Matzav

A man from Oregon who confessed to issuing bomb threats targeting Jewish medical institutions in New York has been sentenced to a five-year prison term, the U.S. Department of Justice revealed on Wednesday.

Domagoj Patkovic, age 31, entered a guilty plea in February to charges connected to his threats against healthcare facilities located in Queens and Long Island. According to prosecutors, he was involved in a conspiracy to issue threats and intentionally gave false information about the presence of bombs.

Authorities reported that Patkovic began making threatening phone calls in May 2021. Over the course of the following months, he made six separate calls to Jewish hospitals and health centers, falsely claiming that he had planted explosive devices. One of these threats, in September 2021, resulted in a hospital being partially evacuated and placed under lockdown.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York noted that Patkovic didn’t act in private—he broadcasted the threatening calls live over a social media and messaging platform, aiming to publicly spread and glorify his hateful conduct.

“The defendant endangered patients and diverted precious law-enforcement resources to advance his hateful agenda against people of the Jewish faith,” stated US Attorney Joseph Nocella. “His actions fed a rising tide of antisemitism in America.”

Nocella further underscored the gravity of the offense, vowing that his office remains committed to aggressively pursuing legal action against bomb threats and swatting incidents, particularly when they are rooted in bigotry.

{Matzav.com}

WATCH:

WATCH:

LISTEN:

https://matzav.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Bitachon4Life-Shiur-1551-Tocheles-Part-71-Faithful.mp3

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

LISTEN:

https://matzav.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Stories4Life-Shiur-461-Poison.mp3

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee addressed the ongoing impasse in the Gaza ceasefire negotiations on Wednesday evening, pushing back against claims that Israel is uninterested in ending the conflict. In a post on X, he dismissed such accusations as unfounded.

“Stop the nonsense saying ‘Israel doesn’t want war in Gaza to end…there is only ONE reason this has dragged on-Hamas! They are evil. And they are the cause of the prolonged suffering. Full stop,” wrote the Ambassador.

Huckabee’s comments came in response to a report by journalist Amichai Stein on i24NEWS, which disclosed that Hamas had reversed its position on several terms that had already been agreed upon during the ceasefire talks, including matters related to humanitarian assistance.

The report stated that Hamas, in its reply on Tuesday, insisted that all humanitarian supplies entering Gaza must now be funneled exclusively through the United Nations. This position contradicts earlier understandings that had called for aid to be distributed by neutral third parties not affiliated with either side.

Stein also noted that Hamas made further adjustments to previously accepted points, such as the terms concerning IDF troop movements during the proposed 60-day truce. The group is also now asking for a greater number of imprisoned terrorists to be freed, especially those with long-term sentences.

{Matzav.com Israel}

The Al-Araby Al-Jadeed newspaper reported on Wednesday night that Hamas has presented a list of conditions it wants met before any ceasefire agreement with Israel can move forward, according to sources familiar with the ongoing negotiations.

Hamas’s primary demands reportedly include changes to the way Israeli forces are positioned throughout the Gaza Strip. Specifically, the group is calling for IDF troops to pull back from densely populated areas and instead station themselves no closer than 800 meters from the eastern and northern borders of Gaza.

The report also states that Hamas is objecting to the current method of humanitarian aid distribution. The group insists that only United Nations agencies should be allowed to handle the aid deliveries, rejecting the involvement of the American firm that is currently managing food shipments to the civilian population in Gaza.

Additional stipulations from Hamas include a comprehensive guarantee that all military operations will come to a halt. The group also wants an assurance that, if a final agreement is not reached during the initial 60-day ceasefire, talks will continue. Moreover, Hamas is pushing for Egypt’s Rafah crossing to be reopened without restrictions, allowing displaced individuals to return and families to reunite.

As part of the next stage in the deal, Hamas is also pressing for an increased number of Palestinian prisoners—specifically those serving life sentences—to be freed for each living Israeli soldier they are holding.

An Egyptian mediator told the publication, “The ball is now in Israel’s court, and if its response is positive, the ceasefire will take effect immediately.”

{Matzav.com}

Rav Gershon Ribner, rosh kollel of Kollel Nesivos Hatorah and son-in-law of Rav Shneur Kotler, has succeeded in applying classical Talmudical analysis and methodology to understanding all areas of Yiddishkeit, bringing out its profundity and sense.

LISTEN:

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump renewed his attacks on Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, blaming him for keeping interest rates too high and pressing the Fed’s board to intervene.

“Our Rate should be three points lower than they are, saving us $1 Trillion per year (as a Country). This stubborn guy at the Fed just doesn’t get it — Never did, and never will. The Board should act, but they don’t have the Courage to do so!” Trump posted on his social media platform.

Trump’s complete statement on Truth Social was as follows:

“Housing in our Country is lagging because Jerome ‘Too Late’ Powell refuses to lower Interest Rates. Families are being hurt because Interest Rates are too high, and even our Country is having to pay a higher Rate than it should be because of ‘Too Late.’ Our Rate should be three points lower than they are, saving us $1 Trillion per year (as a Country). This stubborn guy at the Fed just doesn’t get it — Never did, and never will. The Board should act, but they don’t have the Courage to do so!”

{Matzav.com}

Columbia University has agreed to pay $200 million over a three-year period to resolve accusations that it discriminated against Jewish students. This settlement, according to the university, paves the way for the reinstatement of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding that the Trump administration had either halted or revoked earlier this year.

