Feed aggregator

The United Nations General Assembly and Security Council elected five judges Wednesday to serve on the International Court of Justice in The Hague, prompting sharp criticism from Israel over the backgrounds of several of the incoming and returning jurists, including individuals who previously participated in legal proceedings against the Jewish state.

The five judges were elected to terms beginning in 2027 and continuing through 2036. Their appointments come at a particularly sensitive time for Israel, as the court continues to consider South Africa’s case accusing Israel of violating the Genocide Convention during its war against Hamas in Gaza.

Israeli officials expressed concern that several of the judges have previously taken legal or political positions critical of Israel, raising questions about their ability to approach pending cases with impartiality.

Among the most controversial selections is Mahmoud Daifallah Hmoud of Jordan, who has served on the court since May 2025 and was elected to a new term.

Hmoud previously served as Jordan’s ambassador to the United Nations and as legal adviser to the Jordanian Foreign Ministry. During his diplomatic and legal career, he played a prominent role in Jordan’s participation in international proceedings concerning Israel.

He was involved in the 2004 proceedings before the International Court of Justice concerning Israel’s security barrier and in the legal proceedings that culminated in the court’s 2024 advisory opinion addressing Israel’s presence in Yehuda and Shomron and eastern Yerushalayim.

Hmoud also attracted criticism in Israel for remarks he made at the United Nations Security Council in late October 2023, just weeks after Hamas terrorists carried out the October 7 massacre.

During those discussions, he accused Israel of committing “war crimes” and “ethnic cleansing,” statements that Israeli officials now cite as evidence of his previously expressed positions concerning the Jewish state.

Two other judges elected Wednesday have also participated in international legal proceedings involving Israel.

Professor Dapo Akande of the United Kingdom, a prominent international law scholar at Oxford University, previously provided legal advice to Japan in connection with proceedings concerning the legal consequences of Israel’s policies in Yehuda and Shomron.

Professor Phoebe N. Okowa of Kenya, a professor at Queen Mary University of London who has served on the International Court of Justice since November 2025, advised Namibia in proceedings related to the same 2024 advisory opinion.

Both Akande and Okowa have extensive backgrounds in international law and have served on the United Nations International Law Commission, an expert body responsible for promoting the development and codification of international law.

Their previous involvement in legal proceedings concerning Israel has nevertheless generated concern among Israeli officials, who question whether those roles could create difficulties when the court considers future cases involving the Jewish state.

The remaining two judges elected Wednesday are François Alabrune of France and Rena Lee of Singapore.

Alabrune is a French diplomat and international legal expert with experience in major cases involving allegations of genocide, including proceedings brought by Ukraine against Russia and by The Gambia against Myanmar.

Lee is a Singaporean legal expert specializing in international negotiations and the law of the sea. She has held senior positions within Singapore’s legal and diplomatic establishment and has extensive experience in international legal matters.

Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, strongly criticized the election results, arguing that the professional backgrounds of some of the judges raise serious questions about judicial independence.

Danon said their previous activities were “troubling and raise questions,” particularly given the sensitive nature of the proceedings currently pending before the court.

He questioned how Israel could expect an impartial hearing from a judge who accused the country of grave international crimes only weeks after the October 7 massacre, or from a judge who had previously served as a legal adviser in proceedings challenging Israeli policies.

“The decision made today in the General Assembly,” Danon said, “is simply another example of the UN’s inherent bias against the State of Israel.”

The International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, consists of 15 judges elected by the General Assembly and Security Council. Judges serve nine-year terms, with elections held periodically to fill positions on the bench.

The court hears legal disputes between countries and issues advisory opinions on questions of international law referred to it by authorized United Nations bodies.

Unlike the International Criminal Court, which prosecutes individuals accused of international crimes, the International Court of Justice considers disputes involving states.

The composition of the court has become especially consequential for Israel because of the ongoing proceedings initiated by South Africa in December 2023.

South Africa alleges that Israel violated the Genocide Convention through its military operations in Gaza following the October 7 attacks. Israel has rejected the allegations, maintaining that its military campaign was directed against Hamas terrorists and that it has acted in accordance with international law.

The court has issued provisional measures in the case, but it has not delivered a final ruling on South Africa’s central allegations.

The selection of the five judges comes as the proceedings remain unresolved, with the court’s future composition potentially influencing how the case and other matters involving Israel are considered.

Israeli officials are particularly concerned that judges who previously participated in legal efforts challenging Israeli policies may now be called upon to consider related questions from the bench.

Although the judges are required to act independently and impartially, Danon’s criticism reflects broader Israeli concerns about the treatment of the Jewish state within United Nations institutions and international legal bodies.

{Matzav.com}

[Video below.] Video circulating on social media reportedly shows sweets being handed out to children in the Gaza Strip in celebration of the election of anti-Semitic Abdul El-Sayed, an outspoken critic of Israel who defeated Republican Mike Rogers in Michigan’s closely watched U.S. Senate race on Tuesday.

The footage shows a man distributing candy to children in Gaza, with the individual who uploaded the video describing the gathering as a celebration of El-Sayed’s victory. The precise location, date, and circumstances surrounding the recording have not been independently verified, and it remains unclear how many people participated.

El-Sayed’s victory represents a historic development in American politics, making the 42-year-old Democrat the first Muslim elected to the United States Senate. He will succeed retiring Democratic Senator Gary Peters.

The Michigan contest attracted national attention because of El-Sayed’s progressive political positions, his outspoken criticism of Israel and support of jihad, and the controversy surrounding his statements about the war in Gaza.

El-Sayed, the American-born son of Egyptian immigrants, has been a vocal advocate for Palestinian rights and has sharply criticized Israeli military operations. His positions on Israel became a central issue during the campaign, drawing opposition from Republicans and some members of his own party.

The controversy was particularly pronounced after Democratic Congresswoman Haley Stevens, whom El-Sayed defeated in the primary, withdrew her support and endorsed Rogers in the general election.

Stevens, a strong supporter of Israel, said Wednesday that she did not regret her decision, explaining that she had initially hoped El-Sayed would moderate his positions but believed he had instead moved further in the opposite direction.

El-Sayed also faced criticism over his response to an attack on a synagogue and his association with controversial political commentator Hasan Piker. His critics argued that his statements and political alliances raised concerns about his approach to Israel and antisemitism.

President Donald Trump strongly opposed El-Sayed’s candidacy, publicly urging Michigan voters to support Rogers and accusing the Democrat of holding extreme views.

El-Sayed rejected those attacks, arguing that Republicans had sought to turn his religion and Egyptian heritage into political liabilities.

Following his victory, he told supporters in Detroit that voters had rejected the campaign against him and celebrated his election as a milestone for Muslim Americans.

In an interview with the Associated Press on Wednesday, El-Sayed said Michigan voters had rejected what he described as “a hateful, spiteful campaign” that focused on his identity rather than the issues facing the state.

The reported celebration in Gaza comes amid broader reactions across the Middle East to the Democratic Party’s sweeping gains in the American midterm elections.

The Associated Press separately reported that some Palestinians in Gaza welcomed the election results, viewing the Republican losses as a rejection of Trump’s foreign policy, particularly his administration’s approach to the Middle East.

In Khan Younis, Gaza resident Abdel Kareem Al-Najjar expressed satisfaction with the Democratic victories, criticizing Trump’s policies and describing the results as a consequence of his administration’s actions.

In Israel, meanwhile, the election results have prompted concern among some residents about the implications for American support of the Jewish state, particularly as lawmakers critical of Israeli policy gain influence in Washington.

{Matzav.com}

A senior official in Israel’s Transportation Ministry was questioned Wednesday by the Lahav 433 police investigative unit as authorities expanded their investigation into alleged security failures involving Flydubai flights, according to a report by Channel 13 News.

The official, who holds a senior position in the ministry’s security division, was questioned on suspicion of a conflict of interest connected to the aviation security affair. The investigation is examining whether serious deficiencies in the oversight and operation of flight security arrangements developed over several years.

Police are also investigating possible improper relationships between officials responsible for aviation security and foreign airlines operating in Israel, raising questions about whether private business interests interfered with their professional responsibilities.

According to the report, investigators have broadened their inquiry in recent days and are preparing to question additional senior Transportation Ministry officials and others involved in managing and supervising aviation security operations.

Two additional individuals have emerged as subjects of the investigation.

