THE PRINCIPAL IS OBVIOULY A MAMDANI SUPPORTER

Adams backtracks and admits pro-Israel Holocaust survivor should’ve spoken at NYC school

By David Propper

 

New York Post

Dec 4, 2025 

 

 

Holocaust survior Sami Steigmann tells his life story and gives a motivational speech to seventh and eighth graders  Mr. Steigmann was a baby during the Holocaust, born in 1939, and was medically experimented on by Josef Mengele, the "Angel of Death."

 

Mayor Eric Adams reversed course early Thursday and admitted that a Holocaust survivor with pro-Israel views should’ve been allowed to speak about antisemitism at a Brooklyn middle school.

The mayor’s office initially said it agreed with MS 447 principal Arin Rusch’s decision to keep 85-year-old Sami Steigmann from appearing at the Boerum Hill school — but Adams claimed that statement “went out prematurely.”  

“Let me be very clear, I’ve previously met with Sami Steigmann and he is ABSOLUTELY the right person to speak with kids about the atrocities of the Holocaust,” Adams said in a post on X late Wednesday.

Controversy erupted this week when The Post reported that Steigmann was denied an opportunity to speak at the school last month by Rusch because of his strong support of Israel. 

 

Principal Arin Rusch said Steigmann’s strong support of Israel would not be “right” for the Boerum Hill school. 

 

 

Steigmann argued that he had no intention of discussing Middle East current events with the youngsters, and would only keep his talk to the Holocaust and antisemitism. He said he would have told the principal that if she had spoken to him.

Nevertheless, he was still denied a speaking spot and the Mayor’s Office put out a statement this week confirming Rusch’s ruling.

A mayoral spokesperson said Monday that Steigmann “wasn’t the right fit,” but was committed to featuring other speakers with a similar experience.

Steigmann slammed the Adams administration’s statement, and accused the school of censorship.

Hizzoner finally backtracked in an X post he put online around midnight.

“I’m in New Orleans for the Combat Antisemitism conference and read a report about an unfortunate incident involving New York City Schools not allowing a Holocaust survivor to speak at a local school,” Adams said. “Unfortunately, a statement went out prematurely from my office that said he was not the right speaker.”

 

Eric Adams backtracked on a statement. James Messerschmidt

 

“As our Jewish community faces increased antisemitism and persecution across the globe, it’s more important now than ever that we learn the lessons and stories of the Holocaust,” he added.

Adams, a Democrat who’s about to leave office at the end of the month, has been a consistent supporter of Israel.

The DOE, which also originally said it backed Steigmann not speaking, appeared to change its stance in a statement Thursday.

School Chancellor Melissa Aviles-Ramos has already reached out to Steigmann Thursday about “upcoming plans for student engagement,” a spokesperson said.

“We firmly believe in the importance of educating our children about acceptance and respect and the tragic consequences of intolerance and hate, so our next generation can never again perpetrate such an atrocity,” the spokesperson said. 

“We are very proud of the Holocaust education work taking place across our public schools.”

SUICIDE NEAR THE STATUE OF ONE OF AMERICA'S GREATEST HEROES

Man dies by suicide in parking lot at Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans’ Hospital, SAPD says

Police say the man told a 911 dispatcher where he was before he died

 

By Nate Kotisso and Sandra Ibarra

 

KSAT

Dec 5, 2025

 

 

 

The Audie Leon Murphy statue and marker are shown in front of the Audie L. Murphy Memorial VA Hospital in San Antonio.  

 

San Antonio police said a man died by suicide in the parking lot of the Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans’ Hospital on Thursday afternoon.

Officers responded to the parking lot around 12:45 p.m.

A 911 caller, who the San Antonio Police Department said was the man who took his own life, told a dispatcher where he was.

The 33-year-old man has yet to be identified.

The South Texas Veterans Health Care System, which operates the hospital, told KSAT in a statement that the facility remains “secure, open and operational.”

A similar death happened earlier this year in the vicinity of the same hospital.

In April, decorated U.S. Navy veteran Mark Miller, 54, died by suicide outside the Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans’ Hospital.

Miller and his father co-authored a book in 2021 titled “Suicide Stalks the Sniper." The novel details Miller’s struggle with suicidal thoughts and his efforts to heal.

While KSAT does not typically report on suicides, it is in this case because it happened in a high-traffic area and had similar circumstances as the April death.

 

UPDATE: Bexar County Medical Examiner’s Office identified the man as Enrique Ramos, 33. 

WHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN A GUN-HAPPY FAMILY FAILS TO SECURE ITS GUNS

Judge's sensational rant at 13-year-old boy who shot and killed his brother while playing with his parents' pistol

 

By Rachel Bowman 

 

Daily Mail

Dec 5, 2025

 

 

 

Judge William 'Cruz' Shaw shredded a 13-year-old boy accused of accidentally killing his younger brother for violating the conditions of his release 

 

A Texas boy accused of accidentally killing his younger brother was shredded by a judge after he was rearrested for violating the conditions of his release.

The 13-year-old boy, who has not been named due to his age, was handling an unsecured gun when it accidentally went off and shot his eight-year-old brother Daniel Casares on July 24, according to the San Antonio Police Department.

Casares died from a gunshot wound to the head and neck, according to the Bexar County Medical Examiner's Office. 

The brother has been charged with manslaughter, and was released to his grandmother in August under strict conditions.

However, he was back in court on Wednesday and ordered to remain in juvenile detention after violating those conditions, KSAT reported. 

Bexar County 436th Juvenile District Court Judge William 'Cruz' Shaw reprimanded the teen for failing to comply.  

'All you had to do was follow the rules. You broke two conditions on a very serious charge,' Shaw said. 

'You are here on a serious offense, and I gave you that one shot to show everybody you could behave. And you blew it.

 

The teen was handling an unsecured gun when it accidentally went off and shot his eight-year-old brother Daniel Casares (pictured) on July 24, according to police

 

Shaw added, 'You're trying to harden up, and you are not a gangster. At all.'

The teen broke curfew and was caught hanging out with kids who he was legally banned from contacting. He also picked up an additional evading charge.

His father even expressed his frustration with the teen to judge. 

'I can't excuse him for what he did wrong. He knows right from wrong. I would love to have him home, but a part of me wants him to learn,' he said.

The teen was ordered to remain in detention and his next court hearing is scheduled for December 18.

At his August hearing, the teen's defense attorney, Neil Calfas, described the boy as a good student with no previous disciplinary record.