“While Columbia does not admit to wrongdoing with this resolution agreement, the institution’s leaders have recognized, repeatedly, that Jewish students and faculty have experienced painful, unacceptable incidents, and that reform was and is needed,” the university said in a statement.

As part of the settlement, Columbia will also pay $21 million to resolve investigations initiated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The university additionally agreed to federal oversight through a monitor who will ensure that Columbia adheres to regulations regarding its admissions and hiring policies. It will also be required to share certain information concerning foreign students with immigration authorities.

This resolution brings to a close a prolonged standoff between the university and the Trump administration concerning federal financial support.

Back in March, the Trump administration announced that it was revoking $400 million in grants and contracts to the university, citing what it described as “the school’s continued inaction in the face of persistent harassment of Jewish students.”

Later that same month, Columbia consented to a list of nine requirements presented by the administration. These included a ban on face coverings during protests and stricter oversight of the university’s Middle East studies program.

The university stated that Wednesday’s settlement reflects and expands upon previous actions taken during negotiations, and “builds on Columbia’s broader commitment to combating antisemitism.”

Thanks to the agreement, Columbia noted that “a vast majority” of the federal funding that had been suspended or rescinded in March would now be restored. The university also confirmed that “Columbia’s access to billions of dollars in current and future grants will be restored.” This includes funding from the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Health and Human Services.

Just days ago, Columbia announced disciplinary action against over 70 students involved in two pro-Palestinian demonstrations held on campus during the spring semester—one of which included a May protest that saw students occupying Butler Library.

The university’s campus was rocked by unrest during the spring, sparked by the Israel-Hamas conflict. In late April 2024, pro-Palestinian demonstrators barricaded themselves inside Hamilton Hall, resulting in multiple arrests. Those students later faced expulsion, suspension, or temporary revocation of their degrees.

{Matzav.com}

By Jonathan S. Tobin

For the true believers among the radical Israel-haters and antisemites that now dominate the American left, it was a betrayal. The vote Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) cast against an amendment to the annual U.S. defense spending bill that would have cut a $500 million allocation for Israel’s Iron Dome missile-defense system was harshly criticized by her friends at the Democratic Socialists of America. It even led some of its adherents to vandalize her district office in the Bronx, N.Y. As far as they were concerned, even a vote in favor of protecting Israeli civilians against terrorist rocket fire is tantamount to support for the “genocide” that the group believes is being perpetrated by a state that has no right to exist.

For AOC, it was yet another indication that she has her sights set on being more than just the leader of the left-wing congressional “Squad.”

Much like the Democratic Party nominee for mayor of New York City, 33-year-old Zohran Mamdani, the congresswoman wants to play both ends against the middle when it comes to Israel and antisemitism. Along with 204 other Democrats, Ocasio-Cortez voted against the entire spending bill that provided some aid to Israel as well as funding all of the nation’s defense appropriations. But she chose not to join four fellow “Squad” members—Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.) and Al Green (D-Texas)—and two Republicans, the measure’s sponsor, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), in seeking to end support for the Iron Dome.

The vote on the amendment seemed to signal the creation of a new cross-party group of the most hard-core Israel-haters. But no one should be deceived by AOC’s decision to strike a more moderate tone, even if it was unacceptable to the antisemites of the DSA.

The ‘progressives’ and Israel

If she and the rest of the Democrats’ Progressive Caucus, whose 95 members make up 45% of the Democrats’ 212 members in the House of Representatives, had their way, the United States would not only cut military aid to Israel, but it would also be condemned for defending itself against Hamas and isolated on the international stage. The Democrats’ base isn’t just “pro-Palestinian” but increasingly open to the intersectional left’s demonization of Jews and Israel, which has been normalized in academia, the arts and mainstream journalism. As a result, all of the energy in a divided Democratic Party that is still recovering from its stunning 2024 defeat at the hands of President Donald Trump and the GOP is now on the left.

And as early polls about the 2028 presidential race show, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro—the Democrats’ only leading moderate seen as a potential candidate for the White House—trails far behind former Vice President Kamala Harris and others, including AOC. While a survey three years in advance can be dismissed as meaningless, the numbers are encouraging for those who think that their party’s grassroots will ultimately be reluctant to recycle someone who was soundly beaten by Trump, like Harris, or nominate inauthentic figures like California Gov. Gavin Newsom or former U.S. Secretary of Transportation under the Biden administration Pete Buttigieg.

AOC is backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who nearly led the Democrats’ left wing to victory in 2016 and 2020, only to be denied the nomination by the party’s establishment. That makes the 35-year-old a politician with a future, whether a run for the presidency or a challenge to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer if he seeks to hold on to his seat in 2028.

She and Mamdani both seem to understand that if they are going to attain high office, then they need to position themselves slightly to the right of their leftist backers. In this way, they hope to avoid completely alienating liberals and moderates, including Jewish voters and donors who may not agree with their radical stands on economic policies and against Israel, but who can generally be relied upon to always vote for Democrats in this hyper-partisan era. Seen in that light, her vote for Iron Dome and the subsequent vandalism at her office by antisemites does her a lot of good.

That’s the same strategy that Mamdani is pursuing as he seeks to fend off challenges from Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New York, and incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, both running as Independents, in addition to Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa.

Mamdani has tried to pretend that he is an opponent of Jew-hatred. Of late, he is even willing to say that he will “discourage” his supporters from chanting “Globalize the intifada”—a demand for international terrorism against Jews everywhere—that he has been reluctant to censure. Still, like AOC, he has consistently endorsed the most extreme rhetoric demonizing not merely Israel’s efforts to eradicate the Hamas terrorists who led the invasion of and massacre in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, as “genocide,” but also made clear his opposition to the continued existence of the one Jewish state on the planet.

