Matzav

A new LendingTree analysis paints a stark picture of the rental landscape in New York, revealing that no major metro saw a sharper escalation in the cost of a one-bedroom apartment over the past several years.

Though longtime residents hardly need a data report to remind them of the city’s punishing housing costs, the findings quantify just how sharply rents have climbed. While the typical increase across 50 major U.S. metros between fiscal years 2021 and 2026 was $457, New York’s one-bedroom Fair Market Rent soared by $854—jumping from $1,801 to $2,655.

Fair Market Rents, the federal metrics HUD relies on to set assistance thresholds, reflect what a standard, decently maintained unit costs at roughly the 40th-percentile level in each region. And by that measure, New York’s trajectory has been the steepest in the nation.

San Diego came in a distant second, with its one-bedroom benchmark increasing by $817 over the same period, rising from $1,642 to $2,459.

Across all surveyed metros, the typical one-bedroom rent climbed from $1,122 in FY 2021 to $1,578 in FY 2026—a 40.7% rise that has left many households stretched to the limit.

The report underscored the burden these jumps have created, describing them as a “massive strain” on renters. As the study put it, “The reality for most renters is that their wages have likely not kept up with these rent increases,” referencing U.S. Treasury data showing that 90% of Americans live in counties where housing costs have outpaced wage growth from 2000 to 2020.

{Matzav.com}

it is with great sadness that Matzav.com reports the petirah of the esteemed Breslover mashpia, Rav Binyamin Zev Knopelmacher zt”l, after years of illness. He was 75.

Rav Knopelmacher was regarded as one of the most influential spiritual guides in Breslov, and for decades, thousands sought out his brocha, counsel, and heartfelt encouragement. His gentle manner, clarity of thought, and ability to uplift struggling souls made him a beloved figure whose impact reached far beyond his immediate circle.

He was born in Denmark to his father, Rav Yitzchak Knopelmacher zt”l, and was raised and educated in the Vizhnitz institutions of Torah and chassidus. In later years, he drew close to the Breslov community, where he eventually became one of its leading and most respected mashpi’im.

Countless individuals streamed to his home seeking advice, spiritual direction, or simply a word of inspiration. He devoted himself to strengthening avodas Hashem among the younger generation, instilling within them the pathways of Breslov with sincerity and warmth.

Faithful to Breslov tradition, he traveled annually to Uman for Rosh Hashanah to spend the Yom Tov near the tziyun of Rebbe Nachman.

Rabbi Knopelmacher leaves behind a family of children and grandchildren who follow the path of Torah and mitzvos.

Yehi zichro boruch.

{Matzav.com}

A Republican proposal in the Senate that would route up to $1,500 directly into Americans’ health savings accounts has quickly earned President Trump’s enthusiastic backing.

Speaking with reporters aboard Air Force One, the president made clear why the idea appeals to him. “I like the concept. I don’t want to give the insurance companies any money,” he said, blasting the industry for its practices. “They’ve been ripping off the public for years,” he continued, calling Obamacare “a scam to make the insurance companies rich. … Billions and billions of dollars is paid directly to insurance companies.”

The legislation had been expected to reach the Senate floor this week. Its aim is to relieve the financial pressure on roughly 24 million people insured under Obamacare, many of whom are facing higher out-of-pocket costs.

A key feature of the bill is a direct cash allotment into health savings accounts: $1,000 for eligible Affordable Care Act enrollees aged 18 to 49, and $1,500 for those aged 50 to 64.

Eligibility hinges on several factors, including income. Individuals and families must earn no more than 700% of the federal poverty level to receive the benefit — meaning a single enrollee could qualify with income up to $109,550, and a family of four could qualify with income as high as $225,050.

In addition, only those enrolled in bronze-level plans — about one-third of ACA participants — or catastrophic plans are included. These plans come with steep deductibles but differ in premium costs: bronze plans can require paying up to 40%, while catastrophic plans generally carry minimal premiums.

The proposal sets aside as much as $10 billion for these health savings account payments. It explicitly bars any of the funds from being used on abortions or gender-reassignment procedures. Certain legally present immigrants may also qualify.

Notably, those on silver, gold, or platinum Obamacare plans — which offer higher coverage in exchange for higher premiums — do not qualify for the HSA deposits. The same exclusion applies to people insured through their employers, as well as those covered by Medicare or Medicaid.

Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of the bill’s architects, praised the president’s stance. “I absolutely agree with President Trump that we need to redirect subsidies from insurance companies and give patients the power,” he told The Post. He added, “Republicans want real solutions that actually make health care affordable and put money in families’ pockets. I applaud the President for his leadership on this issue.” Cassidy teamed up with Senate Finance Chairman Mike Crapo of Idaho to introduce the bill.

The Senate is expected to weigh this proposal Thursday alongside an $83 billion Democratic measure that would extend every Obamacare subsidy for another three years — a vote Democrats secured through last month’s shutdown-ending agreement.

The debate lands at a time when Trump is shifting his economic messaging ahead of the 2026 midterms, unveiling a slate of populist policies that include possible $2,000 tariff rebate checks and $1,000 Trump savings accounts for children.

Voters, meanwhile, continue to feel the squeeze of the roughly 20% cumulative inflation tied to Joe Biden’s term. Prices increased another 3% over the past year, according to the newest Bureau of Labor Statistics release.

The White House has rejected claims that tariffs are fueling higher consumer prices. Officials point instead to historic private-sector investment in U.S. manufacturing and a rebalancing of global trade agreements that they say benefits American workers.

