Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon used today’s Security Council session on the Middle East to deliver a forceful message directly to Palestinian Authority envoy Riyad Mansour. Danon confronted him across the table, arguing that the PA’s security establishment has failed to rein in violence in Judea and Samaria.
While speaking in the chamber, Danon charged that the PA’s sizable armed forces have done little to curb militancy. He pointed out that armed cells continue to flourish under the Authority’s watch and that its security apparatus has allowed dangerous networks to expand without interference. “The Palestinian Authority is unable to stop terrorism even in Judea and Samaria. It has more than 32,000 armed operatives. The PA has proven incapable of confronting radicals. Terror groups operate openly. Iranian weapons slip in unchecked. Extremists grow stronger because no one stops them,” Danon told the PA representative.
Danon said that Israel is consistently forced to step in where the Authority refuses to act. He argued that Israeli forces are compelled to dismantle what the PA ignores and to seize caches of weapons that pass through unchecked. “Israel has to step in to seize the weapons the PA ignores to dismantle the cells it won’t confront and to disarm the terrorists it refuses to challenge,” he declared.
The ambassador stressed that any entity that rewards extremists rather than dismantling them cannot be considered a legitimate governing option for the future. He reiterated that such conduct disqualifies the PA from any role in Gaza’s next chapter. “Those who are unable to confront terrorists and continue to reward them are the problem, not the solution, and they will certainly not rule Gaza,” Danon concluded.
{Matzav.com}
The Pentagon has launched a formal inquiry into Sen. Mark Kelly after President Donald Trump blasted him for what he labeled seditious conduct, thrusting a previously obscure video into the center of a high-stakes military-political clash. Officials signaled that the review could escalate into court-martial proceedings, an extraordinary step for a sitting senator with a military career.
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth pointed directly to a video released days earlier by Kelly (D-Ariz.) and five other Democratic veterans, where they urged service members to “refuse illegal orders.” That message ignited outrage within the administration and drew Trump’s furious condemnation.
In responding to the uproar, the Department of War stressed in a written statement that the process will remain grounded in military law. “This matter will be handled in compliance with military law, ensuring due process and impartiality,” the department said, reminding personnel that “All servicemembers are reminded that they have a legal obligation under the UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice] to obey lawful orders and that orders are presumed to be lawful.”
The statement went further, underscoring a long-standing principle: “A servicemember’s personal philosophy does not justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order.”
Hegseth later clarified that most of the Democrats in the video fall outside his jurisdiction because they either served in agencies like the CIA or did not retire from military service. Kelly, however, did retire, making him subject to the UCMJ.
On social media, Hegseth excoriated the group. “The video made by the ‘Seditious Six’ was despicable, reckless, and false,” he wrote on X. “Encouraging our warriors to ignore the orders of their Commanders undermines every aspect of ‘good order and discipline.’ Their foolish screed sows doubt and confusion — which only puts our warriors in danger.”
He added that investigators are evaluating Kelly’s conduct specifically because the senator addressed “all troops while explicitly using his rank and service affiliation—lending the appearance of authority to his words.” According to Hegseth, “Kelly’s conduct brings discredit upon the armed forces and will be addressed appropriately.”
Kelly said he first learned of the probe from Hegseth’s public post. He rejected the implication that he was trying to stir insubordination and said he would not be intimidated. “If this is meant to intimidate me and other members of Congress from doing our jobs and holding this administration accountable, it won’t work,” Kelly declared.
“I’ve given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution,” he added.
The disputed video—featuring Kelly, Sen. Elissa Slotkin, and Reps. Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander, Chris Deluzio, and Chrissy Houlahan—urged troops to remain loyal to the Constitution and resist “illegal orders.” None of the six cited any specific directive they believed warranted refusal.
Reaction from Trump and his allies was swift and blistering. “It’s called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL,” Trump thundered on Truth Social. He demanded severe consequences: “Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand – We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET.” At one moment, he even reposted, “Hang them George Washington would.”
Democratic leaders quickly urged heightened protection for the targeted lawmakers, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer warning of potential threats.
By the weekend, Trump dialed back his language slightly—though still insisting the six Democrats belonged in jail. Despite the controversy, all six lawmakers have refused to retract or walk back the video.
{Matzav.com}A federal judge has abruptly shut down the criminal proceedings targeting James Comey and Letitia James, ruling that the Justice Department had no legal basis to install the prosecutor who brought the charges at President Donald Trump’s demand. The decision instantly halted the prosecutions and signaled a major judicial rebuke of the administration’s attempt to handpick an inexperienced loyalist to helm a premier federal office.
U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie’s ruling concluded that Lindsey Halligan’s appointment was unlawful, making her the latest Trump-backed prosecutor removed for the same reason. Though both defendants pleaded for the cases to be dismissed with prejudice, which would have permanently blocked any future prosecution, the judge opted for dismissal without prejudice. For now, there is no clear indication of whether the Justice Department will attempt to resurrect the indictments.