He thinks all he needs to do to avoid being labeled as an extremist is to pay lip service to opposition to the surge of antisemitism that has led to both violence against Jews and the targeting of Jewish students on college campuses by Mamdani’s fellow anti-Zionists. Indeed, just a few years ago, Mamdani was one of them as chapter president of the anti-Jewish, anti-Israel Students for Justice in Palestine at Bowdoin College in Maine.

Seen in that light, his discouragement of the use of one of multiple antisemitic catchphrases chanted on college campuses is meaningless. Most Democrats have fallen in line behind his candidacy, lest they find themselves out of sync with their party base. He has been pressed by some of them to disavow just one of the litanies of slogans employed by those who don’t merely oppose Israeli policies but view the existence of the only Jewish state on the planet as immoral. The issue is not his position on the use of a single slogan; it’s his effectual anti-Zionism—something inextricably linked to antisemitism. Still, it’s alarming that the party leadership has chosen not to take a stand that makes it clear they think that such a position is disqualifying.

A ‘big tent” party

The fact that most Democrats seem to agree is a troubling sign of the times.

That was made clear earlier this month when Democratic National Committee chairman Ken Martin said on PBS’s “NewsHour” that his conception of the party as a “big tent” included those who advocate globalizing the intifada, even if he personally disagreed with it.

As appalling as that is, it is understandable given the current atmosphere inside his party.

The stands of major Democratic constituency groups, such as the Young Democrats of America, which recently approved a platform falsely accusing Israel of “genocide” and the North Carolina Democratic Party’s call for an arms embargo on Israel, have tied the hands of Martin and the party’s congressional leadership when it comes to ostracizing Israel-haters. Indeed, they know that these symbolic statements, which have no impact on the Trump administration’s pro-Israel policies or the facts on the ground in the Middle East, represent normative opinion among Democrats these days, as polls have repeatedly shown.

So, while it is an understandable concession to the sentiments of what is starting to seem like a plurality, if not a majority, of Democratic voters, it also demonstrates how the Overton Window on acceptable discourse about Jews and Israel has moved in recent years.

Much like the stands of the administrations of many academic institutions that have tolerated and even encouraged antisemitism on their campuses, Martin’s statement is both shocking and an example of the Democrats’ hypocrisy. It goes without saying that he wouldn’t declare that racists who called for violence against African-Americans or Hispanics belonged inside the tent. Moreover, he and other members of his party have always been vocal about the need for their Republican opponents to disavow and condemn any of their members who are extremists and/or bigots.

A GOP problem

Nevertheless, it’s fair to ask whether—given Taylor Greene’s stand on Iron Dome funding and the steady drumbeat of antisemitic agitation from right-wing podcast hosts like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens—the Republicans now have their own Jew-hatred problem.

The Georgia congresswoman’s speech on the floor of the House demanding an end to funding for the missile-defense system that has saved countless Israeli lives was an eye-opener to those who may have thought that hatred for the Jewish state is confined to AOC’s “Squad” mates. Much like the stand of her fellow Republican Massie, MTG’s position can be dismissed as pure isolationism—“America alone” as opposed to Trump’s “America first.” The malevolence toward Israel that she demonstrated was a reminder that antisemitism is the place where the far left and the far right come together.

Given her well-known ignorance of most issues and propensity for saying outlandish things—like talk of Jewish “space lasers” that can only be characterized as stupid—most Republicans have little use for her. But, much like Carlson, she has often been included in Trump’s circle of friends and supporters in recent years. That’s something that ought to worry the vast majority of conservatives and Republicans who remain steadfast supporters of Israel as well as of the president’s tough response to the post-Oct. 7 surge in Jew-hatred that most Democrats oppose.

That said, the question to ask about the willingness of Republicans like Tayler Greene and Massie to make common cause with notorious Democratic antisemites like Tlaib and Omar is whether their faction of the GOP is significant enough to give it any hope of leading it in the foreseeable future. And that is where the real contrast between the two parties’ anti-Israel factions can be found.

The intersectional and virulently anti-Israel faction of the Democrats may not yet be in control of the party, but as the comments of the DNC chair and the refusal of party leaders to disavow an open Israel-hater and an avowed hard-core Socialist like Mamdani demonstrate, they are clearly afraid of them. While Taylor Greene’s stands and the comments of Carlson, Owens and others on the far right can’t be ignored, there is little danger of anyone who shares their views being in control of a GOP that remains, outside of a few outliers, a lockstep pro-Israel party.

That leaves supporters of Israel with the unfortunate reality of a situation where the Jewish nation has become a partisan issue rather than a matter of a bipartisan consensus. This is a disturbing development for a pro-Israel community that has always sought to build support on both sides of the aisle. But that ideal is simply no longer possible in a political universe in which people like AOC and Mamdani have—unlike Taylor Greene—a far from insignificant shot to ascend to high office underneath the Democrats’ banner. JNS

{Matzav.com}

As thousands prepare for the annual Rosh Hashanah pilgrimage to Uman, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar has taken steps to address the growing logistical challenges surrounding flights to the Ukrainian city. During his current visit to Ukraine, Sa’ar met with Jewish community leaders and pledged to work toward removing travel restrictions that have complicated charter flight arrangements for the upcoming holiday.