Avri Cohen is expected to be questioned over allegations that he served as a security officer for the Israel Airports Authority without obtaining the required authorization. Investigators are examining whether his employment in that capacity violated applicable security requirements.

Another official, Dvir Rubinstein, who serves as director of the Aviation Security Operations Center, is expected to face questioning over suspected conflicts of interest.

In Rubinstein’s case, investigators are focusing on his connections with foreign airlines and his private business dealings with those companies. Police are examining whether those relationships created conflicts with his official duties or compromised his ability to properly supervise flight security arrangements.

The investigation has raised broader concerns about the effectiveness of the oversight mechanisms responsible for ensuring that aviation security personnel comply with professional standards and regulatory requirements.

Authorities are examining how the alleged irregularities were permitted to continue and whether officials responsible for monitoring the system failed to identify or address potential problems.

The case centers on security arrangements involving Flydubai, the Dubai-based airline that operates flights between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. The reported investigation is focused on the conduct of Israeli officials and the security oversight system, rather than on allegations of wrongdoing by the airline itself.

Police are expected to continue collecting testimony and examining the activities of additional individuals as they attempt to determine the extent of the alleged security failures and establish who may bear responsibility.

No findings of criminal wrongdoing have been established against the individuals named in the report, and the allegations remain under investigation.

A kosher bakery in Montreal, Canada, sustained extensive damage early Wednesday morning after a fire tore through the building in what police believe was a deliberate arson attack, raising concerns that the establishment may have been targeted because of its Jewish identity.

Montreal police have launched an investigation into the incident, with the department’s hate crimes unit joining arson investigators to determine whether antisemitism played a role in the attack.

The fire broke out at approximately 12:30 a.m. Wednesday at a bakery located on Saint-Louis Street in Montreal’s Saint-Laurent borough. Emergency services received reports of flames engulfing the establishment, prompting a large response from police and firefighters.

By the time officers arrived, the building was already burning intensely. Approximately 60 firefighters were dispatched to the scene, battling the flames for nearly two hours before bringing the blaze under control.

The bakery suffered substantial damage, although the full extent of the destruction has not yet been determined.

According to Montreal police, evidence collected at the scene strongly suggests that the fire was intentionally set rather than caused by an accident.

Investigators are also examining a troubling connection to an earlier incident at the same location.

Police revealed that the bakery had been targeted Monday night at approximately 11:30 p.m., less than two days before Wednesday’s fire. That earlier incident reportedly caused no significant damage, but authorities are now investigating whether the two attacks were connected.

The fact that the same establishment was targeted on consecutive nights has heightened suspicions that the bakery was deliberately singled out.

Because the business is a kosher establishment, investigators are examining whether the suspected arson was motivated by antisemitism. However, police have not yet established a motive, and the incident has not been formally confirmed as a hate crime.

Montreal police have assigned both their arson division and hate crimes unit to the investigation. Detectives are working to identify those responsible and determine the circumstances surrounding both incidents.

As of Wednesday evening, no arrests had been announced, and authorities had not publicly identified any suspects.

The attack has raised fresh concerns about the security of Jewish businesses in Montreal, where the possibility of an antisemitic motive is being treated as a serious component of the investigation.

Police are continuing their investigation into the suspected arson and the earlier attack as they seek to establish who targeted the bakery and why.

{Matzav.com}

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York announced Wednesday that he is seeking to become the next speaker of the House of Representatives, moving to secure the chamber’s top leadership position following the Democratic Party’s victory in Tuesday’s midterm elections.

Jeffries formally launched his candidacy in a letter circulated to Democratic lawmakers, asking for their support as the party prepares to take control of the House in the new Congress.

“I write to humbly request your support in connection with my candidacy to serve as the next Speaker of the House of Representatives,” Jeffries wrote in the letter, which was obtained by Axios.

The New York Democrat argued that his party’s electoral success gives it a responsibility to pursue substantial changes in Washington and respond to voters’ concerns.

“We must now deliver the dramatic change the American people are demanding in the majority,” he wrote.

Jeffries, who entered Congress in 2013 after winning his first election in 2012, has led House Democrats since 2023, succeeding Nancy Pelosi in the party’s top leadership role after she stepped aside following the 2022 elections.

If elected speaker, Jeffries would become the first Black lawmaker in American history to hold the position.

In his appeal to colleagues, Jeffries promised that “every single member of our majority will play a meaningful role” in shaping the party’s legislative agenda.

He also outlined three priorities for the incoming Democratic majority, pledging to help lawmakers “act decisively in three key areas: (1) Affordability (2) Accountability and (3) American Values.”

Although Jeffries is widely regarded as the leading candidate for speaker, his election is not yet guaranteed.

Axios reported that several newly elected Democrats, including progressive lawmakers and representatives from districts that traditionally favor Republicans, have not committed to supporting him.

Nevertheless, Jeffries is expected to face limited resistance within the Democratic caucus. The party’s reported gains in Tuesday’s elections could also provide him with greater flexibility in securing the votes necessary to win the speakership.

The size of the Democratic victory may prove especially important in determining how much influence the party’s progressive wing can exercise over Jeffries. Some incoming left-wing lawmakers had hoped to use a narrow majority to demand votes on proposals involving healthcare, immigration enforcement, and restrictions on American aid to Israel. A larger Democratic majority would make it considerably more difficult for a small group to pressure party leadership.

Democrats are projected to hold a commanding majority, with some estimates placing their eventual total at approximately 255 seats. The party captured districts that had strongly supported President Trump, expanding its gains well beyond the competitive races that had initially been expected to determine control of the House.

Jeffries also received a public endorsement from Pelosi, who congratulated him following the election and expressed confidence in his ability to lead the chamber.

Meanwhile, Republican Speaker Mike Johnson announced that he would not seek another term as his party’s House leader following the election defeat. His decision has opened the way for a Republican leadership contest, with Majority Leader Steve Scalise and Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan among the prominent figures being discussed.

The new Congress is scheduled to convene on January 3, 2027, when House members will formally elect their speaker. Jeffries must still secure the necessary votes on the House floor before assuming the position.

{Matzav.com}

A growing dispute over who will serve as the next Knesset speaker is creating fresh tensions among the parties seeking to replace Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, with Naftali Bennett reportedly demanding that the position go to his Beyachad party or to a mutually acceptable candidate outside Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar party.

According to a report Wednesday evening by Michael Shemesh of Channel 13 News, Bennett is preparing to insist that his party receive the influential parliamentary position rather than allowing Eisenkot’s faction to determine who will replace current Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana.

The report comes amid an increasingly public disagreement between Eisenkot and Yair Lapid over the position, with senior Yashar officials opposing Lapid’s appointment despite support for his candidacy from Yisrael Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman.

Sources close to Bennett denied the Channel 13 report, insisting that the question of who will serve as Knesset speaker has not even been raised during coalition negotiations.

According to the report, Bennett has not endorsed Lapid for the position and may instead favor another candidate, potentially someone from his own party. His reported involvement introduces another complication into efforts by the anti-Netanyahu parties to establish a united parliamentary front following last week’s elections.

The struggle over the speakership began even before President Isaac Herzog opened formal consultations with the political parties regarding the formation of Israel’s next government.

Initially, Eisenkot himself was mentioned as a possible candidate for Knesset speaker, as opposition leaders explored ways to gain control of the parliamentary agenda before a new government could be established.

The situation changed Monday when Lieberman announced that he would support Lapid for the position. That declaration immediately encountered resistance from senior figures in Eisenkot’s Yashar party, who made clear that they would not agree to Lapid’s appointment.

According to a separate report by Channel 12 News, one of the reasons for Yashar’s opposition was Eisenkot’s desire to preserve the possibility of forming a national unity government with Likud. Installing Lapid as speaker could complicate efforts to negotiate such an arrangement.

The disagreements continued Tuesday when leaders of the anti-Netanyahu bloc met to discuss their next steps following the election.

Although the party leaders agreed that they should move quickly to replace Ohana, they were unable to reach an agreement on who should succeed him.

Following the meeting, Bennett publicly called for an immediate effort to remove Ohana from the speakership and urged that Eisenkot receive the presidential mandate to form the next government.

The speakership has become a particularly important position in the current political environment because the speaker exercises substantial influence over the Knesset’s proceedings and parliamentary agenda. Securing the position would give the parties seeking to replace Netanyahu greater influence over legislative activity even before the formation of a new coalition.

However, the emerging disagreements demonstrate the difficulties facing the parties attempting to coordinate their parliamentary strategy.