'This is a real accident, and it's an accident that obviously is very, very serious,' Calfas said. 

The boy's father had slammed the court for not letting his son attend the funeral for Casares. At an earlier hearing, he had pleaded for his release into his custody, a request that was denied.  

 

Shaw reprimanded the teen for failing to comply, telling the boy 'you blew it' and 'you are not a gangster'

The 13-year-old boy was ordered to stay away from the friends he was with when the shooting happen, but he violated that condition and stayed out past his curfew 

 

'I wanted my son to see his brother before he was buried,' he said. 'I kept calling everybody and I didn't get a response from nobody. I just got told it would get passed along.'

Shaw apologized directly to the teen for this apparent mix-up, telling him he 'deserved to be there'.

'If I would have known, I would've made special arrangements for you to see your brother. I just want to make sure you know that,' Judge Shaw added.

In an exchange with the judge at a hearing in July, the teen confessed that the shooting 'was an accident'.

'Okay, and I believe you. The problem is this. You shouldn't have had your hand on that gun in the first place,' the judge responded. 'That gun should have been locked up. And this is what happens when they're not.'

ICE BARBIE PILOTING A US CIAST GUARD BOAT ..... GOD SAVE AMERICA!

Incredible moment Coast Guard sniper takes out drug boat before seizing 20,000 pounds of cocaine

 

By Melissa Koenig 

 

Daily Mail

Dec 5, 2025

 

 

The USCG is speeding up their operation in the Eastern Pacific Ocean as massive amounts of illegal narcotics are transported from Central and South America. US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem is pictured piloting a US Coast Guard Response Boat-Small in March

 

Incredible footage shows the moment a US Coast Guard sniper fired on a drug boat in the Pacific Ocean before seizing more than 20,000 pounds of cocaine. 

The shocking footage shows the go-fast vessel wading in the water in the Pacific Ocean, just south of Mexico on Tuesday, when a US Coast Guard helicopter approaches.

A member of the Coast Guard's Helicopter Interdiction Tactical Squadron could then be seen lining up the shot before opening fire several times.

The sniper ultimately struck the boat's propulsion system, disabling the boat's engine as part of a drug interdiction mission for Operation Pacific Viper, according to Fox News. 

The strike rendered boat's engine useless. The vessel could be seen languishing in the water following the successful strike.

At that point, a Coast Guard boat could be seen pulling up to the go-fast vessel and personnel are then able to board the vessel and capture the illegal drugs stowed away.

Authorities now say they seized more than 20,000 pounds of cocaine from the drug boat, which amounts to more than 7.5 million lethal doses. 

That greatly increases the Coast Guard's total, after it announced that it had snatched 100,000 pounds of cocaine in the eastern Pacific over the course of just a few weeks in October.

Those 100,000 pounds translates to roughly 1,600 pounds of cocaine seized each day, military officials have said. 

 

Dramatic footage caught the moment a US Coast Guard sniper struck a go-fast boat carrying 20,000 pounds of cocaine

The sniper struck the boat's propulsion system while hovering in a helicopter above, disabling the boat's engine, allowing other Coast Guard members to board the vessel and search for the illicit drugs

 

The Coast Guard also reported in November that it had seized 510,000 pounds of cocaine in fiscal year 2025 - the largest amount of the illicit substance snatched in the service's history.

That translates to 193 million potentially lethal doses - enough to jeopardize more than half of the US population, and amounts to more than three times the service's annual average - which comes out to roughly 167,000 pounds each year. 

The USCG is speeding up their operation in the Eastern Pacific Ocean as massive amounts of illegal narcotics are transported from Central and South America, the service has said.

It is now working with international partners to seize and disrupt the transport of cocaine and other criminal drugs.

The process starts with the US Southern Command's Joint Interagency Task Force-South detecting the transit of illicit drugs, at which point, the operation shifts to the USCG to carry out the law enforcement actions and arrest the perps.

The Coast Guard is the lead federal agency for ocean drug interception, and is a joint force with the Department of Homeland Security team as the Trump administration takes on what they have described as 'narco-terrorists.'

In addition to the Coast Guard's efforts, the military has been conducting air strikes on boats suspected of transporting drugs. 

 

The US conducted a deadly military strike against an alleged drug boat tied to the cartel Tren de Aragua, President Donald Trump said in early September. The president said 11 people were killed in the strike in 'international waters.' Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the 'lethal strike' as taking place in the 'southern Caribbean' against 'a drug vessel which had departed from Venezuela

 

But the Trump administration's decision to fire upon ships from Venezuela on September 2 have been derided as 'war crimes,' after it was discovered that at least two men aboard the vessels survived the initial devastating blast. 

Follow-up strikes then killed two survivors of the initial bombardment.

There are strict rules regulating follow-up strikes under international law, which Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is now accused of ignoring as he ordered his officers to kill all the individuals aboard the boats and leave no survivors.

Both the White House and Hegseth have refuted the allegations, but questions remain over whether the follow-up attacks were necessary.

After seeing footage of the attacks, Senator Jack Reed - the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee - said he was 'deeply disturbed' by what he saw and said the video 'confirmed by worst fears about the nature of the Trump administration's military activities.'

House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Jim Himes, a Democrat, also told reporters he was deeply disturbed as well.

'What I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things that I've seen in my time in public service,' Himes said.

'You have two individuals in clear distress, without any means of locomotion, with a destroyed vessel, who were killed by the United States.'

 

Senate Intel Committee Chairman Tom Cotton said the US struck a Venezuelan narco-terrorist boat four times in the controversial September 2 strike. He said he would've taken the same actions had he been the commander

 

But the Trump administration has gained the support of Senate Intel Chairman Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, who declared Thursday that the four strikes were necessary. 

 'About the strikes on September 2, which were righteous strikes; these are narco-terrorists who are trafficking drugs that are destined for the United States to kill thousands of Arkansans and millions of Americans,' Senate Intel Chairman Tom Cotton, R-Ark., told reporters after exiting the briefing. 

'The first strike, the second strike, and the third and the fourth strike on September 2, were entirely lawful and needful survivors,' he added. 

Cotton went on to say he saw 'two survivors trying to flip a boat loaded with drugs bound for the United States back over so they can stay in the fight.

'We heard of other narco-terrorist boats in the area coming to their aid to recover their cargo and recover those narco-terrorists.'

If the men were still actively trying to pursue their drug-running mission, as the Pentagon and Cotton claim, there is leeway in accepting that they are lawful targets for a secondary engagement. 