The meeting, organized by Israeli Ambassador to Ukraine Michael Brodsky, brought together several key figures from Ukraine’s Jewish leadership, including Rabbi Moshe Azman, Rabbi Yaakov Jan (Chief Rabbi of Uman), Rabbi Meir Stambler (Chairman of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Ukraine), and Rabbi Raphael Rotman (Deputy Chairman of the Federation).

A central topic discussed was the need to secure permission for charter flights to land in Chișinău, Moldova — a key transit point for those heading to Uman. Due to security and regulatory hurdles, access through Moldova has faced increasing difficulties. Sa’ar publicly expressed his full commitment to intervening with the Moldovan government to help lift existing limitations and enable smoother travel for the tens of thousands of Jews planning to spend Rosh Hashanah at the kever of Rav Nachman of Breslov.

Rabbi Yaakov Jan thanked both Minister Sa’ar and Ambassador Brodsky for their dedicated efforts and voiced optimism that their involvement would help clear bureaucratic obstacles and ensure the spiritual needs of the Uman pilgrims are met.

The meeting was described as productive and encouraging, with participants noting the deep understanding and cooperation shown by Israeli officials. Community representatives expressed appreciation for the Foreign Ministry’s direct involvement and Sa’ar’s personal promise to advance a practical solution with the relevant authorities.

The annual pilgrimage to Uman draws tens of thousands of Jews from around the world, and organizers are hopeful that this year’s logistical challenges can be resolved in time for a safe and meaningful Rosh Hashanah.

{Matzav.com}

In a deeply emotional encounter, the Rebbe of Belz was moved to tears as he listened to the heartbreaking challenges faced by parents raising children who have strayed from the path of Torah observance.

Leaders of Kanesher Al Gozalav, an organization established to provide emotional support, guidance, and practical tools to families dealing with this painful reality, visited the Rebbe at his home. The group’s chairman, Rabbi Avigdor Stiegel, was accompanied by the prominent mashpia and rabbinic leader of the organization, Rav Yehuda Deutsch.

During the visit, the representatives described the organization’s far-reaching activities, particularly the support groups for struggling parents that have been established in chareidi communities across the country. They shared stories of pain and resilience, highlighting the toll such situations can take on families, and the powerful relief these support systems have brought.

As the Belzer Rebbe listened, tears streamed down his face, and he broke into open weeping. Those present requested words of chizuk to pass along to the many parents who feel broken and alone.

The Rebbe responded with heartfelt words of encouragement and guidance. He also promised to send a personal written letter to be shared with the affected families, offering them chizuk in their difficult journey.

{Matzav.com Israel}

In an emotional wedding ceremony, IDF Staff Sergeant (res.) Boris Baruch Shtonda, who was severely injured in battle in Beit Hanoun during Operation Iron Swords, stood under the chuppah with his kallah, Anna. In a symbol of perseverance and victory, Boris broke the wedding glass using his prosthetic leg.

The chuppah was attended by Boris’s parents; his close friend Elisha Medan, who lost both his legs in the same battle and served as an eid (witness) under the chuppah; and the widow of Master Sergeant Yosef Hershkowitz Hy”d, who was killed alongside them in the same combat that claimed the lives of six Israeli soldiers.

The ceremony was officiated by Rabbi Menachem Kutner, director of Chabad’s Terror and War Victims Project, who has worked for decades with wounded soldiers and victims of terror. “I’ve officiated hundreds of weddings,” said Rabbi Kutner, “but this was one of the most moving I’ve ever witnessed. This chuppah symbolizes the heroism of our fighters, who continue to build lives despite all the pain.”

Boris, 27, had been vacationing in Japan on October 7, 2023, when war erupted. “I felt a deep obligation to come back,” he recalled. On October 11, he landed in Israel and immediately rejoined his unit. The very next day, October 12, he was wounded by shrapnel to the neck during battle, but refused evacuation and kept fighting.

During the battle in Beit Hanoun, a blast severed his leg. He woke up five days later in the hospital, where his parents informed him of the amputation. The early days were filled with suffering and daunting physical challenges. “At 27, I became dependent, like a baby,” he previously shared. But thanks to his family and close friends, he began the long road to recovery, gradually regaining his strength and independence.

Now, standing under the chuppah with Elisha by his side and the widow of Yossi Hershkowitz watching on, Boris showed the enduring strength of the Jewish spirit. And so, in front of tearful eyes and hearts overflowing with emotion, another bayis ne’eman was established—rooted in sacrifice and unshakable faith.

{Matzav.com Israel}

Muslim socialist candidate Zohran Mamdani is currently ahead in the New York City mayoral race, surpassing contenders Andrew Cuomo, Curtis Sliwa, and sitting Mayor Eric Adams, according to new polling data.

Poll results shared during Mark Halperin’s podcast, Next Up with Mark Halperin, revealed that a survey conducted by WICK found Mamdani leading the four-person race with 39 percent support. Cuomo trailed with 21 percent, followed by Sliwa at 18 percent, and Adams at nine percent.

The head-to-head matchup between Mamdani and Cuomo was far tighter, with Cuomo pulling in 42 percent and Mamdani just behind at 41 percent. The breakdown showed Mamdani earning strong support from Democratic voters at 55 percent, with independents at 27 percent and Republicans at 10 percent.

Cuomo, in contrast, held only 34 percent of the Democratic base but drew a majority of independents at 56 percent and Republicans at 61 percent, highlighting his broader appeal beyond his own party.