While Lieberman is backing Lapid, Eisenkot’s party is resisting that choice, and Bennett is now reportedly considering a demand that would place the position in the hands of his own faction or another agreed-upon candidate.

For now, the parties remain united in their stated desire to replace Ohana, but they have yet to agree on who should take his place.

{Matzav.com}

Israel and the United States are working on plans to establish a new military aviation facility in southern Israel that would allow American fighter jets to remain in the country for extended periods, potentially marking a significant expansion of the U.S. military presence in Israel.

According to a report by Israel’s Channel 12 News, Israeli and American military teams have begun developing plans for dedicated infrastructure that would accommodate U.S. aircraft alongside Israeli Air Force fighter jets. The proposed facility would provide the necessary conditions for American aircraft and additional military equipment to be stationed in Israel for prolonged deployments.

The initiative is being considered because Israel’s existing air bases are not currently equipped to accommodate the proposed number of American aircraft for extended periods. Establishing a separate facility would address those limitations and provide additional capacity for joint military operations and deployments.

The proposed complex would be located in southern Israel, although the precise site has not been publicly disclosed. Military planners from both countries are examining the infrastructure requirements, construction arrangements and operational framework for the facility.

The project remains in its preliminary stages, and construction has not yet begun. Israeli officials, however, are reportedly interested in advancing the initiative in the coming months.

The proposal is part of a broader Israeli effort to strengthen the American military presence in the region beyond the current conflict with Iran. Israeli defense officials have increasingly viewed closer operational cooperation with Washington as an important element of the country’s long-term security strategy.

In March, Israeli officials reportedly raised the possibility of relocating American military bases from other parts of the Middle East to Israel. That proposal was considerably broader than the facility now being discussed and has not been implemented.

American military aircraft have already operated from Israeli facilities during the conflict with Iran. Earlier this year, U.S. F-22 stealth fighters were deployed to Ovda Air Base in southern Israel, while American refueling aircraft were stationed at several Israeli airports.

In September, two additional American fighter squadrons reportedly arrived at Ovda as part of a broader repositioning of U.S. military forces in the Middle East. Israeli security officials said at the time that the deployments did not necessarily indicate preparations for a new escalation with Iran.

The extended American deployments have also highlighted the limitations of Israel’s existing aviation infrastructure. Large numbers of military aircraft have occupied space at civilian airports, including Ben Gurion Airport, creating operational challenges for commercial aviation.

The proposed southern military complex could provide a more suitable location for American aircraft, reducing reliance on facilities that were not designed to accommodate prolonged U.S. deployments of the proposed scale.

For now, the discussions are focused on creating the infrastructure needed to accommodate American fighter jets and other military assets for extended periods. No construction timetable, final agreement or permanent deployment arrangement has been publicly announced.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli security forces have thwarted an alleged major terrorist attack in Yerushalayim involving an explosive device at Lion’s Gate followed by a shooting rampage on Har Habayis, according to details of a joint Shin Bet and police investigation disclosed Wednesday.

A 19-year-old resident of East Jerusalem was arrested on suspicion of preparing the attack over a period of approximately two years. Investigators say the suspect intended to target Jewish civilians and police officers, inflict as many casualties as possible, and escape following the assault.

The investigation, conducted jointly by the Shin Bet and Israel Police, uncovered what authorities described as extensive preparations for the planned attack. A serious indictment was filed against the suspect in recent days, according to a report by i24NEWS.

Under the alleged plan, the attacker would first detonate an explosive device near Lion’s Gate, one of the principal entrances to the Old City. He then intended to proceed onto Har Habayis and open fire on Jewish visitors and security personnel.

Investigators believe the suspect spent considerable time studying the locations where he intended to carry out the attack, making repeated visits to the Old City to gather information about security arrangements.

According to the investigation, he regularly traveled to the area on Fridays, using those visits to examine the placement of surveillance cameras and observe the deployment of police officers and other security forces.

The suspect also allegedly attempted to obtain a firearm through the dark web as part of his preparations.

The investigation also revealed that the suspect had begun taking martial arts lessons in recent months, allegedly preparing himself to attack people physically if he was unable to obtain a weapon or carry out the bombing and shooting operation as planned.

During questioning, the 19-year-old reportedly admitted that he had intended to carry out the attack. He told investigators that his decision to pursue the terrorist plot came after watching footage of the October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre in southern Israel.

Authorities also obtained testimony from individuals acquainted with the suspect, which investigators said supported the allegations against him.

Following the completion of the joint Shin Bet and police investigation, prosecutors filed a serious indictment against the suspect in recent days.

The suspect’s identity and the specific charges contained in the indictment were not disclosed in the initial report. No indication was provided that he had succeeded in obtaining a firearm or assembling an explosive device before his arrest.

{Matzav.com}

Israel’s chareidi parties adopted sharply different positions Wednesday as President Isaac Herzog began consultations over the formation of the next government, with Shas formally endorsing Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu while both Degel HaTorah and Agudas Yisroel decided not to recommend any candidate until the status of yeshiva bochurim is addressed.

The developments came amid intense efforts by Netanyahu and Yashar chairman Gadi Eisenkot to secure enough support to receive the mandate to form a government following last week’s Knesset elections. The unresolved military draft issue remains central to the chareidi parties’ calculations, while Shas chairman Aryeh Deri announced that he would remain at the helm of his party after the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah rejected his request to step down.

Herzog opened the consultation process Wednesday afternoon, with representatives of the smaller Knesset factions appearing first and the larger parties scheduled for the conclusion of the proceedings.

Religious Zionism was the first faction to meet with the president and recommended Netanyahu. During the discussion, tensions arose between Herzog and the party’s representatives over their opposition to including Arab parties in a governing coalition.

Shas representatives, led by Michael Malkieli, subsequently informed Herzog that the party was endorsing Netanyahu in accordance with the instructions of the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah. Malkieli criticized the treatment of the chareidi community during the outgoing government’s term, while Herzog raised the possibility of reaching an agreement on the draft issue as part of a broader coalition arrangement.

Malkieli emphasized that Shas was not ruling out a national unity government, although its official recommendation remained Netanyahu.

Yisrael Beiteinu, meanwhile, endorsed Eisenkot. Party chairman Avigdor Lieberman made clear that supporting Eisenkot for prime minister did not mean agreeing to a minority government dependent on Arab parties. Ra’am also announced its intention to recommend Eisenkot, while Zehut joined the parties backing Netanyahu.

A major development unfolded within Shas itself after Deri, who had largely remained out of public view since the election, informed senior rabbonim that he wished to withdraw from political life.

Shas suffered a severe electoral setback, dropping from 11 Knesset seats to six, prompting questions about the party’s leadership and future direction. However, the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah issued a directive, published Wednesday evening in the Shas-affiliated newspaper Haderech, instructing Deri to remain chairman.

Deri subsequently issued his first public response since the election, declaring, “All my life I was raised and educated to obey Daas Torah,” and stating that he accepted the rabbonim’s decision “without hesitation or doubt.”

Deri also visited the home of Rav Moshe Maya, the senior member of the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah, in a meeting attended by Rav Shmuel Betzalel. Photographs from the visit marked Deri’s first public appearance since the election.

The Shas chairman announced that he would convene the party’s Knesset members and senior municipal representatives Thursday for a meeting devoted to examining the election results and determining the movement’s next steps.

Although Deri will remain party chairman, he is considering relinquishing his Knesset seat while continuing to direct Shas from outside parliament.

Another noteworthy development came from Rav Moshe Maya, who indicated that Shas could consider a unity government involving both Netanyahu and Eisenkot, despite the party’s formal endorsement of Netanyahu.

In an interview with Mishpacha, Rav Maya said a rotation arrangement between the two political leaders could produce an excellent government. A recording broadcast Wednesday evening by i24NEWS further indicated that he was open in principle to a rotation agreement, provided legislation was enacted to protect the status of yeshiva students.

The remarks suggested that Shas’s recommendation of Netanyahu did not necessarily rule out participation in a broader coalition that included Eisenkot.

Meanwhile, the leadership of United Torah Judaism reached a significant decision of its own, declining to recommend Netanyahu or Eisenkot during the presidential consultations.

In Degel HaTorah, Rav Dov Landau and Rav Moshe Hillel Hirsch instructed the party’s representatives to withhold their endorsement from both candidates. The decision followed growing frustration over the failure to pass legislation securing the status of yeshiva bochurim.