Still, most Americans want Trump to fire Hegseth over the incident, an exclusive Daily Mail poll found. 

 

The majority of Americans want Donald Trump to fire Secretary of War Pete Hegseth for his strikes against narcoterrorism in the Carribean

 

It showed that 54 percent of Americans say they think Hegseth should be fired for his recent actions heading the Pentagon, while 26 percent say he should keep his job and another 20 percent were unsure.

But when the uncertainty option was taken away from the 1,013 voters polled, a whopping 63 percent wanted Hegseth ousted.

The poll conducted December 3-5 – after revelations of the second strike circulated and criticism ensued – still indicates support for the Trump administration actions against Venezuela.

Nearly half of respondents say they support anti-narcoterrorism operations, while 30 percent say they are against the strikes.  

FAIRLY OR UNFAIRLY, HEGSETH APPEARS TO BE AN ALBATROSS AROUND TRUMP'S NECK

Poll shows majority of Americans want Pete Hegseth FIRED amid 'war crime' furor

 

By Katelyn Caralle 

 

Daily Mail

Dec 5, 2025

 

 

 

The majority of Americans want Donald Trump to fire Secretary of War Pete Hegseth for his strikes against narcoterrorism in the Carribean 

 

Most Americans want Donald Trump to stay true to his 'you're fired' slogan and kick Secretary of War Pete Hegseth out of his cabinet.

Hegseth is facing a barrage of criticism for approving strikes on Venezuelan drug ships – and especially regarding the now-infamous second strike on the first attack in September that neutralized two survivors.

And now 54 percent of Americans say they think Hegseth should be fired for his recent actions heading the Pentagon, according to a new Daily Mail/JL Partners poll.

While 26 percent say he should keep his job and another 20 percent were unsure, when the uncertainty option was taken away from the 1,013 voters polled, a whopping 63 percent wanted Hegseth ousted.

The poll conducted December 3-5 – after revelations of the second strike circulated and criticism ensued – still indicates support for the Trump administration actions against Venezuela.

Nearly half of respondents say they support anti-narcoterrorism operations, while 30 percent say they are against the strikes.  

The Trump administration justifies all actions against narcoterrorism in the Caribbean and Atlantic thus far and asserts they have not violated any laws of armed conflict.

But bipartisan voices in Congress and legal experts warn that the second strike constitutes a war crime because it targeted hors de combat individuals – or attacks against those out of action due to injury.

 

New details of a second strike against the alleged drug boat on September 2, 2025 is raising concerns that the US commit war crimes by killing hors de combat individuals

 

Unsurprisingly, three-fourths of Republicans still back the former Fox News host keeping his position in President Trump's cabinet. 

And nearly eight in 10 Democrats want him gone.

The controversy all stems from the September 2, 2025 boat strike in the Caribbean Sea against a vessel the Trump administration claims was carrying cocaine en route to the US.

A US missile strike disabled the speedboat and killed most on board. But two survivors were observed clinging to the wreckage and thought to be attempting to radio for help.

Then a second missile strike was conducted that killed them.

Many have cited the Geneva Conventions, UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, international law on use of force and the US Law of War Manual as reasons why international law was violated in this case.

Hegseth authorized the operation, including a contingency for follow-up action if the first strike failed to neutralize targets.

But he has denied specific 'kill everybody' orders.

The White House and Pentagon appear to be making on-scene commander Adm. Frank Bradley the fall person, saying he was the one who ordered the second strike. 

Bradley testified before Congress on Thursday and confirmed it was his decision to authorize the strike based on a perceived ongoing threat.

Trump had signaled discomfort with the second strike, claiming he 'wouldn't have wanted that' but insisting he trusts Hegseth's leadership and Bradley's decision-making.

The president has also indicated preference towards escalating actions against Venezuela and Nicolas Maduro's regime – even going as far to say US land strikes within the country's borders could be the next step.

WHITE LIVES DON'T MATTER ... AN OREGON JURY FELT THAT A WHITE MAN CALLING A BLACK MAN 'NIGGER' CONSTITUTES AN ASSAULT

Portland jury clears black man of assault because white man he stabbed had said the n-word

 

By Rachel Bowman 

 

Daily Mail

Dec 5, 20o25

 

 

 

Gary Edwards admitted to knifing the victim, but claimed it was in self-defense because the other man called him a racial slur 

 

A black man was acquitted of stabbing a white man in Oregon after he claimed the attack was self-defense because the victim called him a racial slur. 

Gary Edwards, 43, was charged with second-degree assault for stabbing a man in Portland near a light rail stop on July 8, KPTV reported.

However, he was found not guilty of the crime on October 31 after the jury learned the victim was using racial slurs in the aftermath of the altercation.

Edwards, who is homeless and has a previous assault conviction, admitted to knifing the victim, Gregory Howard Jr., but claimed it was in self-defense because the other man called him the n-word, according to Oregon Live.

Security cameras, with no audio, captured Edwards, with a fixed-blade knife in hand, approaching Howard as he sat on a beach.

Howard immediately jumped up and pushed Edwards, then the two scuffled until Edwards stabbed Howard in the shoulder.

Edwards defense attorney Daniel Small reportedly told the jury that his client was approaching Howard to see if he would trade his knife for cigarettes. 

'What other than racism could explain why Mr. Howard perceived hatred, animosity and aggression from a complete stranger,' Small said.

Moments later, body camera footage from security officers captured Howard shouting a racist slur at Edwards after he had been stabbed.

It is unclear if there is any evidence to suggest that Howard used the slur before he was stabbed.

Prosecutor Katherine Williams told the jury it did not matter what the victim said after he was stabbed.

'The defendant is not scared for his life. He didn't retreat, he sauntered up - and he sauntered away after he stabbed someone. The defendant created the situation,' Williams said.

Despite the prosecutors pleas, the jury found Edwards not guilty.

Edwards lawyer insisted the case never should have gone to trial.

'I laid my cards out on the table and told the state how the trial would go, but it didn't matter,' he told Oregon Live.

Edwards, who is homeless, spent about three months in custody before the trail after prosecutors argued he was a threat to the public due to his lengthy criminal record, according to the outlet.

 

Security cameras, with no audio, captured Edwards, with a fixed-blade knife in hand, approaching Howard as he sat on a beach. It is unclear if Edwards used the racial slur before he was stabbed

 

He was convicted of attempted second-degree assault in 2021 and was sentenced to three years in prison for another stabbing in 2020, records show.

Edwards was accused of fourth-degree assault for fighting with a shop clerk, but the case was dismissed because he could not secure a public defender.