Another scenario showed Mamdani outperforming Adams in a two-way contest, drawing 47 percent of the vote compared to Adams’s 37 percent. Among Democrats, Mamdani attracted 66 percent support, with 28 percent from independents and nine percent from Republicans. Adams, meanwhile, was backed by just 21 percent of Democratic voters, though he held stronger support among independents (63 percent) and Republicans (65 percent).

Cuomo launched an independent bid for mayor following his resignation as New York’s governor in 2021 amid harassment allegations. He has emphasized that he’s “in it to win it.”

Adams, who first took office in 2021 as a Democrat, recently left the party’s primary and announced that he would seek reelection as an independent candidate.

Mamdani, who secured the Democratic nomination, has advocated for municipal grocery stores funded with money redirected from large chain supermarkets. He has also faced scrutiny for remarks made on a July 2020 podcast, in which he argued against police involvement in certain emergency responses and criticized the institution more broadly. “Police do not create safety… there are so many responsibilities we’ve given to police that, frankly, should have nothing to do with their departments… if somebody is jaywalking, if somebody is surviving, going through domestic violence — there are so many different, different situations that would be far better handled by people trained to deal with those specific situations, as opposed to an individual with a gun.”

The New York Young Republican Club (NYYRC) recently submitted a letter to Congress demanding that Mamdani be barred from taking office under the Insurrection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Section Three. The group accused Mamdani of offering “aid or support to enemies” of the United States, claiming that his “words and actions” — including participation in rallies alongside groups identified as pro-Hamas — make him ineligible to serve.

{Matzav.com}

A newly revealed report from the House Intelligence Committee has found that, despite lacking any concrete intelligence confirming Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help Donald Trump win the 2016 election, the Obama administration promoted unsubstantiated claims to the contrary, Fox News reports. The committee determined that this move came under the “unusual” direction of President Barack Obama and involved promoting intelligence that was either flawed, skewed, or lacked credibility.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified a report originally compiled in 2020 by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

The findings were the result of a probe initiated by Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who chaired the committee at the time. Though the document was finalized on September 18, 2020, it remained classified while Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., served as chairman of the committee.

Until now, the report had not been made available to the public and had been held in a secure compartment inside the intelligence community’s archives.

Fox News Digital acquired a version of the report that had been kept in a secure vault at CIA headquarters. Though some information remains redacted, the document is heavily sourced.

The focus of the investigation was the development of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA). The committee found that then-CIA Director John Brennan insisted on inserting information derived from the widely debunked anti-Trump Steele dossier, even though he knew much of it came from unreliable internet chatter.

The report explains that the ICA was created by just five analysts at the CIA, under the leadership of a single lead drafter, and was driven by directives from top intelligence agency heads under Obama’s orders.

According to the findings, “Production of the ICA was subject to unusual directives from the President and senior political appointees, and particularly DCIA,” adding that the draft bypassed standard vetting processes across the CIA and other intelligence agencies, leaving its conclusions largely uncontested.

The committee said that the assessment was expedited by the analysts in order to publish the document ahead of Trump’s inauguration.

The accelerated timeline limited the opportunity for broader review, which the report said contributed to errors, misrepresentations, and failures to detect flawed sourcing.

Brennan, the committee revealed, instructed that 15 pre-existing intelligence reports be released after the 2016 election, three of which were later determined to be of poor quality, ambiguous in origin, or lacking credibility. Nonetheless, these reports served as the main basis for the claim that Putin supported Trump’s campaign over Clinton’s.

The committee said, “The ICA misrepresented these reports as reliable, without mentioning their significant underlying flaws.”

The report also pointed out that just one vague, unverifiable portion of a single sentence from one of those poor-quality reports served as the lone piece of classified evidence suggesting Putin aimed to help Trump. The ICA also “ignored or selectively quoted reliable intelligence reports that challenged—and in some cases undermined—judgments that Putin sought to elect Trump.”

Further, the committee said that the ICA did not even explore other legitimate explanations for Putin’s actions, which had been outlined in trustworthy intelligence as well as observed conduct by the Russian government.

Two senior CIA officials reportedly warned Brennan directly, telling him, “we don’t have direct information that Putin wanted to get Trump elected.”

Still, the report notes, the Obama administration pressed forward with the ICA’s publication.

The assessment itself contained no sourcing or intelligence indicating that Putin had personally expressed a desire for Trump to win the race.

The investigation found that essential intelligence was either excluded or deliberately misrepresented, all in an effort to push the idea of Trump colluding with Russia.

One of the key testimonies in the report came from a longtime associate of Putin, who told investigators that “Putin told him he did not care who won the election,” and that Putin “had often outlined the weaknesses of both major candidates.”

The report concluded that had the ICA included proper context, the notion that Putin preferred Trump would have been seen as “implausible—if not ridiculous.”

Another striking finding was that intelligence suggesting the Kremlin had been gearing up for a Clinton presidency was suppressed. The reasoning, the committee wrote, was because Russia “knew where (she) stood” and considered her more predictable, if not easier to deal with.

The report also criticized the ICA for failing to explain why, if Putin truly wanted Trump to win, he didn’t unleash more damaging information about Clinton as the election neared its final stretch.

The investigation revealed that not only was Putin largely indifferent to the election outcome, but that there was compelling intelligence indicating he may have favored Clinton, anticipating she would be more easily influenced as president.

Gabbard’s declassification of the report follows the recent release of other documents, which, she said, provided “overwhelming evidence” that Obama and his national security team orchestrated the early framework for what would become the prolonged Trump-Russia collusion investigation.