Agudas Yisroel adopted a similar position, with the Gedolei Yisroel directing party chairman Yitzchok Goldknopf not to recommend any candidate. The decision was consistent with commitments made during the election campaign that political support would depend on resolving the draft issue.

However, the position of MK Meir Porush and incoming MK Elyakim Stark, who represent the separate Chomas Toras Yisroel faction, remained unresolved Wednesday evening. Some chassidic courts were reportedly considering instructing their representatives to recommend Netanyahu despite the decisions reached by the other UTJ factions.

Netanyahu had spent recent days attempting to secure the support of United Torah Judaism, including a conversation with party chairman Yaakov Asher and separate contacts involving Porush and Stark.

The decision to withhold recommendations represents a significant departure from UTJ’s longstanding political alignment with Netanyahu and leaves the party with greater flexibility to negotiate with either prospective coalition.

The consultations at the President’s Residence will resume Thursday at 8:30 a.m. with United Torah Judaism. Representatives of Otzma Yehudit, the Democrats and Ra’am are scheduled to follow, with the Joint List and Beyachad appearing later in the day.

Eisenkot’s Yashar party will meet Herzog during the evening, followed by Likud, which will conclude the consultation process.

Once the meetings are completed, Herzog must decide which Knesset member has the strongest prospect of assembling a governing coalition. Current political assessments favor Eisenkot receiving the first mandate, although neither he nor Netanyahu has secured the 61 seats necessary to establish a government.

The candidate selected by Herzog will initially receive 28 days to form a coalition, with the possibility of an additional 14-day extension.

{Matzav.com}

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis warned Wednesday that the Republican Party’s crushing defeat in the midterm elections could have consequences lasting well beyond President Donald Trump’s remaining time in office, describing the Democratic victories as “close to an extinction-level event for Republicans across the country.”

Speaking at a morning press conference in Tallahassee, DeSantis said Republicans were confronting a political setback of extraordinary proportions, with Democrats capturing both chambers of Congress and making significant inroads into states that have traditionally formed the foundation of Republican electoral strength.

The Florida governor cautioned that the results could reshape the national political landscape for years, particularly if Republicans fail to regain the confidence of voters in states they have long depended upon.

“Let’s just be clear, that is going to hurt — not just for the next two years,” he said. “That is something that can reverberate for the next decade or more.”

The Democratic victories extended into states including Iowa, Kansas and Texas, where Republicans had previously enjoyed substantial electoral advantages. The results represented a sweeping rejection of the GOP in the first national election since Trump began his second term.

DeSantis acknowledged that Republicans had anticipated a difficult election night but said the magnitude of the losses exceeded even the more pessimistic expectations within the party.

“We knew it could be worse. I don’t think most of us thought it would be this bad,” DeSantis said.

The governor reserved his strongest warning for Texas, arguing that the party’s devastating losses there could jeopardize its ability to win national elections in the future.

“Over my lifetime, Texas has been the crown jewel of Republican politics,” DeSantis said. “No one holds a candle on the Republican side to the Lone Star State. If the Republican party doesn’t have Texas as an anchor, we won’t be viable nationally going forward.”

Texas delivered some of the most striking Democratic victories of the election, with Gina Hinojosa defeating Republican Gov. Greg Abbott and James Talarico winning the U.S. Senate race against Republican Ken Paxton. Democrats also captured other major statewide offices, ending decades of Republican dominance in the state.

DeSantis warned that the consequences of the Republican losses would extend to Washington, where Democratic control of the Senate could prevent Trump from securing confirmation for conservative Cabinet nominees or a Supreme Court appointment if a vacancy arises.

He described the national results as the political equivalent of a meteor strike, saying Republicans had fallen into a deep political hole that could take multiple election cycles to escape.

Florida, however, proved to be a notable exception to the nationwide Democratic surge. Republicans retained the governorship, with Congressman Byron Donalds defeating Democrat David Jolly, while Republican Sen. Ashley Moody also won reelection. The GOP held other major statewide offices, although Democrats made gains in legislative contests.

DeSantis credited Florida’s Republican organization and its record in state government with helping the party withstand the national political environment. He said Republicans had developed enough voter support to survive an election in which the political mood was overwhelmingly unfavorable to the GOP.

The governor also rejected the idea that Democrats had necessarily secured a lasting endorsement of their policies, arguing that the results reflected public dissatisfaction with Republicans in Washington rather than widespread enthusiasm for the opposition party.

With DeSantis preparing to leave office in January, his remarks amounted to a stark warning that Republicans cannot assume traditionally conservative states will remain safely in their column without rebuilding public confidence.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu issued his first public statement since Israel’s elections on Wednesday evening, urging the establishment of a broad national unity government under Likud leadership while warning against a minority coalition dependent on Arab parties. Netanyahu accused opposition leaders of placing political considerations ahead of Israel’s security and deliberately imposing conditions that would prevent the formation of a wider government.

The prime minister’s remarks came as political parties began maneuvering over the composition of the next government following an election that left the country’s political leadership facing difficult coalition decisions.

Netanyahu framed the debate over the next coalition as a matter of national security, arguing that Israel faces an ongoing threat from radical Islamist movements both beyond its borders and within the country’s political system.

“Radical Islam is the challenge that is tearing countries in Europe apart today. It is the challenge that threatens us as well. It threatens us from outside through Iran and its proxies, and it threatens us from within through Islamist parties that support terrorism,” he said.

The prime minister accused the Islamist parties he was criticizing of seeking to weaken Israel’s Jewish character and restrict the country’s ability to defend itself.

“They seek to erase the Jewish identity of the State of Israel – and they say so openly. They seek to deprive us of the ability to defend ourselves against our enemies,” Netanyahu continued.

According to Netanyahu, the question of which parties form the next government cannot be separated from Israel’s ability to respond to threats from Iran and other hostile forces.

“I ask a simple question. Who will be able to confront this challenge? The one government that certainly will not be able to confront the threat of radical Islam is a government that depends on radical Islam.”

He also alleged that representatives of the parties in question had publicly expressed support for terrorists involved in the October 7 massacre.

“All you have to do is listen to what their representatives openly say. They dedicate their electoral achievements to the despicable Nukhba terrorists who are sitting in our prisons,” he added.

Netanyahu warned that a coalition relying on those parties would not merely face difficulties implementing security policies but could also deepen divisions within Israeli society.

“Not only would such a government fail to fight our enemies, it would simply tear us apart from within.”

Offering an alternative, Netanyahu urged parties across the Zionist political spectrum to join a Likud-led coalition, saying a wider government would be better positioned to address Israel’s security challenges.

“There is a government that can confront this challenge – a broad national government led by Likud under my leadership, which would include all components of the national bloc and all Zionist parties that wish to join.”

The appeal came amid complicated coalition negotiations following the October 27 election. Likud emerged as the largest individual party with 27 seats, but Netanyahu’s bloc secured only 53 seats, short of the 61 required for a Knesset majority. The four principal Jewish-led opposition parties hold 48 seats, while the two Arab lists won a combined 19.

Opposition leaders Gadi Eisenkot, Naftali Bennett, Yair Golan and Avigdor Lieberman met Tuesday in Herzliya and agreed to begin coalition negotiations aimed at replacing Netanyahu. However, disagreements remain over whether a government could rely on Arab-party support, with several opposition figures publicly rejecting such an arrangement.

Netanyahu accused those leaders of pursuing a narrow coalition while simultaneously establishing conditions that would make a national unity government impossible.

“The leaders of the left-wing bloc are busy establishing a narrow minority government, a government that depends on these supporters of terrorism, and they are declaring from every platform impossible conditions designed to thwart in advance any possibility of establishing a broad national government.”

Eisenkot has proposed several principles for prospective coalition partners, including recognition of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, universal national service and recognition of Hamas as a terrorist organization. Opposition leaders have also expressed strong reservations about serving under Netanyahu.

Meanwhile, President Isaac Herzog began consultations Wednesday with the parties elected to the Knesset to determine which candidate should receive the mandate to attempt to form the next government. Neither Netanyahu nor Eisenkot currently has an assured parliamentary majority.

Netanyahu ended his statement by accusing his political rivals of allowing their opposition to his leadership to take precedence over the country’s broader interests.

“They prefer their political interests over the national interest,” Netanyahu concluded.