At a Pennsylvania event earlier the same day, Trump underlined his economic message once more, declaring he has “no higher priority than making America affordable again.” He also defended his trade policies, telling attendees, “If we didn’t have tariffs, you would have no steel. We wouldn’t have one steel mill anywhere in the United States, and that would be really bad for national security.”

Addressing energy costs, he reminded the crowd, “When energy comes down, your other prices come down.”

He then highlighted tax relief already set to take effect. “We’re also putting thousands of dollars in the pockets of hard-working Pennsylvanians with the largest tax cuts in American history: That’s no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security for our great seniors,” he said. “And all of that kicks in on Jan. 1.”

The administration also framed the health-care legislation as part of its broader effort to fight runaway medical costs. White House spokesman Kush Desai criticized the opposing party’s approach. “The current system is not working to deliver health care at reasonable prices for everyday Americans. Democrats’ push to maintain these high prices by giving more money to insurance companies is not a real solution for President Trump,” he said.

Desai noted the president’s focus on negotiating with drug manufacturers and cracking down on systemic waste. “The President has instead focused on lowering prescription drug costs by hammering out deals with pharmaceutical companies, as well as taking on waste, fraud and abuse in the system to deliver results for patients, and will continue to deliver policy solutions that lower costs in the healthcare market for the American people.”

{Matzav.com}

A federal court has once again stepped into the standoff between Washington and Sacramento, with U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ordering that California must regain authority over its National Guard units currently stationed in Los Angeles. His ruling on Wednesday temporarily blocks the Trump administration from continuing to deploy those troops without the state’s consent, though he paused the injunction until Monday.

State officials had gone to court arguing that the circumstances used to justify the troop activation were no longer relevant. When President Donald Trump initially assumed command of the California National Guard in June, more than 4,000 service members were mobilized. By late October, that presence had dwindled dramatically, leaving only “a 100 or so troops” positioned in the Los Angeles area, California noted.

The administration defended the continued deployment, insisting that Guard forces were still needed to bolster security around federal staff and facilities. “U.S. Justice Department lawyers said the administration still needed Guard members in the Los Angeles area to help protect federal personnel and property.” Requests for comment submitted to the White House on Wednesday were not answered.

The political confrontation intensified when the Republican administration extended the mission through February and pushed to send California Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, as part of a broader attempt to move federal forces into cities governed by Democrats—despite repeated objections from local officials.

California maintained throughout the legal battle that the Guard was being conscripted into service as a presidential security arm, contrary to long-standing restrictions on domestic military involvement. “California argued that the president was using Guard members as his personal police force in violation of a law limiting the use of the military in domestic affairs.”

The origins of the dispute trace back to large demonstrations against Trump’s expanded immigration enforcement. In response, Trump assumed command of the Guard without a gubernatorial request—the first such move in decades—and placed troops around a downtown Los Angeles federal detention center where protesters had gathered. Units were also assigned to accompany immigration agents during arrests in surrounding neighborhoods.

California quickly filed suit, prompting Judge Breyer to initially issue a temporary restraining order requiring control of the Guard to revert to the state. That ruling was later frozen by an appellate court panel while the case proceeded.

For its part, the administration argued that the judiciary had no authority to interfere with the president’s determination that unrest surrounding the protests amounted to conditions in which “violence during the protests made it impossible for him to execute U.S. laws with regular forces and reflected a rebellion, or danger of rebellion.”

After a full trial, Breyer concluded in September that the federal deployment violated the governing statutes. His decision aligned with rulings from other courts that had similarly blocked attempts to send National Guard units to Portland and Chicago as part of the administration’s urban enforcement strategy.

{Matzav.com}

Intense consultations inside the Religious Zionist party — including a gathering of its leading rabbonim — have led to a developing consensus that the faction may ultimately support the government’s proposed draft law, even though it grants wide exemptions to the chareidi tzibbur. The matter drew unusual public scrutiny, prompting the party to convene a serious, in-depth gathering on Tuesday to address the wave of criticism over the possibility of backing the bill.

At the closed-door meeting, party MKs sat together with rabbonim, who were invited to express their views on the bill’s long-term consequences for Klal Yisroel. Among those who came to weigh in were Rabbi Chaim Gantz, Rabbi Chananel Etrog, Rabbi Shimon Cohen, Rabbi Chaim Wolfson, Rabbi Eliyahu Blumenzwieg, Rabbi Yaakov Medan, Rabbi Yoel Manovitch, Rabbi Eyal Greiner, Rabbi Yigal Levenstein, Rabbi Yehuda Sadan, Rabbi Shmuel Haber, and Rabbi Eliezer Shinwald.

The party later explained that the purpose of the gathering was to “examine ways to enable significant chareidi enlistment to the IDF,” particularly given the sharp disagreements over the proposed framework. A range of perspectives was voiced. Some argued that the bill was unlikely to produce meaningful results on the ground, while others cautioned that pushing it through without revisions could weaken trust between the party and its core dati leumi supporters — especially after repeated commitments to the Hesder yeshivos were, in their view, not adequately honored.

By the end of the discussion, the assembled rabbonim had reached a unified recommendation: the party should insist on substantial amendments. Party chairman Minister Bezalel Smotrich accepted the guidance of the rabbonim and committed to pursue changes that would reshape the proposal into one that is workable, fair, and aligned with the party’s responsibilities to the tzibbur.

In its statement, the party emphasized that it will continue the internal dialogue and intends to push for revisions that ensure any final law includes genuine, actionable mechanisms to encourage chareidi enlistment, while safeguarding Torah values and maintaining respect for those who already serve.

As public speculation intensified, the party released a follow-up announcement clarifying: “Contrary to various reports, no practical decisions have yet been made, and the faction is formulating its demands and conditions for supporting the law. The meeting was held as part of an in-depth learning process for faction members and rabbis, focusing on the law, its implications, and ways to correct historical injustices and encourage haredim to enlist in the IDF. At the meeting, various opinions were expressed, both by the rabbis and the faction members, and it was agreed that the discussions would continue.”

The faction underscored that its only guiding principle is the protection of Am Yisroel: “Even now, the entire faction is determined to vote only for a law that will lead to real and swift enlistment of chareidim to the IDF, in order to meet Israel’s security needs and ease the burden on the combat soldiers and their families. The Religious Zionist party, which represents the sector that serves the most, is committed to changing the current situation in practical terms and will make its decisions solely based on the merits of the matter, detached from campaigns and political interests from all sides. The faction has only one consideration before its eyes: the security of Israel and the religious and national obligation of IDF service for all parts of the nation,” the statement concluded.

{Matzav.com}

A series of lawsuits filed Wednesday in Dallas County claims that American-made microchips repeatedly surfaced inside Russian missiles and drones used in lethal attacks across Ukraine, Newsmax reports. The filings come against the backdrop of staggering civilian losses, with the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights confirming at least 14,775 civilian deaths — including 755 children — while cautioning that the true toll is “likely significantly higher.”

The complaints collectively accuse several major U.S. semiconductor manufacturers of failing to prevent their technology from entering Russia’s weapons pipeline, despite export bans, sanctions, and what the filings describe as “extensive notice” that their electronics were appearing inside President Vladimir Putin’s missiles. The suits argue that the companies ignored clear warnings and allowed sensitive components to be diverted into military systems used to bombard Ukrainian cities.

Each lawsuit names Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, and distributor Mouser Electronics, asserting that their semiconductors turned up in weapons used in deadly attacks and alleging the firms “armed the Russian military” through what the filings call “domestic corporate negligence.” Plaintiffs say the companies prioritized profits over legal obligations, citing the accusation that they “have chosen to maximize profit ahead of and in favor of their duties to take reasonable, and legally required, steps to keep their products out of the wrong hands.” Newsmax has reached out to the manufacturers for comment.

Below is a complete rewrite of the detailed breakdown of all five lawsuits, preserving every quoted line exactly as written:

Lawsuit 1: Shumylo et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Kryvyi Rih – Apr. 4, 2025)
The first case focuses on the April 4, 2025 strike in Kryvyi Rih, alleging that U.S.-origin parts “powered Iskander-M ballistic missiles and drones that Russia used to attack Ukrainian citizens on April 4, 2025, in Kryvyi Rih.” The filing identifies multiple victims, stating: “This strike killed Plaintiff A.K., the daughter of Plaintiff Marta Shumylo; Plaintiff D.N., the son of Plaintiff Nataliia Nikitska; and Plaintiff T.T., the grandson of Plaintiff Valentina Tsvitok.” The lawsuit contends defendants “armed the Russian military by selling semiconductor components … that Russia used as critical components in weapons systems for its attacks on Ukraine and its citizens.” It also argues the companies were repeatedly warned, noting “Defendants had extensive notice … that their products were being diverted to Russian and Iranian weapons programs” but still “failed to implement and enforce reasonable measures to prevent such diversion.” In closing, the complaint asserts the harm was foreseeable, stating: “Defendants’ domestic conduct in Texas … was a substantial factor in causing the injuries suffered abroad.”

Lawsuit 2: Dmytrivna et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Okhmatdyt Children’s Hospital – Jul. 8, 2024)
This filing centers on the attack against Ukraine’s largest pediatric medical center and claims the weaponry involved included U.S.-linked components that “powered Kh-101 missiles and Shahed 136 drones” used in the strike. Two of the young plaintiffs, M.D. and S.F., are described as children receiving dialysis at the moment of impact, with the filing noting they “were patients at the children’s hospital receiving kidney dialysis care when the Russian military launched the attack,” and emphasizing that the blast “killed multiple civilians, including a hospital doctor.” Medical staff were also endangered, with the complaint stating that Dr. Olha Babicheva and nurse Viktoriia Didovets were “treating patients at the hospital when it came under attack,” making clear they were “directly in harm’s way as Defendants’ products enabled greater strike precision.” The filing cites political warnings as well, including the statement: “Looking the other way when you know your products continue to empower Russian slaughter is not just morally dubious, it is against the law.” This lawsuit argues the assault was facilitated through “the illicit flood of semiconductors into Russia … enabled by the knowing neglect or willful ignorance of American companies.”

Lawsuit 3: Babich et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Kryvyi Rih – Jun. 13, 2023)
The third suit revisits another devastating attack in Kryvyi Rih, alleging U.S. electronics were used in weapons that “killed Plaintiff Anton Babich … Plaintiff A.R. … Plaintiff Khvitcha Khupatsaria … and Plaintiff Vladyslav Kuznetsov.” The filing claims those components “powered Kh-101 missiles and Iranian-made Shahed drones that Russia used to attack Ukrainian citizens on June 13, 2023.” It further accuses the defendants of ignoring overwhelming evidence, asserting they “had extensive notice from government agencies, public advisories, forensic investigations, and media reporting that their products were being diverted,” yet “failed to implement and enforce reasonable measures to prevent such diversion.” The complaint frames this as a breach of responsibility, stating: “Defendants owe a common-law duty of care to the Ukrainian people … to not empower Russia to use their products to facilitate unlawful military attacks on civilians.” As in the earlier filings, it stresses foreseeability: “The foreign injuries were the foreseeable and natural consequences of Defendants’ Texas-based decisions.”

Lawsuit 4: Zaplyvanyi et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Uman – Apr. 28, 2023)
This lawsuit focuses on the Uman strike, arguing defendants’ components “powered drones and Kh-101 missiles that Russia used to attack Ukrainian citizens on April 28, 2023, in Uman.” It recounts the human toll, noting the assault “killed multiple civilians, including a 2-year-old child,” and demolished residential buildings. The filing maintains that the companies disregarded clear warning signs, stating they “failed to identify and resolve distribution red flags” despite the fact that “U.S. laws imposed a duty … to exercise reasonable care” to prevent diversion. The complaint then summarizes the accusation: “Defendants’ semiconductor components foreseeably powered missiles and drones that struck Plaintiffs’ homes, workplaces, hospitals, and communities, causing death, severe injury, and widespread devastation.” It additionally charges the firms with complicity in “a conspiracy to evade and/or violate export restrictions to Iran and Russia.”

Lawsuit 5: Tereschenko et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Rzhyschiv – Mar. 22, 2023)
The final filing turns to the Rzhyschiv drone strike, alleging that U.S.-made parts “powered Iranian-made Shahed-131 and Shahed-136 drones that Russia used to attack Ukrainian citizens on March 22, 2023,” destroying a high school dormitory. According to the lawsuit, “This strike killed Plaintiffs Natalia Pipchenko, Oleksander Gorgul, and R.Z.,” and left many others injured, including minors V.M. and Z.M., after the building collapsed. The complaint says the defendants “failed to implement adequate export-controls, distributor screening, and diversion-prevention systems — conduct that directly caused the injuries abroad.” It argues that decisions made in the United States “materially contributed to the diversion of semiconductor components overseas” and ultimately enabled the attack. Congress’ warning is quoted once more: “Every day, millions of dollars are made … while American technology is still fueling Russia’s murderous war against Ukraine.”

{Matzav.com}

At a campaign stop in Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania, President Donald Trump ignited a new line of attack against Joe Biden, claiming that key personnel decisions at the Federal Reserve may not hold up legally. Trump told the crowd he had been informed that Biden had used an autopen to sign the documents elevating several Democrats to the Fed’s Board of Governors, a detail he argued could undermine their authority.

Trump used the Pennsylvania rally, billed as an economic address, to raise doubts about whether those appointments conform to federal law. He said he is weighing whether to formally challenge the validity of the signings, noting that he plans to speak with legal advisers before deciding how to proceed.

He folded the Fed appointments into a broader critique of what he called Biden’s “autopen presidency,” maintaining that an array of Biden-era actions lacked legitimacy because the signatures weren’t personally executed. Trump argued that many directives, memos, and administrative decisions “should not carry the force of law” if Biden did not physically sign them.

During Biden’s tenure, aides openly acknowledged frequent reliance on the autopen — a device used by multiple past presidents — for routine paperwork or when Biden was out of Washington. The practice was described as a standard procedural tool for managing a high volume of official documents.

Trump has already vowed to roll back a number of Biden-era measures on the grounds that they were finalized with an autopen. He has said that certain regulatory steps and administrative orders will be canceled because, in his view, they lacked direct presidential authorization.

Democrats have rejected that premise, arguing that Trump’s denouncements distort a long-accepted White House practice and create unnecessary confusion about the legitimacy of government processes.

Legal scholars in recent commentary have emphasized that the decisive factor is whether the president authorized the action, not whether the ink on the page came from his own hand. They maintain that Biden’s team consistently met those requirements.

Experts have also pointed out that presidents from both parties — including George W. Bush and Barack Obama — used the autopen to sign routine matters and even time-sensitive legislative items.

Analysts say that the legality of such signatures hinges entirely on the president’s explicit direction, a condition they argue Biden satisfied throughout his term.

Trump closed his remarks in Mount Pocono by suggesting that Biden’s autopen usage raises deeper questions about who was “actually running things” in Washington. He cited reporting from Reuters as justification for raising the issue with supporters.

{Matzav.com}

A highly unusual and distinguished encounter took place when the Ashlag Rebbe visited the bais medrash of the senior kabbalist Rav Dovid Batzri, rosh yeshiva of Yeshivat HaShalom, accompanied by his son Rav Moshe Batzri. The meeting brought together two influential figures in the world of Kabbolah, along with a circle of their leading talmidim.

The Rebbe arrived at the bais medrashin Bnei Brak at the head of a delegation from the editorial team behind the new Zohar edition, Bnei Heichala. Rav Batzri, who has delivered his teachings there for years, welcomed the Rebbe with great honor. During the visit, the Rebbe presented him with the newly released volume of the Zohar featuring the Bnei Heichala commentary, prompting an extended discussion on the essential role of in-depth Zohar study and the commentary’s contribution to greater clarity.

When the Rebbe entered the bais medrash, Rav Batzri was in the middle of delivering an advanced shiur on the inner dimensions of Torah. Surrounding him were prominent talmidim, rabbanim, and fellow mekubalim. After greeting his guest, Rav Batzri was shown the first volume of the new edition, which incorporates the classic Sulam commentary alongside additional layers of analysis.

The Rebbe described the decades of work that went into producing the commentary and supplements. He remarked, “Here, in this place, there is certainly no need to elaborate on the importance of precision in every single word of the Zohar. At times, one word changes the entire picture and the entire understanding.” He demonstrated several examples where a single term in the text significantly shifts the meaning, explaining the necessity of an “analysis” section within the new Zohar edition, one that lays out questions, contradictions, and textual challenges with methodical, deeply grounded answers.

The Rebbe further noted that in the writings of the Arizal there are more than ten thousand citations from the Zohar, yet the Arizal often does not specify the source. “The more one can trace the Arizal’s foundations back to the Zohar itself, the more the entire inner Torah becomes illuminated,” he told Rav Batzri. The senior mekubal expressed profound admiration for the new work, praising its depth, clarity, and rigorous organization.

After closely reviewing the volume, Rav Batzri spoke with extraordinary enthusiasm. “I testify that there has never been a Zohar like this! It is literally like Shulchan Aruch!” he declared before the Rebbe and the assembled talmidim. He lauded the precision and coherence of the edition and offered a heartfelt brocha to the team behind it, expressing hope that it would “make a revolution in the world,” enabling more people to learn the Zohar and thereby come closer to the teachings of the Arizal and the inner essence of Torah.

The Rebbe also shared a story told to him by Rav David Abuhatzeira: that his grandfather, the Baba Sali, studied the Zohar with the Sulam commentary during his years in Morocco and later said that this commentary gave him “very great clarity in the Zohar.”

Throughout the encounter, the two mekubalim explored numerous intricate passages from the Zohar, engaging in deep discussion on the mysteries of Torah. Rav Batzri referenced the teaching of Rav Shalom Buzaglo in his classic Kisei Melech nearly 280 years ago, emphasizing that one hour of Zohar study with understanding is equivalent to tens of thousands of hours of study in the revealed aspects of Torah.

At the conclusion of the meeting, Rav Batzri accompanied the Rebbe out with warm friendship, and the two parted with heartfelt brachos.

{Matzav.com}

MK Avi Maoz, head of the Noam party, charged that the Israel Defense Forces are not genuinely interested in drafting chareidim in a way that allows them to complete their service while fully maintaining their religious identity.

Maoz made the remarks during an interview at the Kikar Hashabbat studio, with the full conversation set to air later tonight.

Maoz argued that the military has failed to create an environment that preserves the lifestyle and standards of chareidi recruits. “I think that the army is not doing what it needs to do so that a chareidi can enlist as a chareidi and also leave as a chareidi while preserving his way of life,” he said.

He explained that the core issue, in his view, is the lack of formalized protections. “Since the army does not anchor the service conditions of chareidim in IDF regulations, I am waiting for the army to anchor the chareidi service conditions in IDF regulations. Only then will I know that the army really wants to draft them so that they will be fighters and not in order to put them through the IDF melting pot to educate them anew.”

Maoz said his conclusion comes after a long period of evaluation. “I, to my great sorrow, and I say this after a long time, the army does not really want to draft the chareidim and have them also leave as chareidim.”

{Matzav.com}

During a tense appearance on Kan 11 News, MK Yuli Edelstein leveled fierce criticism at the coalition’s latest Draft Law proposal, insisting that the legislation is far from what the army actually requires. He argued that the bill is being pushed forward without genuine conviction and suggested that crucial pieces of the plan were never properly vetted.

Edelstein said the military is grappling with a shortfall of roughly 12,000 soldiers across combat and support roles, yet he believes the proposal fails to offer any meaningful solution to that staffing crisis. He also expressed frustration with last-minute items that appeared in the legislation—provisions he noted were never discussed throughout the year—claiming they were tacked on simply to manufacture disputes so that any eventual horse-trading could be marketed as political “achievements.”

Turning his attention to Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, Edelstein remarked, “I’ve known Netanyahu for 30 years. When something is important to him, he throws himself into it. That’s not what’s happening here. I know how many calls he makes and how many meetings he holds when he wants to get something passed. In this case – I haven’t seen that.” His comments underscored his belief that the prime minister has not been fully invested in steering the law to a workable outcome.

The Likud veteran didn’t mince words when discussing the text of the bill itself. “What’s written there is evasion, not enlistment. The Bismuth Law is, unfortunately, a law of evasion,” he said, labeling the draft as a blueprint that avoids the real problem rather than confronting it.

Edelstein cautioned that the political consequences could be severe, noting that dissatisfaction isn’t coming only from opponents of the government. “Opposition to this law isn’t coming from Kaplan demonstrators – it’s coming from Likud and Religious Zionism voters,” he warned, signaling potential turbulence for both the coalition and his own party.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar brushed aside the inflammatory claims coming from New York City’s soon-to-take-office mayor, Zohran Mamdani, who has publicly vowed to have Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu arrested the moment he steps into the city. Sa’ar, speaking with the New York Post during a stop in Midtown on Monday, said the dramatic threats have zero impact on Netanyahu’s intentions.

“I don’t want to enter into a legal debate with the elected mayor of New York,” Sa’ar said. “But I will only say or repeat what the prime minister had said himself, he will come to New York.”

Mamdani has been one of the loudest critics of Israel on the American political scene, repeatedly accusing the Jewish state of committing war crimes during its war against Hamas. Citing the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant, he has insisted he would order Netanyahu’s detention should the prime minister visit New York City.

That declaration was quickly dismissed at the state level. New York Governor Kathy Hochul emphasized last week that Mamdani has absolutely no power to carry out such an act. “No, I do not, and the New York City mayor has not had the power to do that,” Hochul said, making clear that the threat was purely rhetorical.

Even with the heated language flying from City Hall-elect, Sa’ar signaled he was not entirely closing the door on future engagement. “I hope that we will have, in the future, maybe, a constructive dialogue, even though I can be skeptical about it,” he told the Post.

{Matzav.com}

At an affordability-focused appearance in Pennsylvania, the president launched into a blistering attack on Rep. Ilhan Omar, painting her as someone who constantly airs grievances and contributes little. He mocked her by name, telling the audience, “I love this Ilhan Omar, whatever the … her name is, with the little turban. I love her. She comes in, does nothing but [complain]. She’s always complaining. She comes from her country, where I mean, it’s considered about the worst country in the world, right?”

The crowd roared as he amped up the rhetoric, prompting them with “We oughta get her the …. out,” which quickly morphed into loud chants of “Send her back!”

He didn’t stop there. The president once again resurfaced an allegation he has long lobbed at the Minnesota lawmaker—that she married her brother for the purpose of committing immigration fraud—reintroducing one of his most controversial claims.

Trump also pointed back to a message he posted last month on Truth Social, when he had demanded Rep. Omar leave the country. In that post, he shared a video of her speaking in Minnesota, remarking that “Somalia is our home” and referring to the Somali president as “our President,” and added, “She should go back!”

The suggestion that Omar does not belong in the United States is a theme he has revisited often. In the fall, he recounted a conversation at the White House, telling reporters, “You know I met the head of Somalia, did you know that? And I suggested that maybe he’d like to take her back. He said ‘I don’t want her.’”

His antagonism toward Omar traces back years. Throughout his first term—especially in the closing months of the 2020 race—he repeatedly showcased her as a foil, accusing her of “telling us how to run our country.”

{Matzav.com}

A US-based Palestinian critic of Hamas is alleging that the terror group secretly stockpiled massive quantities of baby formula and children’s nutritional drinks in Gaza while publicly insisting that Israel had plunged the Strip into famine, the NY Post reports. According to activist Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, the organization intentionally kept essential supplies out of public reach to intensify hunger and advance its political messaging.

Alkhatib, who has been outspoken in his opposition to Hamas, says the hidden stockpiles were meant to deepen desperation among civilians and harden global sentiment against Israel. He shared video clips online that he says were taken inside one of these concealed storage sites—rooms filled wall-to-wall with boxes of infant formula and supplemental shakes.

“During the worst of the days of the hunger crisis in Gaza in the past six months, Hamas deliberately hid literal tons of infant formula and nutritional shakes for children by storing them in clandestine warehouses belonging to the Gaza Ministry of Health,” he wrote on X.

He argued that the group’s intention was clear. “The goal, as I said then, was to worsen the hunger crisis and initiate a disaster as part of the terror group’s famine narrative in a desperate effort to stop Israel’s onslaught against Gaza and force the return of the UN’s aid distribution mechanism, and away from the controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF),” he added.

The accusations come months after warnings of potential famine surged following the collapse of a temporary cease-fire in March. With Israel blocking aid shipments after the truce fell apart, scenes of gaunt children and empty markets circulated widely, ultimately prompting the United States to spearhead the creation of the GHF to deliver food into Gaza.

But the GHF initiative was plagued by turmoil from the outset, including frequent gunfire and fatal incidents around distribution zones. Hamas reportedly cautioned residents not to approach these centers, which only intensified confusion and danger on the ground.

Against that backdrop, Alkhatib repeatedly accused Hamas of manipulating the crisis and treating its own people as expendable in its struggle against Israel. A longtime advocate of coexistence and a diplomatic resolution, he emphasized that condemning Hamas and calling for increased aid to Gaza are not contradictory positions.

“You can have compassion for the real suffering of the Palestinian civilians of Gaza, and demand Israeli action to facilitate aid entry into the coastal enclave, while still holding Hamas accountable for its part in causing a hunger and starvation crisis in the first place,” he said.

Israel, for its part, has consistently rejected claims that its military campaign contributed to a famine, instead asserting that Hamas operatives were the ones seizing food and creating shortages. Yet independent assessments have provided little confirmation that Hamas was responsible for the wave of looting that struck incoming convoys. A review by the UN Office for Project Services over the chaotic summer concluded that armed gangs—not Hamas—were primarily behind the hijackings of aid trucks.

{Matzav.com}

Elon Musk is now openly questioning whether his government-reform project — the Department of Government Efficiency, better known as DOGE — accomplished enough to justify the upheaval it triggered across Washington.

During a sweeping and often introspective appearance on “The Katie Miller Podcast,” Musk acknowledged that he can’t confidently say his experiment in uprooting waste was the right call. When pressed by Miller on whether DOGE fulfilled its mission, he offered only lukewarm praise: “We’re a little bit successful. We’re somewhat successful.”

That modest assessment didn’t last long. Musk quickly shifted to frustration over how deeply the waste was embedded in federal spending. “There was, like, probably $100, maybe $200 billion worth of zombie payments per year,” he said, noting that DOGE was able to shut down only a sliver of it.

The impact of cutting even that portion, he stressed, brought swift political retaliation. “If you stop money going to political corruption, they will lash out big time,” he said. “They really want the money to keep flowing.”

Pressed on whether he’d sign up for DOGE again, Musk didn’t hedge. “I mean, no, I don’t think so,” he said, explaining that in hindsight he would have devoted his time fully to his companies. He went so far as to imagine an alternate reality in which stepping away from Washington’s storm spared his brand from the wave of Tesla vandalism that erupted after he joined the second Trump administration. In that timeline, he said, “the cars — they wouldn’t have been burning the cars.”

Throughout the interview, Musk portrayed Washington not as a place he ever saw through rose-colored glasses, but as a system warped by what he condemned as “massive transfer payments” to migrants — a “gigantic money magnet,” he claimed, that incentivizes inflows to the US. “I wouldn’t say I was super illusioned to begin with,” he said before launching into another critique of federal spending.