Back in 2020, Fox News Digital also published declassified transcripts showing that national security officials from Obama’s administration admitted, under oath, that they had no “empirical evidence” of a Trump-Russia conspiracy during the 2016 election, even as they promoted the narrative publicly.

The House Intelligence Committee began questioning Obama officials in 2017. Among those interviewed were James Clapper, Susan Rice, and Loretta Lynch, along with other top national security and intelligence figures.

Their testimony, as recorded in the transcripts, echoed the conclusions of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, which found no proof of criminal coordination between Trump’s team and the Russian government. Mueller declined to make a conclusion regarding obstruction.

During those interviews in 2017 and 2018, lawmakers asked these officials repeatedly whether they possessed or had seen evidence of coordination, conspiracy, or collusion—the central accusation that had fueled the FBI’s investigation and the special counsel’s probe.

“I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election,” Clapper testified. “That’s not to say that there weren’t concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence…. But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence.”

Lynch likewise stated she did “not recall that being briefed up to me.”

“I can’t say that it existed or not,” Lynch added when pressed on whether any such evidence of coordination or conspiracy was ever presented to her.

Yet Clapper, Lynch, and then-Vice President Joe Biden were all reportedly present in a July 28, 2016 Oval Office meeting when Brennan briefed President Obama and then-FBI Director James Comey. During that meeting, Brennan shared intelligence from a Hillary Clinton campaign aide outlining a plan “to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service.”

In Brennan’s handwritten notes from the meeting, released in 2020 by Fox News Digital, he wrote, “We’re getting additional insight into Russian activities from (REDACTED),” adding, “CITE (summarizing) alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the [Russian security service].”

Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power was also questioned by the House Intelligence Committee and said she had not seen any proof of collusion or conspiracy.

“I am not in possession of anything — I am not in possession and didn’t read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community,” Power testified.

Asked again, she responded: “I am not.”

Susan Rice was questioned along the same lines.

“To the best of my recollection, there wasn’t anything smoking, but there were some things that gave me pause,” Rice testified. “I don’t recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect that I saw… conspiracy prior to my departure.”

When asked specifically about any “coordination,” Rice replied: “I don’t recall any intelligence or evidence to that effect.”

Pressed about the broader idea of collusion, Rice said: “Same answer.”

Ben Rhodes, who served as Deputy National Security Advisor, was also asked whether he had seen any evidence during his time in the White House.

“I wouldn’t have received any information on any criminal or counterintelligence investigations into what the Trump campaign was doing, so I would not have seen that information,” Rhodes said.

He added later, “I saw indications of potential coordination, but I did not see, you know, the specific evidence of the actions of the Trump campaign.”

Andrew McCabe, the former FBI Deputy Director, was interviewed in 2017 and asked about the infamous Steele dossier, which contained a number of explosive allegations against Trump.

When asked what he believed was the most “damning or important piece of evidence in the dossier that” he “now knows is true,” McCabe responded, “We have not been able to prove the accuracy of all the information.”

When a House investigator asked, “You don’t know if it’s true or not?” McCabe replied, “That’s correct.”

During the transition after the 2016 election, Comey personally briefed Trump on the Steele dossier, which was filled with salacious and unverified claims about his ties to Russia. Brennan was also reportedly present during the January 2017 meeting at Trump Tower.

The dossier, authored by ex-British spy Christopher Steele, was funded by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee via the law firm Perkins Coie.

Despite this, Brennan and Comey allegedly had access to intelligence indicating Clinton’s team was actively working to associate Trump with Russia as part of a broader political strategy. It’s still unclear whether the intelligence community knew, at the time, who had paid for the dossier.

Both Brennan and Comey are now under FBI criminal investigation following a referral from CIA Director John Ratcliffe to FBI Director Kash Patel related to their role in the origins of the Russia investigation.

Gabbard has also referred individuals to the Justice Department for criminal investigation for their role in generating what she described as “manufactured” and “politicized” intelligence to fuel the Trump-Russia narrative.

While most of the Obama-era officials have remained silent about the new findings, Obama’s spokesman broke with precedent to respond.

“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” said Patrick Rodenbush. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one.”

He added, “These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction. Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.”

Rodenbush also stated: “These findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio.”

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump’s administration has made public a massive trove of government records related to the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., providing new context and information surrounding the tragic loss of one of America’s most prominent civil rights leaders.

The collection includes over 6,300 documents along with a single audio recording featuring an interview with the brother of James Earl Ray, the man convicted of killing Dr. King. Altogether, the files contain nearly a quarter of a million pages of material. Below are seven notable revelations from the documents.

One individual from Texas, identified as Joseph Meyer, informed authorities that he might have encountered the man who would later murder Dr. King. The sighting allegedly occurred in Mississippi about two weeks before the assassination.

According to the report, Meyer recounted that while fishing with his son, they saw a man shooting a rifle into a tree.

“He and his son went fishing near Picayune on a Sunday morning between about 8:00 AM and 9:30 AM. They were approaching a small fishing lake on Ridge Road when they noticed a man laying behind a light colored Ford Mustang shooting a rifle into a target on a tree about 40 yards away,” the report reads. “He and his son parked their car at the small lake nearby and began fishing. The man with the rifle, which he observed to be a lever action and either new or very well taken care of, came up to them and started talking to him. The man said he was bore sighting the rifle, but he wished his brother was there because he was more experienced at this. They talked of fishing, hunting and general topics. The man did not talk with an accent and gave the impression of not being from that area.