Daily Mail contacted the prosecutors office, Portland police and Edwards attorney for comment. 

YOUNG VOTERS IN AMERICA ARE GOING TO ELECT MORE MAMDANIS

More Mamdanis to come and Trump can't stop it

Despite the belief that the president will solve all the problems, in the battle for public opinion among young Americans, Israel is being defeated by a well-oiled machine at the end of which more Mamdanis await.

 

By Yoav Limor 

 

Israel Hayom

Dec 5, 2025

 

 

US President Donald Trump meets with New York Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on November 21, 202

 

 

It was cold this week in New York. Cold and beautiful. On some days, the temperature hovered around freezing, but the atmosphere broadcast holiday spirit. From the crowds storming the stores to take advantage of Thanksgiving sales, to the Christmas decorations already twinkling on every street corner. All the markets have already opened, offering all kinds of foods and souvenirs. In short, another December has begun. Business as usual.

Well, not quite. A question mark now hovers over New York, larger and brighter than any lit Christmas tree. His name is Zohran Mamdani, and he brings with him troubling uncertainty to a city that needs certainty more than anything else. "We'll have to wait and see what happens," Hillary Clinton said when I asked her about Mamdani at the Israel Hayom conference held Tuesday in New York. Others were more direct. Sylvan Adams said Mamdani is a "Trojan horse" supported by Qatar.

The election of Mamdani reflects deep currents that may not have been fully understood. There is protest against the establishment, protest against the cost of living, and more than anything, there is a clear cry from the younger generation. Among voters under 30, Mamdani received a share of the vote reminiscent of Assad in his better days in Syria. True, this is Democratic New York, but it would be a mistake to treat his election as a local event: Mamdani represents something, and that something is very concerning for the US, for American Jews, and for the State of Israel.

Our tendency in Israel is to think that Trump will sort everything out. And if not, AIPAC will pull whatever levers are needed and sort everything out. In short, everything will be okay. The problem is that reality signals to us in every possible way that things are not okay. Not only because Trump will not remain president forever, and even within the Republican Party, there are today quite a few voices openly distancing themselves from Israel, but because Israel – always a protected flower in the American political discourse – has turned into a poisonous fruit.

This is especially evident among young people. Clinton said that half of Americans now consume news from social media (most of them young, of course), and on social media, the anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish discourse dominates. A prominent representative of this phenomenon is the popular and ultra-conservative host Tucker Carlson, whom Gilad Erdan aptly described this week as "Qatar Carlson," hinting at his harmful and dangerous influence.

This influence steadily seeps into the mainstream media as well. Last month, during a short visit to Chicago, a Jewish congressional candidate told me that in an interview he gave to the media, out of six questions asked, four were about Israel. And this is someone meant to represent his district with all its residents and their issues, of which Israel is probably the last of them.

It is unclear how far the phenomenon will expand geographically within the US and ideologically in its radicalism. But after Mamdani's election, it's clear that nothing can be ruled out. Not even that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will become the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. Clinton, who a decade ago led the party and ran as its presidential candidate, did not hide her dissatisfaction with what's happening in her former political home. Still, she said, Israel would be mistaken to think its problem in the US is partisan: it's generational.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez arrives to speak during a "Fighting Oligarchy" tour event at Arizona State University, March 20, 2025, in Tempe, Arizona.

 

And Israel is doing nothing about this problem. Erdan, who served as ambassador to the UN and Washington and knows a thing or two about the subject, said it's a "failure of the government." Clinton was sharper, saying that among all the bodies she has encountered in her life, "Israel has the worst public relations." One could interpret her remarks in two ways. One, that the world is so hypocritical and biased that it readily embraces any anti-Israel idea. The second, that Israel simply does public diplomacy poorly. If I may interpret Clinton, she meant both just in reverse order: Israel does poor public diplomacy, and does not make it difficult for the world (hypocritical and biased as it is) to embrace any anti-Israel idea.

There is no way to explain this failure, whose consequences are destructive across every time frame and every relevant group (Israelis, Jews, and foreigners alike). It's unclear why the government doesn't wake up and act to recruit the best forces – and there are excellent forces on both sides of the ocean – into a war plan that would be launched immediately, backed by technology, government, and private funding. Qatar is doing exactly this to blacken Israel's image, and there is no reason for Israel to leave the field empty. It's time to launch a counteroffensive before the situation truly gets out of control.

This message arose from many conversations held at and around the conference in New York. It stood out particularly against the backdrop of the strong connection between American Jewry and Israel, and the strong connection between the current American establishment and Israel. It was impossible not to be moved by the warm embrace, a product of a long war and deep concern. And if there is one message that should have traveled from New York to Jerusalem, it is this: wake up.

The news from Israel doesn't really relent, even in New York. Here, a Syria incident with reservists wounded in an encounter with members of an extremist jihad organization; there, an incident in Gaza with Golani reconnaissance fighters wounded in an encounter with Hamas operatives who emerged from a tunnel. Both fronts naturally occupied the conference attendees. Clinton said Israel must not allow Hezbollah to reestablish itself in Lebanon. The US ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz, spoke of the freedom of action Israel has in Gaza.

Behind the scenes, the Americans sought to understand where Israel is heading. They are convinced that Netanyahu intends to heat up all fronts. First Lebanon. Then Gaza. And later Iran. It seems this sentiment also emerged from the quotes Barak Ravid brought on Channel 12 News from the phone call between Trump and Netanyahu, in which Trump reportedly asked Netanyahu to calm things down.

It's not certain that the Americans care about all fronts equally. For now, the White House's "baby" is the regime in Syria, and it wants to allow it to stabilize. One needs a heavy dose of optimism or naivety to believe anything good can come out of this Syria, headed by an arch-terrorist and backed by Erdogan's Turkey. Therefore, it is good that Israel is suspicious. However, it might want to poke fewer eyes: Netanyahu's visit to the Syrian Golan last week had no real security value, and was entirely for PR for political purposes (and to dodge another day of testimony in his trial).

In Gaza, too, Washington asks Israel not to touch it. Meaning: to touch only what directly threatens it, and even then only moderately. Don't go crazy, don't blow up the agreement. The Americans still believe it will be possible to move to the next stage of the agreement, in which Gaza will be demilitarized and rebuilt under foreign forces and a non-Hamas administration. Blessed is the believer, though in the meantime, the Americans are beefing up the headquarters they established in Kiryat Gat to oversee what's happening in Gaza (where Hamas is steadily fortifying its power).

