parties would inevitably attract fierce criticism, both from within the chareidi community and from opponents of exemptions for yeshiva students.

Against that background, Erlich suggested that remaining outside the government might provide a more effective route toward securing an acceptable agreement.

Under his proposed scenario, Netanyahu and Eisenkot would establish a unity coalition without Shas and UTJ, while the chareidi parties would negotiate support for legislation addressing the status of full-time Torah learners and removing the financial and legal penalties currently affecting them.

Erlich described such an outcome as both realistic and preferable to some of the other arrangements under discussion.

He also drew attention to what he characterized as a remarkable change in the language used by Israeli political commentators when discussing the draft issue.

During the election campaign, critics frequently referred to proposed legislation protecting yeshiva students as a “draft evasion law,” a term intended to portray the measure as an attempt to excuse widespread noncompliance with military service requirements.

Now, Erlich observed, as opposition politicians explore the possibility of cooperation with the chareidi parties, that terminology has begun to disappear from political discussions.

Instead, he said, commentators have returned to using the more neutral description of a military draft law.

Erlich viewed the shift as evidence that the political atmosphere surrounding the issue was changing as parties confronted the practical difficulties of assembling a governing majority.

Nevertheless, he cautioned that the various coalition possibilities remain theoretical, with significant political and ideological obstacles standing in the way of any agreement.

In his assessment, the two most plausible outcomes at this stage are a national unity government formed without the chareidi parties or another round of elections if political leaders cannot overcome their differences.

{Matzav.com}

Bnei Brak has the highest rate of obesity among adult men in Israel, according to a comprehensive national health report released Tuesday, which also reveals rising childhood obesity, a growing diabetes epidemic, and increased purchases of antidepressant medications across the country.

The 2025 National Program for Quality Indicators in Community Healthcare report, published by Israel’s National Institute for Health Policy Research, presents a mixed picture of the nation’s health. While smoking rates have continued to decline, obesity and diabetes are becoming increasingly widespread, with significant differences between cities, population groups, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

The report draws on information collected from Israel’s four health maintenance organizations and examines dozens of indicators relating to medical treatment, preventive care, and lifestyle habits. It covers nearly the entire civilian population, excluding soldiers, prisoners, and individuals who were not continuously insured through a health fund for the full year.

One of the most striking findings concerns obesity among adult men. In Bnei Brak, 30.7% of men ages 20 to 64 were classified as obese, the highest rate recorded in the country. Beit Shemesh followed closely at 29.5%, while Tel Aviv registered the lowest rate, at just 15.6%.

Nationwide, 62.8% of men and 57.6% of women between the ages of 20 and 64 were classified as either overweight or obese. Looking specifically at obesity, the rate stood at 24.6% among men and 27.9% among women.

Among women, the highest obesity rates were recorded in the western Negev, at 33.6%, and the eastern Negev, at 32.9%. Tel Aviv and Herzliya recorded considerably lower figures, at 17.3% and 18.1%, respectively.

The findings concerning children were particularly alarming. Among seven-year-olds, the obesity rate increased for the second consecutive year, reaching 8.6%, compared with 8.4% in 2024. That represents the highest figure recorded since national monitoring began in 2014.

Ashkelon had the highest childhood obesity rate in this age group, at 13.1%, followed by the western Galilee at 12.2%. Bnei Brak, however, recorded one of the lowest rates in the country, at just 4.4%, while the rate in Yehuda and Shomron stood at 5.1%.

The figures also revealed substantial differences between population groups. Among Arab children, 10.8% of seven-year-olds were obese, compared with 5.8% among chareidi children.

Among teenagers ages 14 and 15, the overall obesity rate declined slightly but remained elevated at 12.6%. The western Galilee and Ashkelon recorded the highest rates among boys, while Herzliya and Modiin had the lowest.

Among teenage girls, Ashkelon again topped the list, with an obesity rate of 16.1%, followed by Be’er Sheva at 15%. Herzliya recorded 7.9%, and Modiin stood at 8.4%.

The disparity was especially pronounced among Arab teenagers, where approximately 19% were classified as obese, compared with 12% across the general teenage population.

