Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu is expected to travel to the United States toward the end of February to take part in the annual AIPAC policy conference in Washington, according to reports in Israeli media. Officials in the Prime Minister’s Office confirmed that the trip is being considered, and there is also a possibility of a meeting with President Donald Trump during the visit.
The AIPAC conference, organized by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, is scheduled to take place in Washington from February 22 through February 24 and is regarded as one of the most prominent pro-Israel gatherings in the United States.
According to a report by Ynet, Netanyahu may also meet with President Trump, whom he met last month. Sources in the Prime Minister’s Office said discussions are ongoing regarding the logistics and timing of the visit.
The potential trip comes amid heightened tensions with Iran and an ongoing buildup of American forces in the Middle East. Israeli officials continue to closely monitor the possibility of U.S. military action against Iran, with assessments and situation evaluations taking place in recent days. Reports indicate that the United States has been reinforcing its presence in the region while making those moves highly visible.
American officials have also pointed to continued internet shutdowns in Iran as evidence of the regime’s fear of internal unrest. A U.S. official quoted in the reports said that Washington’s “maximum pressure” campaign is aimed at the Iranian regime rather than the Iranian people, stressing that the United States will continue to support internet access for Iranians as a means of exposing the reality inside the country.
{Matzav.com}New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani deflected criticism Tuesday when pressed about inflammatory social media posts made by two senior aides, choosing instead to pivot to his own priorities during a live television interview.
Appearing on The View, Mamdani avoided directly addressing remarks attributed to his chief equity officer and the city’s tenant advocate, despite a pointed question from co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin about the now-deleted comments.
Griffin cited posts by Chief Equity Officer Afua Atta-Mensah, including the statement “there’s NO moderate way to black liberation,” as well as comments by tenant advocate Cea Weaver calling to “seize private property.”
“Your new chief equity officer made several now deleted comments, disparaging liberal white women,” said Griffin, a former Trump administration staffer. “Your tenant advocate said that home ownership was a weapon of white supremacy and called to elect more communists, among other posts.”
She then asked, “What message do you think this conveys to New Yorkers, and how would you push back on this?”
Rather than responding directly to the substance of the criticism, Mamdani redirected the discussion to his own platform and leadership.
“If you want to know my views or my opinions, you’ll find them in my words,” Mamdani replied. “As the mayor of New York City, and I’m someone who’s looking to make a city that every New Yorker can afford.”
He continued by speaking positively about the work of his administration, praising Weaver’s office without naming her or addressing the specific remarks that had drawn scrutiny.
“And I think, frankly, what New Yorkers are also looking for are the outcomes, and that’s what I care about, the outcomes and the excellence we deliver,” he said.
Mamdani asserted that in the 20 days since Weaver was hired, the city has “taken on a landlord that had more violations than I can count, and we have secured $30 million in guaranteed repairs for thousands of those violations.”
In an apparent effort to calm concerns among property owners, the mayor added that his vision of an affordable city “includes tenants, homeowners, and those who aspire to be homeowners.”
During the same appearance, Mamdani also reiterated his support for abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a position he has previously endorsed.
{Matzav.com}
California Republicans turned to the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday, urging the justices to halt a push by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom to redraw the state’s congressional boundaries ahead of the next election cycle.
In an emergency filing, the California Republican Party asked the high court to step in and stop what it says is a gerrymandering effort set in motion by Newsom through Proposition 50, framing the request as a last effort to prevent the new maps from taking effect.
Republicans argue that the revised district lines could flip as many as five seats currently held by the GOP, significantly altering California’s congressional delegation.
The legal fight carries national political consequences, as Democrats are widely viewed as having a strong chance to reclaim control of the House of Representatives amid voter dissatisfaction with President Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress.
While polling data and prediction markets suggest Democrats are well positioned to capture the House, Republicans warn that an unfavorable ruling in the Proposition 50 dispute could derail those expectations.
Supporters of Proposition 50 have described it as a response to a similar redistricting push in Texas, where the state’s Republican-led legislature moved to redraw congressional maps in a way that would benefit their party.
Newsom promoted Proposition 50 as a counterweight to what he described as partisan mapmaking in Texas, and voters approved the measure by a wide margin in last November’s election.
According to a report by the Sacramento Bee, Republicans are asking Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees emergency matters from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, to issue an injunction that would temporarily restore California’s current congressional map.
In their challenge, Republicans contend that the boundaries created under Proposition 50 would disproportionately advantage Latino voters at the expense of other racial groups.
Justice Kagan can either reject the emergency request outright, a decision that could come within days, or send the matter to the full Supreme Court for consideration.
If the case is taken up by the full court, the justices are expected to rule on the emergency motion well before California’s candidate filing deadline of March 6.
{Matzav.com}
President Donald Trump reignited debate over Greenland on Tuesday, brushing aside questions about limits to U.S. action and responding with a brief “you’ll see” when asked at the White House how far he is prepared to go to bring the Arctic territory under American control.
He waved off objections that residents of Greenland oppose joining the United States and rejected warnings that any attempt to take the island would fracture the NATO alliance.
Over the past several weeks, Trump has returned to the subject with renewed intensity, focusing attention on Greenland, the largest island on the planet and a pivotal foothold in the Arctic.
Although distant and sparsely populated, the semi-autonomous territory under Danish sovereignty sits at the center of shifting global dynamics. It is part of a NATO ally, hosts a critical U.S. military installation, and lies in an Arctic zone that is becoming increasingly contested as receding ice opens new sea routes and access to valuable natural resources.
Trump has repeatedly cast Greenland as essential to American security interests, contending that failure to secure the island would allow Russia and China to expand their influence across the Arctic.
His latest comments come as he prepares to travel to Davos, Switzerland, where political and economic leaders from around the world are gathering for the World Economic Forum.
Greenland is expected to be a frequent topic in private discussions at the summit, particularly as European officials react to Trump’s new warning that he could impose tariffs on countries that stand in the way of his Greenland ambitions.
Those tariff threats arrive while the administration is still awaiting a Supreme Court decision on whether certain trade duties imposed in 2025 were lawful.
European leaders, speaking over the weekend, indicated they could respond with countermeasures totaling as much as $107.7 billion if the dispute escalates.
Trump originally floated the idea of acquiring Greenland during his previous term in office, a proposal that was quickly rejected by Denmark and met with resistance across Europe—opposition he now appears ready to challenge once again.
It remains uncertain whether the Trump administration will ultimately reach an agreement to take control of Greenland. What is clear is that as climate change reshapes the Arctic and geopolitical competition accelerates, the island’s strategic value is only set to increase.
{Matzav.com}
WATCH (SKIP TO MINUTE 102:00):