He didn’t stay in policy mode for long. With characteristic bluntness, he admitted that “AI nightmares” jolt him awake “many days in a row,” leaving him running on only six hours of sleep. Asked what sparks the terror, he answered dryly, “Why do I wake up in nightmares? Oh, AI. Yeah.”

Musk insisted he doesn’t entertain what he considers irrational fears. “If I find an irrational fear, I … squelch it. Fear is the mind killer.” Yet he made clear that public life brings its own real dangers. He said he avoids any situation “where there’s the general public” due to swarming selfie-seekers and ongoing “serious security issues,” especially in the aftermath of the assassination of Charlie Kirk. “Life is on a hardcore mode,” he said. “You make one mistake, and you’re dead.”

By the time the conversation wound down, the hesitation that had hovered from the start resurfaced. Speaking with Miller — whose husband Stephen Miller remains one of President Trump’s closest advisers — Musk admitted he’s unlikely to resurrect DOGE under any circumstances. “I don’t think so,” he concluded. “Knowing what I know now.”

{Matzav.com}

A new investigation is shining a harsh spotlight on Instacart, accusing the delivery giant of quietly manipulating grocery prices through an opaque algorithm that charges different users different amounts for the exact same items—sometimes at the exact same store on the very same day.

Researchers uncovered dramatic differences in what Instacart shoppers paid for identical products. In one striking case at a Target in North Canton, Ohio, a shopper was charged $2.99 for a jar of Skippy Creamy Peanut Butter during a September order, while other customers that very day paid as much as $3.59 for the same jar from the same location.

Seattle shoppers saw similar disparities. At one Safeway, Instacart users were billed five separate prices for the same package of Oscar Mayer Deli Turkey: $3.99, $4.31, $4.59, $4.69 and $4.89 — a spread of 23% between the highest and lowest amount collected.

Across stores in four different cities, this pattern repeated itself. The findings come from Groundwork Collaborative and Consumer Reports, which enlisted 437 shoppers to place Instacart pickup orders and track the prices that appeared.

The revelations add to the growing backlash against “dynamic pricing,” a frustration that began with rideshare surges during bad weather and has since seeped into countless industries. Consumers have complained about vanishing price stability at a time when inflation has made everyday living increasingly unaffordable.

Companies already known for employing price fluctuation tactics include airlines—whose fares often rise when multiple users are searching at once—and fast-food chains that use digital menus to quietly adjust burger prices throughout the day. Groundwork warned that Instacart’s methods alone could cost families up to $1,200 a year, especially as food inflation continues to climb faster than most other expenses.

The study reported that nearly 75% of items reviewed on Instacart were listed at multiple prices, despite being identical products. Instacart, responding to The Post, rejected the notion that its system resembles real-time surge pricing. The company insisted that any price “tests” are not tied to customers’ personal characteristics, stating its prices are never “dynamic,” even though the discrepancies revealed in the study showed dramatic swings from shopper to shopper.

Researchers clarified that they found no proof Instacart is actively using personal data to determine pricing, but noted that Instacart and its retail partners very likely possess the capability to alter prices based on factors like income level, age, or whether a user is new or returning.

Instacart defended the strategy, positioning its tests as tools to help retailers “learn what matters most to consumers.” The company said higher markups might appear on niche items, whereas staples like milk and bread sometimes show lower prices. “Just as retailers have long tested prices in their physical stores to better understand consumer preferences, a subset of only 10 retail partners – ones that already apply markups – do the same online via Instacart,” a spokesperson said.

Target, however, distanced itself from the entire practice. A company representative stressed, “Target is not affiliated with Instacart and is not responsible for prices on the Instacart platform.” The retailer offered no further comment on whether it planned to evaluate Instacart’s conduct.

Safeway’s parent company, Albertsons, declined to respond to requests for comment.

The uproar comes as grocery prices remain 25% higher than before the pandemic. Over the weekend, President Trump ordered a sweeping federal probe into allegations of price-fixing across the food industry, following accusations from several Democratic lawmakers that major conglomerates have been exploiting consumers.

Some supermarket chains say they would never consider the type of in-store price variability that Instacart appears to be experimenting with. Stew Leonard’s, which uses Instacart for e-commerce, said it has never been asked to take part in such pricing practices—and wouldn’t agree even if it were. “We would never price customer A differently from customer B,” said chief marketing officer Tammy Berentson. “We would have nothing to gain. It’s unfair. We are transparent about our pricing and we want to be fair to our customers and for our customers to trust us.”

The variability documented in the study was staggering. At a Safeway in Washington, DC, some Instacart customers paid $3.99 for a dozen Lucerne eggs while others were charged $4.79. The same store sold Signature SELECT Corn Flakes for anywhere between $2.99 and $3.69. At a Target in North Canton, one group of Instacart shoppers paid $3.99 for Premium Original Saltine Crackers, while others were charged $4.59 or $4.69. Even a store-brand farfalle pasta ranged from $1.19 to $1.43.

In Seattle, Wheat Thins ordered through Instacart at Safeway appeared with four distinct price tags: $3.99, $4.31, $4.69 and $4.89.

“Instacart is a black hole for the retailer,” one industry executive told The Post. The executive explained that grocers joined Instacart to gain digital reach, only to discover during the pandemic that they no longer had a clear view into customer transactions. “The classic rub in the scenario is ‘Whose customer is it’ – Instacart’s or the grocer’s?”

Driving all these shifting numbers is a pricing engine developed by Eversight, the software company Instacart acquired in 2022. Last year, during an investor call, Instacart CEO Fidji Simo said the AI system “helps retailers dynamically optimize their pricing both online and in-store to really figure out which categories of products a customer is more price sensitive on versus less price sensitive on and really adjust their prices based on that information.”