Diabetes was another major concern identified in the report. The number of Israeli adults living with the disease rose to approximately 677,000 in 2025, an increase of roughly 36,000 patients in a single year.

The prevalence of diabetes among adults ages 18 and older climbed to 11%, compared with 10.6% the previous year, marking the fourth consecutive annual increase.

The disease was significantly more common among lower-income Israelis. Among men ages 45 and older in the lowest socioeconomic category, 27.8% had diabetes, compared with 19.1% among men in the highest socioeconomic category.

Geographically, the Nazareth region recorded the highest diabetes prevalence, at 14.7%, while the Tel Aviv area had a considerably lower rate of 8.7%.

There was, however, encouraging news concerning diabetes management. Approximately 79% of patients ages 18 to 84 achieved the report’s measure of blood sugar control in 2025, the highest rate recorded since monitoring began.

At the same time, fewer diabetic patients underwent important preventive examinations intended to identify complications. The percentage receiving foot examinations declined from 66.2% to 63.7%, while the rate of eye examinations dropped from 73.7% to 71.4%.

Smoking rates offered another positive development. The percentage of Israelis ages 16 to 74 who smoke fell to 19.1%, down from 19.4% in 2024 and 21.1% in 2023.

Men continued to smoke at substantially higher rates than women, with 27.2% of men identified as smokers compared with 11.9% of women.

Bat Yam emerged as Israel’s smoking capital, with 33.5% of men and 22.6% of women reporting that they smoke. Among men, the western Galilee and Hadera followed at 32.2%.

Bnei Brak and Modiin were among the areas with the lowest male smoking rates. Among women, Bnei Brak had the lowest rate in the country, at just 2.1%, followed by Beit Shemesh at 6.4%.

The report also identified a continuing rise in purchases of antidepressant medications. In 2025, the rate reached 703 purchases per 1,000 residents, compared with 685 the previous year, an increase of approximately 2.6%.

Since 2022, antidepressant purchases have increased by approximately 14% nationwide, with a particularly sharp rise of 29% in Arab communities.

Women purchased antidepressants more frequently than men, with 833 purchases per 1,000 residents compared with 555 among men. Tel Aviv recorded the highest regional rate, at 835 purchases per 1,000 residents, followed closely by the western Negev at 834. The Nazareth region had the lowest figure, at 482.

Purchases of sleeping medications and sedatives declined slightly. The Haifa region recorded the highest rate, at 763 purchases per 1,000 residents, more than double the 357 recorded in the Golan Heights.

The researchers cautioned that prescription purchase figures do not necessarily represent the number of people experiencing depression or other mental health conditions, since individuals may purchase multiple prescriptions during a year.

For the first time, the national report also examined dental examination rates among children, revealing substantial gaps in preventive dental care.

Only 50.9% of six-year-olds and 45.3% of 12-year-olds underwent dental examinations during 2025.

Socioeconomic differences were especially pronounced. Among six-year-olds from low- and middle-income backgrounds, 43.9% received dental examinations, compared with 57.7% of children from higher-income families.

Among 12-year-olds, the corresponding figures were 38.3% and 52.1%.

The lowest dental examination rates were recorded in Arab communities, where only 36% of six-year-olds and 27.2% of 12-year-olds received examinations.

{Matzav.com}

A heated confrontation erupted Monday night on Israel’s Channel 12 News when prominent chareidi journalist Yishai Cohen accused opposition politicians and television commentators of blatant hypocrisy for suddenly entertaining political agreements with the chareidi parties after spending years attacking the community over the military draft issue.

Cohen, a political commentator for Kikar HaShabbat, challenged fellow panelists over reports that opposition figures, including Avigdor Lieberman, were quietly exploring arrangements with the chareidi parties in an effort to assemble a governing coalition following last week’s Knesset elections.

The controversy comes amid a political deadlock in which the opposition bloc is struggling to secure the 61 Knesset seats necessary to form a government without the support of either the chareidi parties or Arab factions.

During the discussion, Cohen expressed astonishment that politicians who had repeatedly condemned yeshiva bochurim for not serving in the military were now reportedly prepared to offer significant concessions on precisely that issue in exchange for political cooperation.