Shas chairman Aryeh Deri has reversed his decision to relinquish the party leadership after the Shas Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah instructed him to remain in his position. Deri is nevertheless expected to resign from the Knesset, allowing him to continue directing the party’s political activities without serving as a member of parliament.

The development came Wednesday following a meeting between Deri and Rav Moshe Maya, the senior member of the Shas Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah. The meeting followed reports that Deri was considering stepping aside from the leadership after the party’s disappointing performance in Israel’s elections.

The Moetzes made its position clear in a statement published in Haderech, the newspaper affiliated with Shas, declaring that “the Council supports the movement’s chairman and forbids him from resigning.”

In explaining their decision, the rabbonim pointed to the ongoing struggle over the status of yeshiva bochurim and the need for experienced leadership at a particularly difficult time for the chareidi community.

The statement said the present circumstances demanded “the most experienced general to win the war.” Citing halachic principles and the Rambam, the rabbonim maintained that Deri could not abandon his responsibilities while the battle over the future of Torah learning remained unresolved.

The Moetzes also expressed appreciation for Deri’s decades of public service and his efforts on behalf of the Shas movement and the broader Sephardic Torah community.

In their message, the rabbonim pledged that Shas would continue using every available political and public avenue to secure the status of yeshiva students and combat what they described as the persecution of those devoted to Torah learning.

They also extended their appreciation to the approximately 300,000 people who voted for Shas and urged the party’s elected representatives to continue serving the public despite the electoral setback.

Shas suffered a severe defeat in last week’s election, falling from 11 Knesset seats to just six, its poorest showing in decades. The result prompted intense discussions within the party about Deri’s future and whether changes were necessary in its leadership.

Earlier Wednesday, reports indicated that Deri had sought permission from the Moetzes to leave his position entirely. Shas initially disputed reports that he had formally submitted his resignation, while senior rabbonim discussed the possibility of his continuing as chairman without retaining his Knesset seat.

According to additional reports in the Israeli media, Deri’s anticipated departure from the Knesset could also affect the composition of Shas’s parliamentary delegation. There has been discussion of a possible resignation by Moshe Abutbul as well, potentially allowing Ariel Busso, who was placed eighth on the party’s election list, to enter the Knesset. Those arrangements have not been finalized.

The decision to retain Deri at the helm follows more than three decades in which he has been one of the most influential figures in Shas and a central participant in Israeli coalition politics.

For now, the arrangement being discussed would leave Deri responsible for the movement’s overall political direction while transferring his parliamentary seat to another Shas representative.

President Donald Trump acknowledged Wednesday that the war against Iran played a major role in the Republican Party’s sweeping midterm election defeats, agreeing with Vice President JD Vance that the conflict had driven voters away from the GOP. Nevertheless, Trump insisted that preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons was worth the political consequences and that he would launch the military campaign again if faced with the same decision.

The president’s remarks came one day after Democrats made major gains in the House and Senate, leaving Republicans facing a dramatic loss of political power. The election results have intensified debate within the administration over the war’s economic consequences and its effect on voters who supported Trump in 2024.

Asked about Vance’s conclusion that the Iran conflict was responsible for the Republican losses, Trump acknowledged that the vice president’s assessment was substantially correct.

“Well, I think it’s largely true because it drove the gasoline up a little bit short term.”

Trump immediately defended the military operation, arguing that the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions left Washington with no acceptable alternative.

“If I had it to do again, I’d have to do it again, because long term it’s the only answer. You can’t let Iran have a nuclear weapon.”

When pressed on whether the operation justified the political damage suffered by his party, Trump replied, “I do, yeah,” and maintained that the consequences of allowing Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons would have been far more serious.

“I thought the oil would go up a lot more, and I did it on that basis. You have no choice. You have to do it. You can’t let Iran have a nuclear weapon, or everything that you see here someday might not exist,” Trump said.

The president also argued that energy supplies had recovered from the disruption caused by the fighting, particularly around the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping route for international oil shipments.

“We have tremendous oil flowing out of the Hormuz right now. At the beginning there was none,” Trump said.

His comments suggested that he viewed higher fuel costs as a central reason for the Republican defeat, even as he continued to defend the broader objectives of the war.

Trump also signaled a willingness to negotiate with the incoming Democratic congressional leadership, despite the sharp political divisions exposed by the election.

“I’ll get along probably with the Democrats unless they want to be destructive,” he said, revealing that Democratic officials had already approached him about possible discussions.

The president’s comments followed an unusually direct assessment from Vance, who published an extensive statement on X examining why so many Americans who voted Republican in 2024 supported Democratic candidates this year.

According to Vance, the principal concerns driving those voters included ending the Iran war, reducing inflation and living expenses, prioritizing American interests, and reconsidering the United States’ relationship with Israel.

The vice president argued that Republican losses could not simply be explained by insufficient participation among the party’s traditional supporters. Instead, he said, substantial numbers of voters had actively changed their political allegiance.

“The main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026,” he wrote.

Vance said internal polling had also identified dissatisfaction with Washington’s relationship with Israel as an important concern among voters who abandoned Republicans. He did not elaborate on precisely what changes those voters favored.

He was particularly emphatic in identifying the Iran war as the decisive factor behind the Democratic victories.

“The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night.”

The vice president’s remarks drew attention because of their unusually candid acknowledgment of the political damage caused by a military operation that the administration has repeatedly defended as essential to American national security.

Trump, however, rejected any suggestion that Vance had been disloyal or that his public assessment represented a disagreement with the White House.

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

The president’s explanation also highlighted the economic pressures that have accompanied the conflict. Rising energy costs became a prominent campaign issue as Democratic candidates criticized the administration over gasoline prices and household expenses.

Preliminary national voter polling, however, suggested that the election reflected a broader range of concerns. An ABC News voter survey found that 55% of House voters considered government corruption crucial to their decisions, compared with 49% who cited the cost of living and 34% who identified the Iran war.

The election defeat has also raised questions about the future of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, whose leadership of the Pentagon has attracted scrutiny throughout the military campaign.

CBS News reported that Trump had discussed the possibility of replacing Hegseth with advisers following the Republican losses, although no final decision had been made.

Asked directly about the defense secretary Wednesday, Trump expressed confidence in his performance.

“I think he’s doing a very good job.”

The president’s public defense of Hegseth came as Republicans began assessing the consequences of losing control of both chambers of Congress, a development that will give Democrats greater authority over military spending, congressional investigations and oversight of the administration’s handling of the Iran conflict.

{Matzav.com}

The results of Tuesday’s Teaneck Township Council election have produced a significant political shakeup, with all three candidates from the Teaneck First slate leading the field and Avi Berliner narrowly holding the fourth and final available seat, according to unofficial election returns released by the township.

The results could substantially alter the balance of power on the Township Council and potentially affect the leadership of Mayor Mark Schwartz, whose allies faced a difficult election night.

According to the township’s unofficial November 3 results, George Fernandez Jr. received 3,447 votes, placing first among the candidates. Denise Belcher followed with 3,361 votes, while Duane Harley received 3,164 votes. All three ran together on the Teaneck First slate.

Berliner, who ran on the Schwartz-backed One Team, One Teaneck slate, placed fourth with 2,802 votes, narrowly ahead of his running mate Sharon Kolb, who received 2,710 votes. The 92-vote difference leaves the final council seat potentially vulnerable to changes as outstanding ballots are counted.

Amrit Ramjattan received 2,632 votes, while incumbent Councilwoman Hillary Goldberg trailed with 1,595 votes.

The election carries particular significance for Teaneck’s Orthodox Jewish community, which has taken a strong interest in the township’s political leadership and municipal affairs. Berliner’s apparent success would secure him a seat on the council, although the narrow margin separating him from Kolb means the outcome is not yet final.

The strong showing by the Teaneck First candidates also represents a setback for the political coalition associated with Schwartz. With three candidates from the opposing slate positioned to win seats, the election could reshape the council’s internal alliances and influence the selection of the township’s next mayor.

Unlike municipalities where voters directly elect the mayor, Teaneck operates under a system in which councilmembers choose the mayor from among themselves. Consequently, the composition of the council following the election will play an important role in determining who holds the township’s top leadership position.

The results remain unofficial and are subject to additional ballot counting and certification. While Fernandez, Belcher and Harley hold substantial leads, the contest for fourth place remains considerably closer, with Berliner ahead of Kolb by just 92 votes.