“The man was dressed in canvas field hunting clothes. He was about 5’10” to 11″ tall, 175 pounds, dark wavy hair well groomed. Meyer has observed photographs of James Earl Ray and he stated that some of the photographs definitely do not look like the man he saw, but one of the photographs he recently saw in Look Magazine, the one without glasses, in some ways resembles the man he saw firing the rifle. He said he does not believe he would be able to identify the man he saw even if he saw him again,” the report continued.

The report went on to say:

“Meyer thought nothing of the incident until he heard of the shooting of Martin Luther King. Then he thought there might possibly be some connection, but he did not report the matter to the local police because he was afraid they would only laugh at him. He said he went back to the area [where] the man was firing and was unable to find any cartridges. He looked at the tree that had been shot at and noted that the places where the bullets hit indicated that a high-powered cartridge was used,” the report said.

Among the materials is a CIA report examining Cuba’s reaction to the assassination, spanning five pages and incorporating both independent and state-controlled media from the island nation.

The Cuban Communist Party’s newspaper, Granma, emphasized the upheaval that followed MLK’s killing, particularly the widespread violence and unrest in American cities.

“Twenty-seven persons have been killed in the U.S. as a result of the fighting which has been going on since the assassination of Martin Luther King. In Washington alone there are 750 wounded and 4,186 persons arrested. Snipers continue to be active in different cities in the U.S. The White House and the Capitol are under heavy guard,” the paper wrote, according to the CIA report.

The CIA file also noted how Cuban radio stations broadcast incendiary messages from “black power” leaders. Among them was Stokely Carmichael, who made a call to arms for Black Americans: “arm ourselves with rifles and pistols and launch an assault on the streets of the cities of the United States.”

Carmichael also allegedly predicted, according to Radio Liberacion, that there would be “executions in the streets.”

A separate FBI file revealed a threat made against King months before his death during a public appearance in Wisconsin in May 1967.

The Bureau was contacted by an unidentified caller who said he intended to “put a bullet through KING’s head.” The man was later identified as Theodore Adank, who local police categorized as a potential threat with apparent mental instability.

“At the news conference held by King on 5/12/67 the area was sealed off by police to ensure that only newsmen were admitted,” the FBI reported. “Theodore Adank showed up on that occasion posing as a newsman, but was evicted by local police.”

Following King’s assassination, federal agents visited Adank to determine whether he had any role in the killing but found no evidence linking him to the crime.

“Adank was interviewed by [special agents] Kenna and Walker on 4/8/68 and impressed interviewing agents as being somewhat of a mental case,” the report read. “Adank advised he has been in Wausau during the entire recent 2-week period except for one occasion when he traveled to Milwaukee, Wis. for treatment at a Wood, Wis. VA Center in connection with his medical disability pension.”

The FBI also detailed how Ray, the man ultimately convicted of the assassination, operated under several assumed names leading up to the murder.

He used different aliases when buying firearms at a Birmingham gun shop on March 29 and 30. Although he introduced himself as “Harvey Lowmeyer,” he used the car and address associated with another pseudonym, “Eric Galt.”

The connection was made when store employees were shown a photo of “Galt” and confirmed it matched the man who had claimed to be “Lowmeyer.”

“Galt first visited Aeromarine Supply Company on two occasions: Friday, 3/29/68, when be purchased a .243 caliber Remington rifle, Model 700, which was equipped with Redfield scope. On following day, Saturday, 3/30/68, same individual returned after telephonic contact and exchanged this rifle for the murder weapon, a Remington Model 760, 30.06 caliber, to which scope was attached,” the FBI report reads.

Among the more personal elements of the release was a recorded conversation with Ray’s younger brother, Jerry Ray, who speculated that his brother might have been a pawn in a broader plot.

Jerry claimed not to have seen James for several years and believed he had been manipulated or hired for the crime.

“I don’t think he was involved. I think he was used as a–he was used some way in it, though. I think that because, you know, of the money he spent and all that. I think his name was used, and because he couldn’t turn himself in because he had so much time to do in Missouri. I think he was implicated in some way, more likely used,” Jerry said.

“Are you saying that someone paid him to pretend to be King’s murderer?” the interviewer asked.

“Well they have two Eric Starvo Galts within about two miles of each other, and every time he went some place there would be another guy like him, and it seems kind of strange,” Jerry responded.

Jerry went on to suggest that James Ray might have viewed silence about possible co-conspirators as a matter of personal integrity. He said he planned to visit his brother in custody once he arrived in Memphis.

“If he definitely didn’t do it, he’ll tell me that, but he won’t tell me the other things, how come he was used or what,” Jerry predicted of talking with Ray. “But he’ll tell me if he did or if he didn’t do it, but he won’t implicate anybody else.”

“So, Jerry, your whole theory is that Ray was paid to implicate himself?” the interviewer pressed.

“That’s what my theory is,” he responded. “I figure he was paid for his name being used. That’s as far as I think he’s involved in it.”

The intelligence files also include Chinese Communist propaganda denouncing the U.S. and encouraging revolution. One such booklet was titled “Statement by Comrade Mao Tse-Tung, Chairman of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, in Support of the Afro-American Struggle Against Violent Repression.”

Released shortly after King’s death, the publication, available in English and Spanish, labeled the civil rights struggle as part of a global fight against “yankee imperialists,” and called for international unity to defeat this “common enemy,” according to the FBI summary.