In Lebanon, the situation is different. A year after the cease-fire agreement, the Lebanese army is not truly fulfilling its part in effectively taking control of southern Lebanon, which includes dismantling Hezbollah's military infrastructure. Israel is indeed operating and threatening to significantly expand the campaign, but it is not enough to stop Hezbollah's rebuilding activity. In recent weeks, it seemed almost every moment that the die had been cast, and yet Israel granted additional opportunities for a change of course. This waiting period will likely last at least until after the planned meeting between Netanyahu and Trump, expected to take place before Christmas.

Security issues are good for Netanyahu: they are his forte and help distance him from the political and legal swamp. Yet it is hard to escape the disturbing sense that these issues are intertwined. In his conversation with Trump, Netanyahu asked the president to press again on the pardon issue. The American president, as noted, asked to calm things down in Syria and Gaza. One could claim there is no connection between the matters, but the fact that they were raised in the same conversation is the crudest, most blatant, most improper mixing of international and personal matters, of security and criminal issues, of the State of Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu.

The topic of pardon also reached New York. The Americans (and Israelis) wanted to know how the president of Israel would act. No one had a good answer, because it seems President Isaac Herzog himself has yet to decide. Here, too, an uncomfortable feeling hangs in the air about how things are being handled: from Netanyahu's request, not submitted in the proper manner, to Herzog's poor response.

Herzog should have sent Netanyahu to the Attorney General. She is the authority authorized to conduct such negotiations. That would also have shown whether Netanyahu's intentions to focus on healing and unity were serious, or empty words like so many things he has said regarding his trial. For example, that he could be prime minister while conducting a criminal trial at the same time, or that he was determined to conduct his trial to the end to prove his innocence. These are not Netanyahu's first lies, nor his worst. To rely on an old Supreme Court ruling, such statements by Netanyahu were "truths of the moment."

This week, Herzog canceled a meeting with Yair Golan, who said it was clear to him how Herzog's father would have handled such a pardon request (throwing it out entirely). Herzog was offended, but Golan is right. There is no chance that Chaim Herzog would have cooperated with the current madness, which bears no resemblance to the Bus 300 affair in which the elder Herzog granted a pardon to senior Shin Bet officials. There, the involved parties acted (improperly) for the good of the state and gained nothing from it; here, Netanyahu acted for his personal and political benefit, and the State of Israel gained nothing. There, the involved parties accepted responsibility and guilt and resigned; here, Netanyahu refuses to accept responsibility or guilt and demands to continue as if nothing happened.

In a normal world, this request should indeed have been thrown out entirely, because all are equal before the law, first and foremost, the prime minister. But our world is not normal, and the defendant has done everything to blacken the justice system (and then claim the public has no trust in it), exactly as he did regarding the state inquiry commission and other matters. Therefore, if Netanyahu seeks correction, the correction should begin with what he gives and not with what he gets. First, the draft-dodging law should be repealed, and immediate conscription of the ultra-Orthodox should begin. And the laws against the justice system and the media should be repealed. And a state inquiry commission should be established. And overdue responsibility for October 7 should be taken. And he should give an interview: a real interview, with real questions and real answers.

ENSURING THE SECURITY OF ISRAEL AND PROTECTING THE DRUZE

‘IDF should not withdraw from southern Syria’

Israeli observers assess the chaotic reality on the Syrian border, where a mix of jihadist factions operate and where the IDF established positions.

 

By Yaakov Lappin

 

Israel Hayom

Dec 5, 2025

 

 

Israeli soldiers seen in the Syrian side of Mount Hermon, August 12, 2025.

 

 

Amid growing concerns of a new terror front opening on Israel’s northern border, the Israel Defense Forces has significantly bolstered its defenses on the Golan Heights since the fall of the Assad regime and its replacement with the Sunni al-Sharaa regime in December 2024.

This has included setting up nine IDF positions on the Syrian side of the buffer zone on the Golan Heights, launching intelligence-fueled security raids to prevent rocket and cross-border terror threats, fortifying engineering works, and digging new anti-tank trenches. Fortifying the border security fence is also part of the effort.

The Israeli objective is to prevent Sunni jihadist groups, including those who joined the new Syrian army framework, and those operating outside of it, from entrenching themselves in southern Syria, potentially planning a surprise attack on Israeli communities in the Golan Heights.

Defense Minister Israel Katz, speaking during a closed-door session of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, reportedly stated on Nov. 25 that terrorists in Syria, Houthis included, plan to attack Israel.”

On November 27-28, the IDF raided the southern Syrian village of Beit Jinn to arrest terrorist operatives from the Jama Islamiyya terror organization, which is the armed faction of the Lebanese Sunni Muslim Brotherhood. The operation became entangled after the IDF unit came under fire, resulting in six IDF injuries and requiring Israeli air support. Some 20 terrorist operatives were eliminated, according to a report by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center.

Dina Lisnyansky, an expert on the Middle East and radical Islamic movements and a research fellow at the Moshe Dayan Center at Tel Aviv University, told JNS that Syrian President Ahmed Al-Sharaa is currently focused on stabilizing his rule and attracting economic investment, goals that would be shattered by a major conflict with Israel. At the same time, the border area contains jihadist forces operating outside of the regime’s directives, she assessed.

Regarding the IDF’s new fortifications, Lisnyansky stated, Unequivocally no, Israel should not remove positions,” adding, “I would not advise a withdrawal from any IDF position, from the Syrian side, certainly not at this stage.

“Now is really not in the interest of al-Sharaa to generate now invasion attacks into the State of Israel. That is, if we suddenly see any move from his side, it means that he is currently going against the will of Trump, and against the will of the Western and Arab countries that are with him currently.”

She added that “within the larger context, the interests of al-Sharaa currently are to stabilize Syria and to bring into it as many economic investments as possible.”

Lisnyansky cautioned, however, that there are indications of the presence of jihadist forces on the border with Israel. “We are talking not only about Shi’ite forces but also ISIS forces, Al-Qaeda forces,” she added, while noting that elements of the Islamist Tahrir al-Sham forces, the main rebel umbrella group headed by al-Sharaa, have amalgamated into the Syrian Army.

As a result, Lisnyansky assessed, immediate security threats to Israel certainly exist, but are unlikely to be orchestrated directly by Al-Sharaa in Damascus. Lisnyansky added, “Regarding al-Sharaa’s lack of control, it is true that he does not control certain parts that currently are also turning against him. But to say that his hand is not in the matter at all, regarding all that occurred on the border, that is simply incorrect.”