Vice President JD Vance on Wednesday blamed the Trump administration’s war with Iran for the Republican Party’s devastating midterm election losses, as Democrats celebrated their capture of both chambers of Congress and House Speaker Mike Johnson announced that he would not seek to lead Republicans in the new minority.

Vance’s assessment represented a significant acknowledgment from within the administration that the military conflict, now in its ninth month, had become a major political liability for Republicans. The party suffered defeats across the country Tuesday, losing control of the House and Senate and surrendering seats in states that had long been considered Republican strongholds.

“If you’d like to argue it was worth it,” Vance said of the war, “then do so.”

President Donald Trump also acknowledged Wednesday that the conflict had contributed to the Republican defeat, although he defended his decision to launch military operations against Iran.

“I think a part of it was Iran,” Trump told Fox News. In a separate interview with The Wall Street Journal, the president said, “Iran was a piece of it.”

Despite the political consequences, Trump insisted that he remained convinced the military campaign was justified.

“I did the right thing,” he told the Journal. “I would have done it again.”

The war has been deeply unpopular with American voters since American and Israeli forces began their military campaign against Iran in February. Democrats spent much of the election season connecting the conflict to rising gasoline prices, increased household expenses and broader concerns about the administration’s foreign policy.

The results suggested that those arguments resonated well beyond traditional Democratic constituencies. Republicans suffered losses in suburban communities, rural areas and states where Trump had won comfortably in the 2024 presidential election.

Democrats captured Senate seats in Kansas, Iowa, Maine, Ohio, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas, while also winning a substantial majority in the House. In Texas, Democrat James Talarico defeated Republican Ken Paxton in a historic Senate upset, while Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gina Hinojosa unseated Republican Governor Greg Abbott.

The scale of the losses has triggered an immediate reckoning among Republican leaders, who entered the election confident that Trump’s political influence and the party’s legislative accomplishments would help them maintain control of Washington.

The most significant leadership development came Wednesday when Johnson informed his staff that he would not pursue the position of House minority leader when the new Congress convenes in January.

Johnson, who became speaker in October 2023 following the removal of Kevin McCarthy, had spent the campaign insisting that Republicans could overcome the traditional difficulties facing the president’s party in midterm elections.

Instead, Democrats are preparing to take control of the House with a commanding majority, leaving Republicans to select a new leader as they return to the minority for the first time since 2022.

Ohio Republican Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is among those expected to compete for the leadership position. Johnson is expected to remain in Congress but relinquish his leadership responsibilities.

The Republican collapse has also dramatically altered the political landscape for the final two years of Trump’s presidency.

With Democrats controlling both chambers beginning January 3, 2027, the administration will face substantial obstacles in advancing its legislative agenda. Democratic lawmakers will gain control of congressional committees, the ability to issue subpoenas and expanded authority to investigate the administration’s policies and activities.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who is positioned to become the next speaker, promised that the incoming majority would focus on reducing living expenses and holding the administration accountable.

“We hear you,” Jeffries said in response to the election results. “We’re going to work hard to deliver on the dramatic change that you deserve.”

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, whose party secured a majority in the upper chamber, also celebrated the results.

“Five words for the American people: Relief is on the way,” Schumer declared.

Democrats have indicated that their initial legislative priorities will include efforts to lower gasoline and grocery prices, reverse reductions in federal healthcare programs and conduct extensive oversight of the Trump administration.

California Congressman Robert Garcia, who is expected to lead the House Oversight Committee, delivered a brief warning to administration officials: “Lawyer up.”

The Democratic Senate will also be able to block presidential nominations, including judicial appointments, presenting Trump with an additional challenge as he enters the second half of his term.

The president has signaled that he is prepared to work with Democrats on certain issues but warned that he would use his veto authority to reject legislation he considers unacceptable.

“I don’t want to be just sitting there for two years vetoing everything,” Trump told Politico.

For Republicans, the immediate challenge is determining how to recover from an election in which opposition to the Iran war and frustration over the cost of living overwhelmed much of the party’s campaign message.

The administration had entered office promising to avoid new foreign conflicts, but the prolonged military campaign against Iran became a defining issue of the midterms. Trump has offered varying assessments of the war’s objectives and duration, at times threatening additional strikes while also suggesting that an end to the fighting could be within reach.

The election results were welcomed by Iranian officials. Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf responded Wednesday by declaring, “Americans said NO TO WAR, and we endorse this message.”

Republicans will retain control of Congress until the new lawmakers take office in January, giving the party several remaining weeks to address unfinished legislative business before Democrats assume power.

{Matzav.com}

A massive billboard in Tehran’s Revolution Square has displayed an explicit death threat against President Donald Trump, featuring an enormous image of the American president gripping prison bars alongside the words “We Will Kill Trump.”

The provocative display, erected at one of the Iranian capital’s prominent public gathering places, shows Trump with his head lowered and his hands wrapped around the bars of what appears to be a prison cell. The words “We Will” appear in large white lettering, followed by “Kill” in red and “Trump” in white.

The billboard also includes a message in Persian expressing the same threat, making the display unmistakably directed at the American president.

The threatening imagery represents another example of the openly hostile rhetoric directed at Trump by elements within Iran, where calls for retaliation against the United States have featured prominently in political messaging.

The billboard was unveiled Tuesday, November 3, amid renewed tensions between Washington and Tehran following American military strikes against Iranian targets near the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump confirmed Tuesday that U.S. forces had struck an Iranian anti-aircraft installation on Qeshm Island, describing the operation as a limited military action. The strikes followed reports of Iranian forces firing at an American aircraft.

The new billboard was accompanied by other threatening displays throughout Tehran. Another large poster depicted Trump alongside Vice President JD Vance, U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, showing the four leaders with bloodied faces and torn clothing against damaged American and Israeli flags.

Dozens of Iranians gathered in Revolution Square carrying red flags and banners bearing the warning “There will be blood,” while demanding revenge for the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during the American-Israeli strikes that began on February 28.

Since the outbreak of the war, Iranian authorities have repeatedly used public displays to ridicule Trump and promote threats of retaliation. Previous installations have depicted the president inside a coffin, while other exhibits have portrayed him injured or imprisoned.

In northern Tehran’s Tajrish Square, an outdoor exhibition featured paintings showing Trump bloodied on the ground and another depicting an explosive device covering his face. A nearby installation included a replica prison cell occupied by an actor impersonating the American president.

The latest threats come as diplomatic efforts continue to prevent another major escalation between the United States and Iran. Despite the renewed military activity, Trump has indicated that an agreement with Tehran remains possible.

Iranian officials, however, have continued issuing warnings. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, a leading Iranian negotiator, declared that the country was prepared for renewed fighting, while Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi asserted Iran’s right to respond militarily to American attacks.

Iran has long used enormous billboards and murals in prominent public locations to communicate political messages, particularly against the United States and Israel. Such displays have been a regular feature of the country’s political landscape since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Billionaire Elon Musk responded with humor Wednesday to the Republican Party’s crushing midterm election losses, despite having poured nearly $500 million into efforts to help GOP candidates retain control of Congress and win key races across the country.

Democrats captured both the House of Representatives and the Senate in Tuesday’s elections, dealing President Donald Trump a major political setback and leaving Republicans confronting the consequences of an expensive campaign that failed to prevent a sweeping Democratic victory.

“Guess my election-interfering space lasers didn’t work this time,” Musk wrote on X, adding a shrugging emoji.

The Tesla and SpaceX chief executive emerged as the largest individual political contributor of the election cycle, according to OpenSecrets, which tracks campaign financing. His spending approached half a billion dollars, an extraordinary amount made possible by campaign finance rules permitting unlimited independent political expenditures.

Much of Musk’s financial support flowed through America PAC, his Republican-aligned political organization, and the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC dedicated to electing Republican senators.

Among the most closely watched contests was the Texas Senate race, where Musk’s financial backing proved insufficient to secure a victory for Republican Ken Paxton, a close Trump ally.

In September alone, Musk contributed $158 million to the Senate Leadership Fund, which directed substantial resources toward helping Paxton defeat Democratic candidate James Talarico.

The Texas contest became the most expensive Senate race of the election cycle, with outside political organizations spending more than $200 million opposing Talarico.

Despite the enormous financial effort, Talarico defeated Paxton, becoming the first Democrat to win a statewide election in Texas since 1994.

Celebrating his victory at a rally in Austin, Talarico portrayed the result as a rejection of the influence wielded by wealthy political donors.