The dispute over Halligan’s appointment was only one front in a broader attack by both Comey and James. Each has accused the Justice Department of mounting politically driven prosecutions, and Comey’s team separately flagged significant issues in the grand jury process. Those arguments, still unresolved, have not yet been addressed by the court.
Monday’s ruling focused solely on the way the Trump administration installed Halligan—who previously served as a White House aide and had never worked as a prosecutor—to run an elite U.S. attorney’s office. Her elevation occurred after Erik Siebert, then interim U.S. attorney, was effectively pushed out following pressure from the administration to bring charges against Trump’s adversaries.
Comey’s lawyers argued that once Siebert resigned, the judges of the district alone had authority to name a replacement. Instead, Trump tapped Halligan while openly urging Bondi on social media to move against his critics, posting, “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!” Just days later, prosecutors indicted Comey on obstruction of Congress and false-statement charges, and James was soon accused of mortgage-related wrongdoing.
Reacting to the dismissal, James said, “I am heartened by today’s victory and grateful for the prayers and support I have received from around the country.” She added, “I remain fearless in the face of these baseless charges as I continue fighting for New Yorkers every single day.”
Federal judges in multiple districts—including New Jersey, Los Angeles, and Nevada—have also ruled that interim U.S. attorneys appointed under similar circumstances were improperly installed, though cases in those jurisdictions were allowed to continue. Attorneys for Comey and James insisted that the situation here was more extreme, as Halligan alone signed and propelled the indictments.
Comey has long been one of Trump’s most persistent foes. Appointed in 2013 during President Barack Obama’s administration, he was leading the FBI’s probe into potential coordination between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia. Trump removed him in May 2017, triggering years of public friction and political combat between the two men.
{Matzav.com}
As the Knesset prepares to renew deliberations on the proposed draft law in the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, a senior Chareidi official involved in the negotiations is revealing what he calls the real picture behind the emerging legislation. According to him, the current draft will not result in additional Chareidi enlistment — and is unlikely to withstand a legal challenge.
The source explained that the framework being discussed is designed to preserve the existing situation, not change it. “The current version of the law won’t bring more Chareidim into the IDF over the next two years,” he said. “Out of the target of 10,000 Chareidi recruits over two years, the requirement is only to reach 75%, and 10% of that can be national service. In other words, sanctions won’t apply unless recruitment falls below 75% of the targets.”
He noted that the proposal essentially formalizes the status quo. “The new draft law is an attempt to create wording that ensures what was is what will be. Everyone understands it won’t pass judicial review. The law will recruit the same number of Chareidim as today, when there is no law at all — around 3,000 a year.”
For that reason, the official believes the legislation is unlikely to survive scrutiny in the High Court of Justice. Its primary purpose, he said, is political: to show that efforts are being made to regulate the status of yeshiva students. “The law is very likely not going to pass, and even if it passes, it won’t survive the High Court. Attias drafted the law so he can show the rabbonim that real steps were taken to fix the situation — maybe it will even bring us back into the government, with or without actual legislation.”
He added that discussions could still take a sharp turn once the committee begins its formal debate. One scenario under consideration stems from the committee’s legal adviser, who has proposed significantly raising the first-year recruitment requirement. “If the demand increases to 7,500 in the first year, then we would really have to bring in another 1,500 Chareidim immediately,” the senior official said.
{Matzav.com}
An emotional scene unfolded during the Satmar Rebbe’s visit to the Or HaGanuz community near Meron, where he had gone to perform the mitzvah of separating terumos umaasros from the past year’s wine at the local winery. What appeared to be a routine stop on his trip revealed a hidden act of generosity that even his closest associates did not anticipate.
During the visit, the Rebbe met with members of the Badatz of the Eidah HaChareidis in Yerushalayim. At the height of the gathering, as those present watched in silence, the Rebbe unexpectedly reached into his pocket and pulled out a sealed envelope. Inside was a staggering check: one million dollars.
The Rebbe handed the envelope to Badatz member Rav Avrohom Yitzchok Ullman. The purpose of the donation was explicit — the funds were to be distributed among “mosdos al taharas hakodesh in Eretz Yisroel,” institutions that operate with strict adherence to their principles and refuse to accept any financial support from the Israeli government.
The gesture was so discreet and so sudden that even those closest to the Rebbe had been completely unaware. Only after leaving Yerushalayim did he decide to make the unprecedented gift, with no publicity, no ceremonial welcome, and none of the honorific events that typically accompany donations of such scale.
Rav Ullman, visibly shocked by the enormity of both the sum and the Rebbe’s modesty, expressed his astonishment. “In all the years that I have sat on the beis din hagadol, I have seen that anyone who gives a sum like one million dollars to mosdos al taharas hakodesh, the event itself — the ceremony — usually costs another two million dollars!”
He added, “And here, for the first time, someone gave such an amount — with no ceremony, no event, no expectation of recognition.”
The Rebbe requested that the distribution of the money take place only once he had returned to the United States, and specifically close to Chanukah, emphasizing that he did not want to be in Eretz Yisroel when the funds were handed out.
{Matzav.com}