She specifically confirmed the presence of the Jamaa al-Islamiyya, a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, operating in southern Syria independently of the regime.

On Dec. 3, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited soldiers wounded in recent clashes along the Syrian border, underscoring Israel’s determination to prevent hostile entrenchment near its northern communities and to safeguard its Druze allies.

Netanyahu said Israel was acting in direct response to the lessons of Oct. 7 and remained committed to defending border communities, blocking terrorist infrastructure and preventing ground and cross-border attacks. He stressed that Israel expects Syria to establish a demilitarized buffer zone extending from Damascus to the existing separation area, including the approaches to Mount Hermon and its summit.

“After Oct. 7, we are determined to defend our communities on our borders, including the northern border,” Netanyahu said. “We are determined to prevent the entrenchment of terrorists and hostile actions against us, to protect our Druze allies, and to ensure that the State of Israel is safe from ground attack and other attacks from the border areas.”

He said Israel’s continued presence in key areas was driven solely by security needs. “We hold these territories to ensure the security of the citizens of Israel, and that is what obligates us,” he added.

Netanyahu also left the door open to future diplomatic arrangements, noting, “In a good spirit and understanding of these principles, it is also possible to reach an agreement with the Syrians—but we will stand by our principles in any case.”

Prof. Eyal Zisser, a Syria expert and vice rector of Tel Aviv University and the university’s chair of contemporary Middle East history, agreed that a full-scale invasion is unlikely but warned that the chaos on the border creates a fertile ground for terror.

“I do not think there is a threat of invasion from Syria. It is not serious. But Israel does not take risks,” Zisser told JNS. “There is chaos along the border, among other things, because Israel does not let the Syrian regime establish itself there. So the vacuum is filled by all kinds of extremist groups. For example, the Jamaa al-Islamiyya that operates in Lebanon often in cooperation with Hamas and Islamic Jihad and even with Hezbollah, which established themselves in this village.”

He added, “It is a nuisance and can develop into a threat of a terror attack. [But] not a real invasion because they are isolated cells. In any case, Trump intervened and forbade Israel from acting in Syria because he is in favor of al-Sharaa. So we are limited in the ability to act. And therefore it is preferable to reach understandings with the Syrian regime, especially since it is supported by the United States.”

Zisser added that “caution is required,” stating that the threat at this time is at the level of targeted terror attacks.

ISRAEL'S EUROPEAN ENEMIES ARE NOT GOING TO RECEIVE THE COVETED ARROW 3 MISSILE-DEFENSE SYSTEM

The new German-Israeli alliance to save civilization

The $3.6 billion Arrow 3 deal sends a message that Europe can't ignore. 

 

By Fiamma Nirenstein 

 

JNS

Dec 4, 2025

 

 

At a formal ceremony at a German Air Force base near Berlin on Dec. 3, 2025, Israel’s Defense Ministry Director-General Amir Baram handed the Arrow 3 missile-defense system to German Air Force Commander Holger Neumann. 

If Europe still needed a sign in the sky—a symbol powerful enough to measure the depth of the antisemitic convulsion now shaking the continent—it arrived not in a United Nations hall, but at the Holzdorf air base outside Berlin.

There, Israel’s Defense Ministry Director-General Amir Baram formally delivered the Arrow 3 missile-defense system to German Air Force chief Holger Neumann, sealing a $3.6 billion agreement.

Germany—the nation that once bore the heaviest historical guilt for the slaughter of six million Jews—has now issued a signal to all of Europe. Even after years of moral confusion and wavering rhetoric, it is Germany that demonstrates what real defense means: not conferences, not slogans, not appeasement—but action rooted in reality.

Germany, the heart of Europe and a pillar of NATO, has chosen the weapon designed by the Jewish people to stop a genocidal threat that has pursued them for decades: ballistic missile warfare. Arrow is not a political statement. It is survival.

This is the system that already shields Israel from Hamas rockets, from Hezbollah arsenals and from Houthi attacks. The newer Arrow variants proved decisive against Iranian ballistic missiles, intercepting them outside the atmosphere—destroying them so completely that radioactive or chemical fallout never reaches the ground. Few weapons in the world can claim such operational proof.

Many countries want this system. Israel chose to supply it only to Germany. This is not a commercial sale. It is a strategic civilizational partnership. Former Israeli Air Force commander Ran Kochavi said it plainly: The war in Ukraine proved that Europe needs missile defense—and Arrow is the only real answer.

Germany’s role since Oct. 7, 2023, is not heroic. But it is intellectually intact. Unlike many European governments that descended into fabricated genocide accusations and moral hysteria, Berlin refused to surrender to false numbers, staged testimonies and antisemitic narratives masquerading as human rights.

One seemingly marginal episode exposed Germany’s deeper line: when Israel’s participation in the Eurovision Song Contest was threatened, Germany warned it would withdraw entirely and deny the broadcast to its 82 million citizens. The final decision in Geneva was silence—no vote—and Israel advanced. Germany had made its point.

And now the rest: France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Iceland—states that had threatened to boycott if Israel appeared. What will they do now? Will their millions of viewers turn off their televisions? And in a genuine emergency, will they refuse protection from the very Arrow shield they tried to sabotage symbolically?

The lesson is brutal and unavoidable. Europe debates while missiles fly. It analyzes while jihadists arm. It moralizes while Jewish children run for shelters. Appeasement never saves civilizations. It only postpones their reckoning.

Germany has chosen not to postpone. And Arrow is not merely a defense system. It is a declaration: Civilization still has allies.

NETANYAHU IS THE VICTIM OF LAWFARE

Netanyahu deserves exoneration, not a pardon

Anyone with Israel’s “best interests“ at heart wouldn’t have welcomed the witch hunt against the prime minister for the “crime“ of garnering votes. 

 

By Ruthie Blum 

 

JNS

Dec 5, 2025

 

 

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends his trial on corruption charges at the Tel Aviv District Courtin in December 2024

 

Since submitting a formal request for a pardon from Israeli President Isaac Herzog on Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been issuing explanations for what many of his supporters consider a disappointing move.

It didn’t come as a total surprise, of course. Toward the end of his historic address to the Knesset on Oct. 13, U.S. President Donald Trump conveyed a message to Herzog about this very issue.

“Hey, I have an idea,” Trump said, acknowledging that he was going off script. “Why don’t you give [Netanyahu] a pardon? … [I]t just seems to make so much sense. You know, whether we like it or not, this has been one of the greatest wartime [prime ministers]. … And cigars and champagne—who the hell cares about that, right?”