“I am asking you in all seriousness — aren’t you shocked?” Cohen demanded of the other panelists.

“For three years, and even longer, we have heard Lieberman attacking and inciting against the chareidi community, from his remarks about taking them in wheelbarrows to the garbage dump to all his other harsh statements. Politicians sat around this table night after night, shouting ‘draft dodgers,’ claiming that the chareidim discriminate between one person’s blood and another’s, and swearing that they would never agree to concessions. And now, on the eve of the elections, those same politicians have suddenly changed their positions.”

Cohen was referring to the increasingly heated political and public campaign surrounding the draft of yeshiva students, which has dominated Israeli politics and placed enormous pressure on the chareidi parties.

Over the past several years, opposition politicians have repeatedly demanded tougher enforcement against yeshiva students who do not enlist, including criminal penalties, arrests, and the withdrawal of financial benefits from those who fail to comply with military service requirements.

However, according to reports discussed during the Channel 12 broadcast, some of those same political figures are now exploring arrangements that would substantially ease those measures if the chareidi parties agree to support an alternative government.

Panelists acknowledged that discreet discussions have been taking place behind the scenes between opposition representatives and chareidi political figures, with contacts reportedly occurring intermittently as parties assess their options following the election results.

Among the proposals reportedly being discussed are an immediate suspension of arrests targeting yeshiva bochurim classified as draft evaders, the restoration of financial benefits previously withdrawn from eligible families and institutions, and the removal of certain criminal and legal sanctions connected to military enlistment.

The reported proposals have not been announced as a formal coalition agreement, and it remains unclear whether the discussions will lead to an actual political arrangement.

Nevertheless, Cohen argued that the willingness to consider such concessions exposed the political motivations behind years of attacks on the chareidi community.

“Your entire theory about the chareidim is simply collapsing,” Cohen declared.

“The same politicians and the same commentators who sat here every evening and smeared the chareidi community are now going into closed rooms and offering exactly what they previously ruled out completely.”

His comments highlighted the sharp contrast between the opposition’s public positions during the election campaign and the compromises that may now be under consideration as political leaders search for a path to forming a government.

Lieberman, in particular, has long been one of the most outspoken critics of the chareidi parties and has repeatedly advocated strict measures against yeshiva students who do not enlist. The possibility that he or other opposition figures could now participate in negotiations involving concessions on the draft issue has drawn considerable attention in chareidi political circles.

The discussion also reflected broader frustration within the chareidi community over what many perceive as a willingness among Israeli politicians to abandon previously declared principles when coalition arithmetic makes cooperation politically advantageous.

For Cohen, the central issue was not simply whether the opposition could reach an agreement with the chareidi parties, but how politicians who had portrayed the draft issue as an uncompromising matter of national equality could now consider reversing their positions to secure parliamentary support.

The reported contacts remain preliminary, and no agreement has been reached. However, the emerging negotiations have already raised questions about whether the opposition’s longstanding demands for strict military draft enforcement will remain intact as the struggle to form Israel’s next government continues.

{Matzav.com}

New analysis of Israel’s election results indicates that Shas suffered significant losses among its traditional chareidi voters, with some shifting their support to United Torah Judaism and others backing Itamar Ben Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party. The findings help explain why UTJ emerged with seven Knesset seats while Shas fell to six, reversing the usual balance between the two chareidi parties.

Attorney Avraham Justman, a member of Israel’s Central Elections Committee, discussed the voting patterns during an interview Monday night with Avi Mimran on Kol Chai Radio’s main news program. He described the decline in Shas support as particularly striking because it occurred not only among traditional and religious voters but also within established chareidi communities that have historically provided the party with reliable electoral backing.

According to Justman, UTJ’s improved performance was primarily the result of natural population growth within its voting base, supplemented by voters who had previously supported Shas. He said the movement between the parties was evident in several major chareidi population centers.

Among the cities where Shas experienced declining support were Yerushalayim, Bnei Brak, Modiin Illit, Beitar Illit, and Elad. Justman said the figures suggested that some voters had transferred their allegiance to UTJ, while others supported Otzma Yehudit, headed by National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir.