“In this race, we went up against our own Goliaths. The richest man in the world, the most powerful man in the world, and the entire Washington, D.C. establishment,” Talarico told supporters.

He also criticized billionaires “who own the social media algorithms, who own the cable news networks, who own the politicians fighting on our screens” and who “want us at each other’s throats.”

Texas delivered another major embarrassment for Republicans when Democrat Gina Hinojosa defeated incumbent Governor Greg Abbott, ending years of Republican dominance in the state’s highest office.

Hinojosa made opposition to billionaire influence a central theme of her campaign, arguing that wealthy corporate interests had gained excessive power over decisions affecting ordinary Texans.

After her victory, she recalled asking voters whether Texas was “a state that is by and for the people of Texas.”

“Or is this the billionaire’s world and we just live here? Does Texas belong to the parents and their children? Or the billionaires trying to dismantle our schools? Does Texas belong to the farmers and ranchers who have worked this land for generations? Or the corporations trying to buy it up?” Hinojosa said.

Both Hinojosa and Talarico campaigned for stricter oversight of artificial intelligence data centers, an increasingly contentious issue in Texas as communities express concern about electricity prices, water consumption and the strain that massive computing facilities place on local power supplies.

The issue has particular significance for Musk, who relocated the headquarters of Tesla, SpaceX and X to Texas and has substantial business interests in the state.

Reacting to the election results, Musk offered another sarcastic observation on his social media platform.

“Data centers in space looking pretty appealing right now,” he wrote.

Musk’s political spending has reached unprecedented levels. Estimates published Wednesday placed his contributions to Republican candidates and organizations at approximately $474 million, although figures vary depending on the reporting period and which expenditures are included.

His financial involvement follows the 2010 Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which removed restrictions on independent political spending by corporations and unions. Subsequent court decisions allowed political organizations known as super PACs to accept unlimited contributions, provided their expenditures are not coordinated with candidates’ campaigns.

Those rules have enabled wealthy individuals to direct enormous amounts of money toward elections, frequently through organizations operating independently of the candidates they support.

The scale of Musk’s involvement has renewed debate over the influence of billionaires in American politics, particularly after the candidates receiving some of his largest contributions suffered decisive defeats.

The election results have also raised concerns among technology investors about the potential impact of Democratic control of Congress and new state-level restrictions on artificial intelligence infrastructure. Shares of Tesla and several AI-related companies declined Wednesday as investors assessed the possibility of tougher regulation.

Musk had warned before Election Day that Democratic victories could lead to major changes in immigration policy, the composition of the Supreme Court and the balance of political power in Washington.

In an October 30 post, he argued that maintaining Republican control of the Senate was essential to preventing what he feared could become permanent Democratic dominance.

The billionaire’s extraordinary spending ultimately failed to stop Democrats from capturing both chambers of Congress or winning historic statewide victories in Texas, where his companies have become major employers and investors.

It was a big night for the Democrats and a very, very bad night for U.S. President Donald Trump and the Republican Party. But amid the wreckage left by the blue wave that flipped control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, members of the GOP aren’t the only big losers. Supporters of the U.S.-Israel alliance and those who worry about the surge of antisemitism that has swept across the globe over the past three years should be equally worried about the implications of the Democrats’ midterm victory.

The consequences of the Democrats’ return to power on Capitol Hill will be primarily directed at the Trump administration. But whatever that will mean for Trump’s ability to govern effectively in his final two years in office, control of Congress by a party that is now largely dominated by its intersectional left-wing will have a serious impact on the U.S.-Israel relationship as well as the battle against Jew-hatred.

Jews in denial

That will not be the message we hear from most Jewish Democrats. They will point to the exit polls that show Democrats winning their usual two-thirds of the Jewish vote, though we don’t know for sure yet whether that was also true in states like Michigan where their candidate, Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, is an open antisemite.

They will also say that the leadership of the Democratic Party in both the House and Senate will remain in the hands of relative moderates like House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) who both speak of themselves as supporters of Israel. Though, especially in the case of Schumer, his longtime pose as the shomer or “guardian” of Israel in Congress has been largely conditional with the senator backing up efforts by his fellow Democrats to attack the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and hamstring its efforts to defeat Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran and even downplaying the threat of antisemitism.

But as we saw throughout 2026, the moderates are no longer in control of the Democratic Party, especially where Israel is concerned.

As a result of primary wins across the nation, the composition of both the House and Senate Democratic caucuses has been materially altered. Progressives, including members of the Democratic Socialists of America and their left-wing allies will now be sitting in seats that were once held by traditional liberals.

Progressives dominate

That doesn’t just mean that the ranks of the far-left congressional “Squad,” which had already grown since its first four members were elected in 2018, will be increased. The swing to the left is being felt across the country amid a midterm election where Democrats made gains at every level of government.

What will this mean?

During the campaign, the primary theme of the Democrats largely centered on the economy. The rise in gas prices as a result of the ongoing conflict with Iran has hit voters across the board, but most of the pain is felt by those working-class voters who largely supported Trump and the GOP in 2024. Their defection to the Democrats seems to have gone well beyond the usual backlash against the party in power two years after it won the presidency and Congress.

But while dissatisfaction with the economy as well as a sense that Trump had not improved the lives of voters during the past two years may have won them the midterms, the winners will have other priorities once they are sworn into office in January.

As the primaries demonstrated, the two issues that are the main motivating factors for the party’s activists and their candidates are only tangentially connected to what enabled them to win. The organizing principles of the Democratic Party and its base are now opposition to enforcement of immigration laws and hostility towards Israel.

Trump has effectively ended the flood of millions of illegal immigrants that entered the United States during the Biden administration. That will likely remain the case even with a Democratic Congress. But we can expect them to try to use their control of Congress and government funding to end the deportations of illegals.

And it’s equally true that their priority will be to confront Trump.

That will mean attempts at impeachment of the president and members of his cabinet that will likely fail. But it will tie the administration up in knots, as was the case during the Democrats’ efforts to undermine Trump during the last two years of his first term. Even more important, control of congressional committees will give the ability to launch investigations of every department as well as members of the president’s family. Yet whether any of it leads to any tangible consequences for those put in their crosshairs, it will materially influence Trump’s ability to govern effectively or get anything done.

Targeting Israel

But along with that, the large number of anti-Israel Democrats elected by voters who have accepted lies about the war in Gaza will be trying to sever the relationship with Israel.

Democrats who were long considered “moderates” or even pro-Israel have been signaling over the course of the last year that they can no longer be relied upon to back a Jewish state under assault by Iran and its terrorist proxies. The reason is that they can read the polls that indicate those who identify as Democrats have turned upon Israel as well as the primary results that are sending anti-Israel leftists to Washington.

Rather than try to resist the base of their party and find themselves out of power, figures like Schumer are going along with the progressives.

During the campaign, that meant backing an open antisemite like El-Sayed. They feared being targeted by angry leftists. And now that the Michigan Democrat with links to the Muslim Brotherhood appears poised to join Schumer on the Senate floor while others with similar views enter the House, the same dynamic will be in play.

We already know that will lead to measures that will fundamentally alter the alliance with the Jewish state. That will mean sanctions on Israelis in Judea and Samaria—an effort that will be driven by acceptance of the false narrative about “settler violence.”

Military aid to Israel will also be targeted by the Democrats.

Trump may have thought he could forestall such efforts by announcing this week that the aid will now wind down by the end of the year and be replaced with a partnership rooted in joint efforts to research and develop weaponry.

In the long run, that is, as Netanyahu has actually been saying for decades, exactly what Israel needs. Doing so will enable the Jewish state to be less dependent on the United States and remove a major talking point employed by Israel-bashers. That’s in spite of the fact that almost all of it was spent in the United States and was as much of an aid package for American arms manufacturers as the Israelis. It’s also true that the amount spent on assistance to Israel is actually dwarfed by the aid that Europe gets via American participation in NATO that is part of the Pentagon budget rather than called “aid.”

Still, making this change abruptly rather than gradually, as Israelis who desire this shift wanted, will create a strain on their military at a time of war when it is already hard-pressed.

Mainstreaming antisemitism

What Trump and whoever winds up leading the next Israeli government need to realize is that the anti-Israel progressives are not really focused so much on ending aid so much as they are interested in severing the relationship altogether.

For one thing, that will likely mean efforts to stop the transition from aid to partnership. But the impact of congressional majorities that are overwhelmingly hostile to Israel will transcend the ongoing debate about the aid package.