The following month, Trump submitted the entreaty in a letter.

“As the Great State of Israel and the amazing Jewish People move past the terribly difficult times of the last three years,” he wrote, “I hereby call on you to fully pardon Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been a formidable and decisive War Time Prime Minister and is now leading Israel into a time of peace, which includes my continued work with key Middle East leaders to add many additional countries to the world changing Abraham Accords.”

He went on to state that “Netanyahu has stood tall for Israel in the face of strong adversaries and long odds, and his attention cannot be unnecessarily diverted.”

Assuring Herzog that he respects both the independence and requirements of the Israeli judicial system, Trump nevertheless opined that the “case” [his quotation marks] against the prime minister is a “political, unjustified prosecution.”

He ended by saying, “It is time to let Bibi unite Israel by pardoning him, and ending lawfare once and for all,” using the nickname of the prime minister.

Herzog couldn’t have been caught off guard by the missive, due to Trump’s quip at the Knesset. But he was definitely put on the spot. As a result, he responded with pompous piety, claiming that his sole consideration before making his decision on the matter would be the “best interests of the State of Israel and Israeli society.”

Whatever that means.

Under the circumstances, anyone who had Israel’s “best interests” at heart wouldn’t have welcomed the witch hunt that’s been going on against Netanyahu for the “crime” of garnering votes. And though Herzog’s role is supposed to be ceremonial (other than in the power to grant pardons), the former leader of the Labor Party has been tipping the scales in favor of the “anybody but Bibi” crowd from the get-go.

Before the war, he served as a kind of self-appointed mediator between the government and the anti-judicial reform movement. You know, the one that included threats by the “Brothers and Sisters in Arms” group to refuse to show up for their reserve duty in the Israel Defense Forces. Oh, and vows by Israeli Air Force pilots not to participate in any potential operation against Iran.

Never mind that this was among the reasons that Hamas considered the timing ripe for its long-planned attacks on Oct. 7, 2023. And still, Herzog honored BSA less than a year later, bestowing on the organization the Presidential Award for Volunteerism. That was for mobilizing after the massacre that sparked the war to assist in civilian aid efforts.

Thanks a lot to the arsonists for helping pour water on the country-under-attack (excuse me, on the Netanyahu-led coalition elected by the public) that they had been so keen to set on fire—and not only figuratively. To express their rage at the very suggestion that restoring balance to the branches of government was necessary, their members literally burned tires on main roads and highways.

Despite the mass casualties and other atrocities suffered by Israeli civilians, foreigners, soldiers and hostages since that fateful Simchat Torah holiday more than two years ago, the courts and protesters have been happy to keep Netanyahu tied up in court. They figure that their favorite show must go on.

That the comedic drama involves corruption charges that neither years of police investigations nor the trial itself have been able to prove is of little concern to the prosecutors and other political oppositionists. On the contrary, by this point, after spending nearly a decade and oodles of tax shekels, there’s no way they’re going to back down from finding him guilty of some wrongdoing.

The one thing they’ve made clear all along is that he’d be off the hook if he agreed to exit the arena. It’s a case of blatant lawfare, not even in disguise.

Netanyahu has refused to make such a deal with the devil. He’s said all along that he will use the very system trying to block his ballot-box successes to exonerate himself.

What, then—other than Trump’s wishes—possessed him to shift gears and ask for a pardon? And why now, when the full extent of the illegal methods employed to pressure witnesses into manufacturing evidence against him is coming to light in horrifying detail?

Netanyahu spelled out the answer in a Dec. 3 interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin at The New York Times’s annual DealBook Summit. During the one-on-one, with Sorkin live at Manhattan’s Lincoln Center and Netanyahu via video conference from his office in Jerusalem, the Israeli premier first described what he called “six years of bogus investigations and four years of an endless trial” as follows:

“I was being put on trial … for bribery. What was the bribery? Not envelopes of cash, not any material remuneration, but supposedly positive coverage in a second-rate internet site. Well, it turned out that it was negative coverage. … So, two years ago, the judges call in the prosecution, and they say, ‘Drop the bribery charge. That’s your flagship charge. There’s nothing there.’

“Well, they wouldn’t agree. They kept on going, because they don’t want justice; they want me out of office. … So then, two charges were left. I received a Bugs Bunny doll—you’re not laughing—my son received a Bugs Bunny doll 29 years ago, and I received some cigars and champagne bottles. That’s what this trial is about.”

Sorkin interjected: “And you were at that trial today.”

Netanyahu replied: “Yes, I’m supposed to spend three times a week, eight hours a day in that trial. And, you know, I’ve got a few other things to do. … I think history beckons: We have opportunities for peace. We have enormous opportunities in AI and Quantum, [among] other things. I’ve already revolutionized the Israeli economy once—into a free-market economy. It’s become a juggernaut. And now we have the ability to seize the future, which will not only help us, but will help the entire Middle East—the world, really.”

He went on, “In our system, when you ask for a pardon, you’re not admitting to any guilt. You don’t have to. And I don’t. But I am saying that the needs of Israel are such that to spend another two to three years in this nonsense, where this trial has just collapsed, it’s become a joke. … It’s so silly and so stupid. … [It’s] absurd. So, I hope that it ends.”

Asked about the chances for Herzog to agree, Netanyahu said, I don’t know. … I hope he does, because I think it’s right for the country and it’s right for our future. We have a lot of tasks at hand. And it’s a lot easier to do them if you don’t have to spend eight hours a day, three times a week in this nonsense.”

He presented a shorter version of the above in a video message on Thursday that he shared on social media, this one with a prop—a Bugs Bunny doll—for effect. Though it was an apt and amusing tool to illustrate the farce, the bigger picture is not the least bit funny.

In any event, it’s unlikely that Herzog will grant the requested pardon without a set of strings attached. And there’s no way that Netanyahu will admit to culpability for crimes that he didn’t commit. He certainly won’t resign or agree not to run in the next election.

The issue, therefore, is moot.

FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

 Submitted by Trey Rusk

 

They see themselves as the cowboys of the drug trade, highly experienced crews that ferry narcotics on small boats across the open seas, running on a mix of bravado, skill and dreams of a massive payday.

Now, designated as terrorists by the Trump administration, they face not only the perils of a capricious sea but the new danger of getting blown out of the water by the U.S. military. The trade’s unofficial motto—“deliver or die”—has never rung so true.

Many of the pilots and crew of the go-fast boats got their start as fishermen before transitioning into smuggling. Three men who have manned these drug boats spoke to The Wall Street Journal, describing a once little-known but essential part of the narcotics trade that is now in President Trump’s sights.

They run drug cargoes worth as much as $70 million on the sleek 40-foot-long boats. These boats are the workhorses for the traffickers along 2,000 miles of Colombian coastline—and hundreds more miles in Ecuador and Venezuela.

“The ocean is very big, very big,” said one Colombian pilot who plies the Caribbean. “These drug organizations live from trafficking. They will continue to do this. This doesn’t end. This will continue even if the United States continues its bombings.”

THE CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING BATTLE

Supreme Court allows Texas to use a congressional map favorable to Republicans in 2026

                                    

By Mark Sherman

 

Associated Press

Dec 4, 2025 

 

WASHINGTON — A divided Supreme Court on Thursday came to the rescue of Texas Republicans, allowing next year’s elections to be held under the state’s congressional redistricting plan favorable to the GOP and pushed by President Donald Trump despite a lower-court ruling that the map likely discriminates on the basis of race.

With conservative justices in the majority, the court acted on an emergency request from Texas for quick action because qualifying in the new districts already has begun, with primary elections in March.

The Supreme Court’s order puts the 2-1 ruling blocking the map on hold at least until after the high court issues a final decision in the case. Justice Samuel Alito had previously temporarily blocked the order while the full court considered the Texas appeal.

The justices cast doubt on the lower-court finding that race played a role in the new map, saying in an unsigned statement that Texas lawmakers had “avowedly partisan goals.”

In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the three liberal justices that her colleagues should not have intervened at this point. Doing so, she wrote, “ensures that many Texas citizens, for no good reason, will be placed in electoral districts because of their race. And that result, as this Court has pronounced year in and year out, is a violation of the Constitution.”

The high court's vote “is a green light for there to be even more re-redistricting, and a strong message to lower courts to butt out,” Richard Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California at Los Angeles law school, wrote on the Election Law Blog.

The justices have blocked past lower-court rulings in congressional redistricting cases, most recently in Alabama and Louisiana, that came several months before elections.

The Texas congressional map enacted last summer at Trump’s urging was engineered to give Republicans five additional House seats.

The effort to preserve a slim Republican majority in the House in next year’s elections touched off a nationwide redistricting battle.

Texas was the first state to meet Trump’s demands in what has become an expanding national battle over redistricting. Republicans drew the state’s new map to give the GOP five additional seats, and Missouri and North Carolina followed with new maps adding an additional Republican seat each. To counter those moves, California voters approved a ballot initiative to give Democrats an additional five seats there.

The redrawn maps are facing court challenges in California and Missouri. A three-judge panel allowed the new North Carolina map to be used in the 2026 elections.

The Trump administration is suing to block the new California maps, but it called for the Supreme Court to keep the redrawn Texas districts in place.

More in Politics

The justices are separately considering a case from Louisiana that could further limit race-based districts under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. It’s unclear how the current round of redistricting would be affected by the outcome in the Louisiana case.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the Supreme Court's order "defended Texas’s fundamental right to draw a map that ensures we are represented by Republicans.” He called the redistricting law “the Big Beautiful Map.”

“Texas is paving the way as we take our country back, district by district, state by state,” Paxton said in a statement. “This map reflects the political climate of our state and is a massive win for Texas and every conservative who is tired of watching the left try to upend the political system with bogus lawsuits.”

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott issued a statement saying: “We won! Texas is officially — and legally — more red."

Democratic National Committee chairman Ken Martin said in a statement that the court's decision “to allow Texas Republicans’ rigged, racially gerrymandered maps to go into effect is wrong — both morally and legally. Once again, the Supreme Court gave Trump exactly what he wanted: a rigged map to help Republicans avoid accountability in the midterms for turning their backs on the American people.”

In the Texas case, U.S. District Judges Jeffrey V. Brown and David Guaderrama concluded that the redistricting plan likely dilutes the political power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the Constitution. Trump appointed Brown in his first term while President Barack Obama, a Democrat, appointed Guaderrama.

“To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 Map,” Brown wrote. “But it was much more than just politics. Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map.”

The majority opinion provoked a vituperative dissent from Judge Jerry Smith, an appeals court judge on the panel.

Smith accused Brown of “pernicious judicial misbehavior” for not giving Smith sufficient time before issuing the majority opinion. Smith, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, a Republican, also disagreed strenuously with the substance of the opinion, saying it would be a candidate for the “Nobel Prize for Fiction,” if there were such an award.

“The main winners from Judge Brown’s opinion are George Soros and Gavin Newsom,” Smith wrote, referring to the liberal megadonor and California’s Democratic governor. “The obvious losers are the People of Texas and the Rule of Law.”

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi hailed Thursday's Supreme Court stay, posting on X, “Federal courts have no right to interfere with a State’s decision to redraw legislative maps for partisan reasons.”

The new map eliminated five of the state’s nine “coalition” districts, where no minority group has a majority but together they outnumber non-Hispanic white voters. The total number of congressional districts in which minorities make up a majority of voting-age citizens dropped from 16 to 14.

Yet Republicans argued the map is better for minority voters. There’s a new, eighth Hispanic-majority district, and two Black-majority districts instead of none.

But critics consider that the Hispanic or Black majority in each district is so slim that white voters, who tend to turn out in larger percentages, will control election results.

__________________

 

TRUMP WINS IN TEXAS ... DOES THAT MEAN HE WILL LOSE IN CA ?

 

By Bob Walsh

 

 

 

SCOTUS ruled yesterday that the blatantly political redistricting in Texas is good to go, at least for the nonce.  The objections asserted that the gerrymandering was essentially racial, which would be a no-no.  

The current objections to a similar thing just done from the opposite direction in CA have been similar in some respects.  Originally the objections to CA Proposition 50 were procedural.  The California Supreme Court did not care that the procedure appeared to violate the CA constitution.  The basic angle of attack of the more recent shots at Prop 50 assert a primarily racial component.  There is some reason to believe this is so, that the lines were drawn to advantage Hispanic voters, because this would give the Democrat-Socialist party a leg up against Trump in the upcoming off-year election.  It remains to be seen which assertions, if either, SCOTUS will buy into.

A certain amount of speed is necessary due to the filing deadlines for the CA congressional elections.  There is already a roughly similar case before SCOTUS out of Louisiana.  I suspect an outcome will rear it's ugly head in the very near future.