Despite denials from the company, the study’s findings raise sharp questions about transparency, fairness, and the future of pricing in a digital marketplace dominated by algorithms—algorithms that, for now, remain largely invisible to the very shoppers they affect.

{Matzav.com}

A circulating photo that supposedly captures Vice President JD Vance in a tense back-and-forth with his wife, Usha, sent social media into a frenzy — but the VP shut it down with a quip that instantly flipped the narrative.

The picture, which has no date, no source, and no verification, shows Vance in a plain white T-shirt, sitting across from Usha in what looks like a restaurant booth. In the image, she appears to be looking downward with her hand on her face, while he wears a stern expression. The internet immediately seized on the snapshot, spinning it into a storyline about the Vances’ personal life.

Critics of the Trump-Vance administration wasted no time. The comments section filled with snark, including from Facebook user Thomas Clay Jr., who wrote on Dec. 5, “Looks like things are not so good in Republicanistan.” Others insisted the picture looked more like a digital fabrication than a genuine moment.

As speculation snowballed, Vance stepped in on Tuesday and dismantled the rumor mill with a single razor-sharp line. Posting directly to X, he cracked, “I always wear an undershirt when I go out in public to have a fight loudly with my wife.”

His sarcasm immediately reframed the conversation and showed the absurdity of treating the image as evidence of marital drama.

This isn’t the first time the couple has been the subject of online gossip. That intensified again when Usha appeared without her wedding ring at two separate events alongside First Lady Melania Trump. Her spokesperson quickly clarified the issue, saying the second lady simply juggles a full load as a mother: she “does a lot of dishes, gives lots of baths, and forgets her ring sometimes.” Vance himself brushed off the noise in a recent interview with NBC News, saying that he and Usha “kind of get a kick out of it.”

{Matzav.com}

WATCH:

LISTEN:

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

LISTEN:

Rabbi Ari Berman, president of Yeshiva University, conferred an honorary doctorate on Isaac Herzog, president of Israel, at the university’s 101st annual Chanukah dinner on Sunday.

The honorary degree recognized Herzog’s “leadership, moral courage and lifelong commitment to the Jewish people,” the university stated. Yeshiva added that the degree conferral was “a profound family legacy,” as his late father Chaim Herzog, a former Israeli president, received an honorary degree from the school in 1976.

Berman said at the black-tie event at the Cipriani Wall Street venue that Isaac Herzog is “a leader, who not only carries the conviction to defend Israel at every turn but has the character to build a state that is a beacon of light to all.”

Herzog is “the very embodiment of what it means to be a Zionist in our times,” he said.

The Yeshiva president announced at the event, which drew several hundred people, that the school had reached its $613 million fundraising goal, after billionaire philanthropist and New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, who spoke in a prerecorded message, donated the last $5 million.

“Even in the face of hate or division, we can come together with unity and solidarity and lead with spirit and purpose of light,” Kraft said in the message. “That’s what, to me, Yeshiva University does every day.”

Kraft added that his $5 million gift was not just an investment in the school but also an effort to “illuminate minds, strengthen hearts and prepare a new generation to lead with conviction, compassion and courage.”

There were also several institutional announcements at the event, including that Douglas Murray, a conservative British political commentator who is one of Israel’s staunchest defenders in the media, will be a visiting professor at Yeshiva next semester.

Berman announced that Yeshiva will debut a new engineering program and will expand its science and health school significantly, including with new departments and chairs.

The Yeshiva president also said that “distinguished scholars are joining our faculty in pursuit of an institution, whose values they actually trust, and our philanthropic achievements have surpassed every benchmark.”

“Yeshiva University is thriving with clarity and pride and purpose,” he added.

Yeshiva University HerzogIsaac Herzog, president of Israel, receives an honorary doctorate at Yeshiva University’s Chanukah fundraising dinner, Dec. 7, 2025. Credit: Courtesy of Yeshiva University.
In his keynote address, Herzog recalled observing a conversation some 25 years ago in Hebrew between Rabbi Norman Lamm, a former Yeshiva president, and Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, a former Sephardi chief rabbi of Israel, in the latter’s office.

“It was a meeting of the minds and hearts, between a renowned leader of the American Jewish community and an admired leader of Sephardic and Israel Jewry,” Herzog said.

As the two “spoke of the impressive trajectory of American Jews, and of the dialogue that must take place within the streams of Jews in America and elsewhere, I watched another bridge between Israel and world Jewry take place before my eyes,” he added.

“Dear friends, you—all of you—are the embodiment of this bridge in our times,” he said.

The Israeli president said the university is “for American Jewry what Israel is for world Jewry.”

“It is home base, and as Yeshiva’s second president Rabbi Samuel Belkin said, ‘You have built a little Israel right here,’” he said.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Murray and billionaire philanthropist Miriam Adelson attended the event, as did the parents of Omer Neutra, who was murdered on Oct. 7 and whose body Israel liberated from Gaza in early November.

Anita Zucker, chair of the dinner and supporter of an eponymous scholarship for Jewish early childhood education at Yeshiva, stated that “this dinner marks not only a celebration of YU’s past but also the beginning of its bold new chapter.”

“The enthusiasm surrounding this event speaks to the unity, devotion and deep commitment that define the Yeshiva University community,” she said.

There were also lighthearted moments at the event, as when Herzog noted that Albert Einstein “famously declined David Ben-Gurion’s offer to become Israel’s second president, and yet he happily accepted an honorary doctorate from Yeshiva.”

“Ladies and gentlemen, I did accept the position of Israel’s president, and I am also pleased to accept this honor here this evening,” he said. JNS

{Matzav.com}