A smaller number of former Shas voters apparently cast ballots for minor parties that failed to cross the electoral threshold, further reducing the number of votes available to the established chareidi factions.

Justman characterized the setback as unusually severe, saying Shas had suffered a blow unlike those it had experienced in previous election campaigns. He emphasized that the decline among chareidi voters was especially significant because the party has traditionally relied on strong support from those communities.

The results have raised questions about the ability of Shas to retain its traditional electoral coalition, which includes both Sephardic chareidi voters and religiously traditional Israelis who do not necessarily identify with the chareidi community.

Justman also examined the impact of several smaller parties that competed for chareidi votes, including Tzeva Shachor, Noam, and the party associated with Motti Leitner. Although these lists attracted some support, he assessed their overall effect on the final distribution of Knesset seats as relatively limited.

He also challenged the suggestion that the right-wing bloc would automatically have secured 61 seats if all ballots cast for parties that failed to cross the electoral threshold had instead gone to established right-wing factions. According to Justman, the electoral calculations were more complicated and did not necessarily support that conclusion.

Another issue addressed during the interview was the voting behavior of Gerer chassidim, whose participation had been closely watched because of internal tensions and questions surrounding the community’s mobilization for UTJ.

Justman said the available figures indicated that Gerer voters had turned out in numbers generally consistent with previous elections, rather than producing either a significant decline or an extraordinary surge in participation.

“Gur apparently came out to vote in the numbers they usually bring,” Justman said.

He explained that Gerer participation did not appear to have caused substantial damage to UTJ’s overall result. At the same time, there was no indication of an unusually large mobilization that might have helped the party capture an additional seat.

With voter turnout reaching high levels nationally, Justman said the possibility of UTJ securing an eighth mandate had become increasingly remote. The higher overall vote total meant that parties needed more votes to obtain each Knesset seat.

The discussion also turned to voting patterns in Arab communities, where Justman raised questions about exceptionally high turnout figures reported in certain localities.

He argued that turnout approaching the entire eligible voting population in some communities warranted closer examination, noting the practical difficulty of bringing nearly every registered voter to the polls.

“There are very difficult questions about the Arab sector. There are questions that arise, and there are new discoveries that I am not yet certain about,” Justman said.

However, Justman did not present evidence of election fraud or cite investigative findings establishing that illegal voting had occurred. He indicated that he was continuing to examine the figures before reaching conclusions.

The analysis comes as Israel’s political parties continue reviewing the election results, with particular attention focused on the changing loyalties of chareidi voters and the implications for future elections. For Shas, the loss of support in its traditional strongholds presents a significant challenge, while UTJ’s seven-seat showing demonstrates its ability to maintain and modestly expand its electoral base despite internal tensions.

{Matzav.com}

A one-year-old boy is hospitalized in serious condition after being stung by a highly venomous yellow scorpion inside his family’s home in the community of Meitzad, near Yerushalayim, overnight Monday into Tuesday. The child, identified as Elazar ben Hodiya, was rushed to Hadassah Ein Kerem Medical Center after developing severe breathing difficulties and a reduced level of consciousness.

Emergency medical personnel were dispatched to the home after the toddler suffered a dangerous reaction to the sting. Upon arriving, responders found him semi-conscious, struggling to breathe and displaying signs of a potentially life-threatening reaction.

United Hatzalah volunteer medic Eitan Saar, who was among the first responders, administered an emergency injection of adrenaline to stabilize the child.

Saar said that family members informed rescue personnel that the boy had been stung by a scorpion and subsequently developed a severe reaction that placed his life in immediate danger. Following the administration of adrenaline and additional emergency treatment, the child was transported to Hadassah Ein Kerem.

According to Saar, the toddler was in moderate and stable condition at the time of evacuation, although subsequent reports described his condition as serious.

Tzevet Hatzalah volunteers Yoni Pindrus and Chaim Silber, who also responded to the emergency, said they were directed into the family’s home, where they discovered the young child suffering from respiratory distress and reduced consciousness.

Working alongside Magen David Adom paramedics and other emergency personnel, the volunteers administered an EpiPen injection and provided oxygen before transferring the toddler to an intensive care ambulance for urgent transport to the hospital.

Yellow scorpions, which are found in various regions of Israel, are considered particularly dangerous because of their potent venom. Young children face an elevated risk of serious complications because of their smaller body size and the venom’s potentially severe effects on the nervous and cardiovascular systems.

In serious cases, a scorpion sting can lead to breathing difficulties, abnormal heart rhythms, neurological complications, and other life-threatening symptoms requiring immediate medical intervention.

Emergency medical officials stress that anyone stung by a potentially venomous scorpion should seek urgent medical attention, particularly when the victim is a young child.

The family is asking Klal Yisroel to recite Tehillim and daven for the complete recovery of their young son, Elazar ben Hodiya, who remains hospitalized at Hadassah Ein Kerem.

Please say Tehillim for Elazar ben Hodiya.

{Matzav.com}

Hillary Clinton delivered a blistering attack on President Donald Trump Monday night, accusing him of becoming increasingly consumed with his own image and personal ambitions while losing sight of his responsibilities to the American public.

Appearing on CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360,” the former secretary of state and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee argued that Trump has changed considerably since their election contest a decade ago. She claimed that the president is now operating without the restraints that once existed within his political circle.

During the interview, host Anderson Cooper asked Clinton to compare the Trump she faced in the 2016 presidential debates with the president today, pointing specifically to his recent appearance near Washington’s Reflecting Pool and his proposals for architectural changes in the nation’s capital.

“How do you think he is as a candidate, when you see the guy you debated then and you see the person now, and with the press conference he gave today outside the reflecting pool and the plans and the decorations and the crafting projects, how how different is he?” Cooper asked.

Clinton responded by arguing that Trump had once possessed a more deliberate political strategy and had advisers capable of challenging his decisions, a dynamic she believes has largely disappeared.

“Look, I think that he’s lost the plot. You know, back in 2016, ten years ago, think about that, he had a theory of the case. He knew how he wanted to present himself. He had people around him who at least had some ability to rein him in or to say no to him. He’s totally unfettered and unhinged now. And for him to go to the reflecting pool, one of the great failures of his efforts to redo Washington and stand there as though it was a huge success, and go on and on about all of his, you know, projects ripping up Washington, destroying the East Wing, building an arch that will interfere with air traffic control, navigation in and out of Washington. I mean, you can’t make this up. He is so focused on himself.”

Her remarks followed Trump’s appearance earlier Monday at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, where he highlighted renovations to the historic Washington landmark. The president devoted much of his nearly hour-long address to improvements involving the pool’s drainage system, surface, and appearance, while also discussing other construction projects his administration has undertaken throughout the capital.

The Reflecting Pool renovation has attracted controversy after encountering delays, algae problems, and peeling surface coatings. The project ultimately cost more than $16 million, according to Reuters, considerably exceeding the administration’s original estimate. Trump defended the work and praised the improvements during Monday’s event.

Trump has also promoted plans for a new White House ballroom, an imposing triumphal arch near Arlington National Cemetery, and renovations to other prominent Washington landmarks. He has characterized the projects as long-overdue improvements that will enhance the appearance of the nation’s capital, while critics have questioned their costs, priorities, and impact on historic sites.

During his Reflecting Pool remarks, Trump jokingly suggested that the landmark might eventually bear his name before immediately clarifying that he was not serious. The president has repeatedly defended his interest in construction and restoration projects, maintaining that they are an important part of improving Washington.

Clinton, however, argued that the president’s emphasis on such undertakings reflected what she considers an increasingly self-centered approach to governing.

“He wants to build tributes to himself, in the image of himself. I mean, he’s truly lost the plot of being president for the American people.”

The criticism came on the eve of Tuesday’s midterm elections, as Republicans sought to maintain control of Congress amid voter concerns about the economy, rising living costs, and the conflict with Iran. Trump spent recent weeks campaigning for Republican candidates across the country before returning to Washington for Monday’s appearance at the Reflecting Pool.

{Matzav.com}