It’s been clear for years that the Democrats have not only rejected any idea of a bipartisan consensus about the alliance but have been transitioning to being an anti-Israel party. But the 2026 results have produced more than just majorities that don’t want to aid Israel’s efforts to defend itself.

With the victories of figures like El-Sayed and others who were willing to spread blood libels about Israel committing “genocide” in Gaza and who sought to anathematize the pro-Israel AIPAC lobby, we’ve gone well beyond arguments about military assistance.

A public square in which the sort of antisemitism that they spout is normalized is one that can fundamentally change the way that Jews interact with society. El-Sayed’s focus on AIPAC, which was echoed in other campaigns around the country, employed classic tropes of Jew-hatred. This will make it even harder for the dwindling numbers of pro-Israel Democrats to be heard or influence policy.

But it will also impact Republicans.

The majority of Republicans remain supportive of Israel and opposed to the left’s antisemitism that is driven by their acceptance of the toxic doctrines of the left about race such as critical race theory, intersectionality and settler-colonialism.

It won’t only be the antisemitic extremists of the far right who are influenced by podcasters like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens who will be speaking of the conflict with Iran as being the primary reason for the GOP defeat. There were other causes for the Republican catastrophe including Trump’s failure to adequately explain his decision to the American people, choosing terrible candidates in several states and general disillusionment with the administration.

But rather than just blaming Trump for his correct decision to go to war against an Islamist regime that is a threat to America, some will likely blame it on Israel.

That will likely undermine Republican efforts to resist the Democrats’ push to target the Jewish state. It will also make it more difficult for them to join in efforts to push back against a tsunami of antisemitism that is making itself felt in every sector of society including academia, popular culture and the arts, as Trump has attempted to do.

The pendulum swings

Nothing is permanent in politics and the Democrats celebrating now should remember that. In the 21st century, the two parties have exchanged control of both Capitol Hill and the White House with increasing frequency. There is no telling now which side will be in a better position to win in 2028. The more the currently triumphant Democrats overplay their hand with their harassment of Trump and even their measures against Israel, the less likely it will be that they will win the presidency, especially if they nominate one of the increasingly dominant progressives who will be running.

The one thing that is certain is that the pendulum of American politics is always swinging.

Some Jewish liberals who appear deaf, dumb and blind to the way they are being marginalized along with the rest of the community may try to deny this or focus solely on their hatred for Trump. But there can be no disguising the fact that the midterms have delivered a devastating blow to supporters of Israel and a victory to those who wish to eradicate the Jewish state. That will make it all the more necessary for decent persons, whether Republican or Democrat, Jewish or non-Jewish, to redouble their efforts to fight back against the growing volume of antisemitic invective that has insinuated itself into so much of public discourse.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS. 

Newly released dashcam footage has raised serious concerns in Lakewood after a motorcyclist was reportedly seen driving directly toward three yeshiva bochurim walking along a sidewalk, forcing them to jump out of the way to avoid being struck.

The incident occurred Monday afternoon, November 2, along Route 9 near Todd Plaza, several hours before a separate confrontation in which a motorcyclist allegedly harassed and chased a bochur in Lakewood.

A local resident who was traveling with his son witnessed the earlier incident at approximately 1:50 to 2 p.m. The witness said a red motorcycle suddenly veered onto the sidewalk and headed toward three bochurim who were walking in the area.

The bochurim reportedly scrambled to get out of the motorcycle’s path as the rider approached them, narrowly avoiding what could have been a serious collision.

The witness said the motorcyclist then continued into the Todd Plaza parking lot, driving recklessly and nearly striking additional pedestrians before speeding away.

“Guy looked like he was having a blast scaring people,” the witness told The Lakewood Scoop.

The resident suggested that surveillance footage from nearby businesses and properties be reviewed to help identify the rider and establish precisely what occurred.

The newly surfaced footage has attracted particular attention because of another incident reported later that same evening, when a motorcyclist allegedly ran a red light before harassing and pursuing a yeshiva bochur.

The Lakewood Scoop reported that the motorcycle seen during the afternoon incident appeared similar to the one involved in the nighttime confrontation. However, it emphasized that the identity of the rider has not been established and that it remains unconfirmed whether the same individual was involved in both episodes.

The reports have prompted concern among residents about the dangers posed by reckless motorcycle riding, particularly in areas heavily traveled by pedestrians and yeshiva bochurim.

Additional residents responding to the reports described other troubling encounters with groups of motorcyclists in Lakewood. One motorist claimed that several motorcycles had passed his vehicle while being operated erratically and that one rider kicked his car while passing.

Those accounts have not been independently verified, and authorities have not publicly established a connection between the reported incidents.

It was not immediately clear whether police have identified the motorcyclist, whether formal complaints have been filed in connection with the sidewalk incident, or whether any charges are being considered.

The footage and eyewitness account nevertheless raise serious safety questions, particularly given the possibility that pedestrians were deliberately frightened by a motorcycle being driven toward them.

{Matzav.com}

JetBlue passengers will now have to pay as much as $70 to check their first suitcase, following another round of baggage fee increases announced Tuesday as the airline seeks to offset rising fuel costs and other operating expenses.

The new pricing, which took effect November 3, represents JetBlue’s second increase in checked-baggage charges this year and comes just weeks before the busy Thanksgiving and winter holiday travel seasons.

Under the revised fee structure, passengers traveling on domestic flights and routes to Canada, Latin America and the Caribbean will pay a minimum of $50 each way for their first checked bag when purchasing the service more than 24 hours before departure. That represents an $11 increase from the previous minimum charge of $39.

Passengers traveling during peak periods will pay $55 for their first checked bag when purchasing it in advance. Those who wait until within 24 hours of departure will face a $60 charge during regular travel periods and $70 during peak dates.

The higher prices mean that a traveler checking one suitcase on a round-trip flight during a busy holiday period could spend as much as $140 on baggage alone, in addition to the cost of the airline ticket.

Second checked bags are also becoming more expensive, with fees ranging from $70 to $85 each way, depending on the travel date and when the baggage charge is paid.

For a family of four checking one suitcase per person during a peak travel period, the new charges could total $440 round-trip when paid in advance. Waiting until shortly before departure could increase the family’s baggage bill to $560.

JetBlue said the increases are necessary because of the continued rise in aviation fuel prices and other expenses affecting the airline industry.

“We’re adjusting checked bag fees to help offset rising fuel and operating costs,” a JetBlue spokesperson said.

The airline explained that charging separately for checked luggage allows it to avoid raising base fares for every passenger.

“This helps us keep our base fares competitive while giving customers the choice to pay for a checked bag only if they need one,” the spokesperson added.

The new fees apply to tickets purchased on or after November 3. Travelers who booked their flights before that date will remain subject to the previous baggage rates.

JetBlue’s peak travel periods include November 19 through November 30 for Thanksgiving and December 17 through January 18 for the winter holidays. Additional peak periods are scheduled around other holidays, spring break and the summer travel season.

The airline has also increased baggage charges on certain transatlantic flights. Passengers purchasing its lowest-priced Main Base fares for flights to Europe will now pay at least $80 each way for their first checked bag during off-peak periods, up from $60.

The latest increases follow a previous round of baggage fee hikes in March, when JetBlue raised prices amid a sharp increase in jet fuel costs following the outbreak of the Iran war.

Fuel expenses have become an increasingly serious concern for American airlines. Jet fuel prices have more than doubled since the beginning of the year, rising from slightly above $2 per gallon in January to approximately $4.41 per gallon this week.

JetBlue has also been struggling financially, reporting a $257 million loss during the third quarter. Additional baggage revenue could help the carrier offset some of those losses without imposing equivalent increases on advertised ticket prices.

Not all passengers will be required to pay the higher fees. Customers holding eligible JetBlue Plus, Business or Premier credit cards can receive a complimentary first checked bag for themselves and up to three companions traveling on the same reservation.

Members of JetBlue’s TrueBlue Mosaic loyalty program also qualify for baggage benefits, with Mosaic 1 members receiving one free checked bag and higher-tier members receiving two.

Travelers who do not qualify for those exemptions can reduce their expenses by purchasing baggage allowances at least 24 hours before departure, potentially saving as much as $15 per suitcase.

JetBlue’s decision could also lead to additional increases across the airline industry. Earlier this year, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines followed JetBlue in raising baggage charges after the carrier announced its previous increases.