Another item found among the documents is a CIA draft titled “Talking Points for Interview with Dan Rather,” dated October 29, 1975.

“The CIA was in no way involved in the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King,” the proposed talking points begin. “In addition, I would like again to deny categorically that there was any CIA like involvement in the assassinations of President Kennedy or Senator Robert Kennedy, or the attempted assassination of Governor Wallace.”

The draft does not specify the intended speaker. CBS journalist Dan Rather conducted an interview with then-CIA Director William Colby in late November 1975. That interview focused on alleged CIA links to Lee Harvey Oswald and did not touch on King’s assassination.

Rather’s televised report on King that month did not include any appearance or statements from a CIA official.

{Matzav.com}

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky stated during an appearance on “The Charlie Kirk Show” that the Department of Justice ought to prosecute Anthony Fauci for allegedly lying under oath to Congress. According to Paul, such a prosecution would test the legal strength of President Joe Biden’s pardon of Fauci. “I do believe Anthony Fauci committed a felony by lying to Congress. So you have to charge him with a felony; take him to court, and then the court will decide whether or not the pardon is upheld.”

Speaking as chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Paul explained that while debates can be made over whether Biden used an autopen or knew about the pardon’s execution, the only definitive way to test its legitimacy is through the legal system. “You can argue until you’re blue in the face that you can’t do autopens and that maybe the president wasn’t aware of it. But the only way to actually do this is you have to charge someone who has been pardoned.”

Paul argued that of all the potential individuals who could be prosecuted, Fauci remains the most suitable case. He suggested that others, such as Hunter Biden, could also be prosecuted, but emphasized the importance of taking action. “I think Anthony Fauci is the most likely to be chargeable. There are other people — Hunter Biden could be charged as well — but someone has to be charged,” said Paul.

The senator pointed to Fauci’s previous testimony before Congress, where he denied that the National Institutes of Health had funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan. Paul asserted that Fauci’s claims are at odds with evidence from those directly tied to the research. “Fauci testified before Congress in a very vigorous and heated and animated way that the National Institutes of Health never funded gain-of-function virus research in Wuhan,” Paul said. “This is directly contradicted by the actual people who were involved in the funding.”

{Matzav.com}

It is with great sadness that Matzav.com reports the petirah of Rav Moshe Chaim Dinner zt”l, who served as the mahgiach of Yeshivas Tiferes Yaakov in Gateshead. Rav Dinner passed away in the United States after a yearlong battle with illness. He was just 48 years old.

His passing has plunged his students and the broader Torah community into deep grief. Rav Dinner was not only a guide but a true father figure to the bochurim in his care, nurturing them with wisdom, heart, and a profound sense of mission.

As his condition worsened, many across the world davened fervently for his recovery, adding the name Refoel. He had traveled to the U.S. for treatments in recent months, but was now niftar.

Rav Dinner was born in England, a son of Rav Shlomo Dinner, who passed away when Moshe Chaim was still a child. His grandfather was the renowned gaon Rav Yosef Tzvi HaLevi Dinner zt”l, Raavad of London, a towering figure in Anglo-Jewry.

As a bochur, he learned in Yeshivas Beis Yosef Tzvi in Gateshead and later in the Yeshivas Ponovezh in Bnei Brak, where he distinguished himself among the elite talmidim, known for his hasmadah and depth in learning.

He married the daughter of Rav Binyomin Carlebach, one of the roshei yeshiva of Mir Yerushalayim, and granddaughter of Rav Binyomin Beinush Finkel, rosh yeshiva of Mir. After his marriage, he continued learning in the Mir before eventually returning to England.

Upon his return, he was appointed mashgiach of Yeshivas Tiferes Yaakov in Gateshead, where he became a beloved and guiding presence for generations of talmidim.

Rav Dinner leaves behind his devoted wife and six young children.

His aron will arrive in England from the U.S. on Thursday for burial in Gateshead.

Yehi zichro baruch.

{Matzav.com}

During a Tuesday appearance on CBS News, Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-OH) accused the Trump administration of fabricating favorable economic data, casting doubt on the reliability of reports regarding the stock market, job growth, and inflation. She claimed, “what they’re reporting are just numbers and we don’t know how much accuracy [there] is.”

CBS News Chief Washington Correspondent Major Garrett pressed Beatty with a question: “Congresswoman, the White House says, repeatedly, and there are some numbers that back them up on this, the stock market is up, investment in this country is up, employment is up or stable, inflation is down or stable. Most of the economic indices they point to are on the upswing. And yet, you sound so glum, why?”

Beatty pushed back, questioning the credibility of the data being shared by the administration. “Well, because what they’re reporting are just numbers and we don’t know how much accuracy [there] is. Maybe there’s a reason why he’s also been on the attack against Jay Powell with the Federal Reserve and wanting to remove him.” She continued, “So, here’s what we do know: When you go into the grocery store, prices are up. Here’s what you do know: The things that the American people pay for that [help] them live their lives, put a roof over their head, those things aren’t applicable, it’s not happening.”

She went further, accusing the president and his administration of deliberately spreading falsehoods to obscure cuts to vital programs. “I think they make up numbers. I have no trust in this president or the administration, because what they say is counter to what we’re doing in government. They would tell you that Medicaid and Medicare [are] okay. They would tell you that they’re not dismantling the Department of Education. They would tell you all of those things while we know the fact is, they’re cutting billions of dollars from those needed services.”

WATCH: