Tag: Opinion

‘Regime Change by Jazz Improvisation’

Smoke from an oil refinery rises over residential buildings in southern Tehran after Israeli airstrikes. (Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA)
“Regime change by jazz improvisation.” Karim Sadjadpour’s phrase is not just clever — it is damning. It perfectly exposes the reckless, contradictory, and fundamentally dishonest mess that Donald Trump’s White House has unleashed on Iran and, by extension, on the entire world.
This is not foreign policy. This is a saxophone solo played by a president who campaigned on “America First” but has instead delivered “Israel First” on steroids, orchestrated by the same neoconservative warmongers, AIPAC donors, and Zionist ideologues who have hijacked U.S. strategy for decades.
Let’s be brutally honest about what is happening. Trump began the war with a midnight Truth Social post urging Iranians to rise up and overthrow their government, apparently convinced the Islamic Republic would collapse in 48 hours. When it didn’t, he pivoted within days — floating deals with regime insiders, praising the 2019 Venezuela operation (two arrests, no real change) as “perfect,” and letting Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Elbridge Colby insist this was not a regime-change war, merely a limited strike to “degrade” Iranian forces.

Then came the latest improvisation: Trump personally reaching out to Kurdish leaders in Iran and Iraq, dangling U.S. support if they help topple Tehran and redraw borders. By Friday he was demanding “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER” and promising to “MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN (MIGA!)” — a slogan so transparently written for his Israeli-American billionaire patron Miriam Adelson that even his own supporters are laughing through gritted teeth.
This is not leadership. This is chaos in service of a foreign agenda.
The real danger, however, lies in the widening gap between Washington’s stated interests and Tel Aviv’s actual objectives. For Benjamin Netanyahu, this is the culmination of a 40-year Zionist dream: the total destruction of the Islamic Republic. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Israeli strikes have been surgical and merciless — decapitating leadership, bombing command centers, even hitting police facilities — methodically dismantling the regime’s repressive machinery. Netanyahu is also finishing off Hezbollah “root and branch.” Chaos in Iran and Lebanon? Acceptable collateral damage. A Syrian-style civil war next door would actually strengthen Israel’s position by eliminating any coherent Arab or Persian state capable of resisting Greater Israel ideology. History is clear: the Syrian civil war improved Israel’s security precisely because it removed a unified adversary. Netanyahu is betting the same outcome will work in Tehran.
For the United States, this is catastrophic. Iran is a nation of 90 million with deep ethnic fault lines — Kurds, Armenians, Azerbaijanis — who have coexisted peacefully under central authority. Remove that authority and, as the Balkans and post-2003 Iraq proved, people retreat to tribe and sect. Fueling the fire is Iran’s massive armed apparatus: nearly 200,000 Revolutionary Guards, hundreds of thousands of Basij militiamen, and 400,000 regular troops. Many will simply melt away and re-emerge as insurgents, exactly as Saddam’s army did. Libya, 14 years after Gaddafi, still has no single authority. Iraq remains a fractured mess. Destroying a state is child’s play for modern air power; rebuilding one — or even preventing total collapse — has never been America’s strong suit.
Yet Trump, captured by the same AIPAC-driven machine and neocon zombies (Lindsey Graham practically glowed on cable news), keeps lurching toward Netanyahu’s endgame. Iraqi Kurds are now caught in a deadly three-way squeeze, as Axios reported in devastating detail. Iranian Kurds are pressing them to open borders and join the fight. Tehran has issued its first direct threat: allow cross-border attacks or “Zionist regime elements” through your territory and every facility in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq will be hit “on a massive scale” — 200 Shahed drones would be enough, given the Kurds’ lack of air defenses. Israeli operatives are far more aggressive in pushing Iranian Kurdish militias than the Americans, who seem content with “Regime Lite — Venezuela Plus.” Kurdish officials are staying neutral, remembering every previous American betrayal. One told Axios: “We have trust issues from the past and we don’t want to get involved. Who is going to defend us if the Iranian regime ends up surviving this?”
Meanwhile, America’s actual allies are in open disbelief as the Pentagon reroutes weapons shipments to feed this Zionist adventure. European officials, still rebuilding after Ukraine, fear they will be left naked against Russia. Asian partners watch China and North Korea taking notes on U.S. ammunition burn rates. Even Gulf states wonder where their promised air defenses went.
As one northern European official put it anonymously: “The munitions that have been and will be fired are the ones that everybody needs to acquire in large numbers.” Production cannot be magicked overnight. A Patriot missile is not a Tesla. The EU is already rewriting rules to favor European arms makers. Poland is buying South Korean tanks. The old “America as giant Walmart” illusion is dead, and the transatlantic defense relationship is fracturing — all so Israel can pursue its maximalist fantasy.
And the propaganda? Vintage neocon script. First it was “not even a war.” Then “a short war, nothing like Iraq.” Then “not regime change.” Now Trump himself tells TIME magazine he is open to ground troops, has “no time limits,” and wants a “Western-friendly government” — the exact phrase used when the CIA overthrew Iran’s elected leader in 1953 and installed the Shah.
He even bragged to CNN that he doesn’t care about Iranian democracy — just leaders who “treat the United States and Israel well.” This is the same model that produced the 1979 revolution and decades of blowback. Trump’s own words confirm it: unconditional surrender or endless war, with him personally vetting Iran’s next leaders. The “MIGA” acronym practically writes itself.
Americans are already paying the price — higher gas prices, diverted defense budgets, and the looming threat of more domestic retaliation. A horrific shooting in Austin, Texas, last week was explicitly linked by investigators to rage over U.S. strikes on Iran. Yet the same crowd that cheered Iraq (Condoleezza Rice resurrected on Fox News) now insists this time will be different.
It won’t.
Washington still has a narrow window to salvage something: a disarmed, defanged Iran that no longer threatens the region. Qatar stands ready, as always, to mediate. But that requires telling Netanyahu and his AIPAC enablers “enough.” It requires rejecting Greater Israel ideology and the neocon fantasy that America can endlessly remake the Middle East in Israel’s image.
Time is running out. Ethnic tensions are rising. The Revolutionary Guard is preparing for prolonged resistance. Drones are already hitting Gulf infrastructure. The spillover — refugees, oil shocks, new terror networks — will not stop at the Mediterranean or the Persian Gulf.
March 8, 2026
Britain Can Still Avoid an Inflation Spiral
Britain can still save itself from an inflation spiral. © Getty
LONDON — Britain’s economy is staring down a familiar foe: creeping inflation that threatens to erode living standards and stall recovery. Yet amid the headlines of a 3.4% CPI rise in December 2025—the first uptick in five months—and a slowdown in wage growth to 4.5% annually (regular earnings excluding bonuses) in the three months to November, per the Office for National Statistics (ONS)—a more optimistic path emerges. The UK possesses the structural levers to break free from this inflationary trap without resorting to punitive interest rate hikes or endless fiscal giveaways. The key? A renewed focus on domestic production, export revival, and supply-side reforms that rebuild economic resilience from the ground up.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves, fresh from her Autumn Budget’s £13 billion in targeted relief over three years—including £5.4 billion this year for pocketbook boosts—faces a tough early 2026. Inflation climbed from November’s 3.2% to 3.4% in December, driven by airfares, tobacco duties, and persistent services pressures (4.5% annual rise), according to ONS data released January 21. Economists had penciled in 3.3%, making this a mild surprise that likely keeps the Bank of England on hold at 3.75% for its February meeting, per Reuters polling and City pricing.
Wage momentum has cooled too: Regular pay growth eased to 4.5% from 4.6%, with private-sector earnings dropping sharply to 3.6%—the lowest since November 2020, ONS figures show. Public-sector pay remains elevated at 7.9% due to timing effects from prior awards, but overall trends signal easing labor-market heat. Unemployment held at 5.1%—highest since January 2021—while payrolled employees fell 155,000 year-on-year to November, with provisional December estimates showing another 184,000 drop.
This isn’t the 1970s wage-price spiral redux. Real wages have grown just 9% over the past decade, a far cry from the unchecked rises that fueled stagflation then. Today’s pressures stem from structural imbalances: a chronic trade deficit widened post-2008 financial crisis, when financial services exports—once a sterling stabilizer—plummeted 25% and stagnated. The City lost its allure as a global capital magnet, siphoning fewer foreign inflows and weakening the pound by over 20% against major currencies since the crash peaks.
A depreciated sterling inflates import costs for essentials—food up 0.8% monthly in December, nearly doubled since 2008; clothing and footwear reversing long-term deflation to rise 20% in five years. This feeds services inflation, the economy’s dominant driver. Yet the ONS and Bank of England data point to transience: Headline inflation is forecast to drop sharply in January (potentially 0.5 percentage points, per Resolution Foundation), with the BoE eyeing a return near 2% by mid-2026. Deutsche Bank’s Sanjay Raja predicts the UK’s biggest G7 inflation fall this year, with Q4 forecasts averaging 2.2% (Treasury economists) to 2.1% (OBR November outlook).
Escaping the Whirlpool: Production Over Handouts
Reeves’ £150 energy bill cuts, rail fare freeze, and prescription charge hold are welcome short-term palliatives, but lasting relief demands supply-side boldness. Britain’s post-crisis malaise—widening trade gaps, sterling weakness, import dependence—mirrors vulnerabilities that subsidies alone can’t fix. The answer lies in revitalizing domestic manufacturing and agriculture to reduce reliance on overseas goods, create high-value jobs, and strengthen the currency organically.
Since the 1980s, the UK has shed a million hectares of farmland, per historical data, exacerbating food import exposure. Yet glimmers of reversal exist: Textile production shows tentative growth after decades of decline, with Q3 2025 sales rebounding 4.3% for small-to-mid fashion manufacturers to £500,517 average revenue, per Unleashed reports. Broader manufacturing output grew modestly in late 2025, though confidence dipped amid fragile demand (Make UK/BDO Q4 survey forecasts 0.5% growth in 2025 before a 0.5% contraction in 2026).
Policymakers should accelerate this shift: Targeted incentives for onshore production in essentials—cars, clothing, food—could rebuild supply chains. Challenge the defeatist myth that Britain can’t compete; scale and innovation can offset labor costs if energy prices fall and taxes ease. High electricity bills (among world’s highest) and employment taxes deter investment—abandoning rigid net-zero timelines for pragmatic energy policy could unlock competitiveness without subsidies’ fiscal drag.
Public discourse underscores this: Commentators lament foreign ownership of utilities and manufacturing siphoning dividends abroad, urging British-owned firms to retain profits domestically. Others decry subsidies as non-solutions, advocating deregulation, lower energy costs, and tax relief instead. Freeing food imports could collapse prices short-term, but long-term security demands balanced domestic capacity.
New export powerhouses—beyond stagnant finance—could replace lost sterling inflows. Green tech, advanced manufacturing, and services innovation offer paths if regulations don’t stifle them.
Market Implications and Political Calculus
Sterling held steady post-inflation data at around $1.32 and €1.146 (Wise mid-market January 22), reflecting expectations of temporary blips. BoE futures price one to two cuts in 2026, likely from April if January data confirms cooling. Gilt yields and FTSE sectors sensitive to rates (banks, utilities) show muted reaction, betting on gradual easing.
Politically, 2026 is Reeves’ proving ground: Deliver cost-of-living relief via growth, not handouts, or face voter backlash. As she once advocated “make, sell and buy more in Britain,” returning to that vision—boosting production, jobs, investment—offers sustainable escape from inflation’s grip. Handouts fade; productive capacity endures.
Britain isn’t doomed to perpetual import dependence or sterling weakness. With supply-side courage—lower barriers, energy realism, domestic focus—the UK can rebuild strength, tame prices, and deliver genuine prosperity. The tools are there; the will must follow.
January 22, 2026
Democrats must win young voters or lose them forever
David Plouffe, the Obama-era strategist who’s seen his share of Democratic highs and lows, dropped a reality bomb in The New York Times this week: Despite the party’s “big wins everywhere” last year—from Abigail Spanberger’s Virginia governorship to Mikie Sherrill’s New Jersey hold and Zohran Mamdani’s socialist splash in NYC—the Dems are barreling toward electoral oblivion unless they ditch their “broken brand and stale agenda.”
Plouffe, who steered Obama’s 2008 juggernaut and lent a hand to Kamala Harris’ 2024 flop, warns that post-2030 census tweaks will skew the Electoral College rightward, potentially dooming Democrats to fall short of 270 votes even if they reclaim Harris’ haul plus the Blue Wall (Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin). “Democrats have no credible path to sustained control of the Senate and the White House,” he thunders, urging a radical overhaul to woo “politically unforgiving” turf—code for the white working-class heartlands where Trumpism thrives.
From a right-center vantage, Plouffe’s cri de coeur is music to conservative ears: The Dems’ fleeting rebound owes more to anti-Trump shutdown fury than genuine appeal, masking a rot that’s hemorrhaging young voters—especially white men—to bolder voices like Nick Fuentes, who unapologetically champions their grievances against endless foreign aid (hello, Zionist lobbies draining billions for Israel’s wars), mass remigrations flooding jobs with cheap labor, and a feminist-LGBTQ agenda that sidelines traditional masculinity.
Nick Fuentes, a pro-white firebrand exposing the elite’s demographic games, resonates with millennials tired of being labeled “bigots” for wanting secure borders via ICE crackdowns and pro-men policies that prioritize family over radical gender ideology. Anti-criminal? Absolutely—Dems’ soft-on-crime stance lets thugs roam while real Americans suffer.
Plouffe nails the peril: An “unforgiving map” post-census hands red states like Florida and Texas 10 more EVs, per Brennan Center estimates, while blues like California and New York bleed votes. Dems could sweep Harris’ wins plus the Rust Belt and still lose— a setup tailor-made for GOP dominance, especially if Vance-like figures keep courting the disaffected. Trump’s “unpopular” chaos? Overblown—his America First tariffs and shutdown hardball target waste, not workers. Plouffe’s fix: Hammer Trump on costs (fair, but ignore Dem spending sprees), build blue-collar jobs (nurses, cops, mechanics—pro-men fields Dems neglect amid feminist quotas), regulate AI to curb billionaire overreach (echoing Fuentes’ elite critiques), and embrace reforms like term limits and pardon bans (long overdue, but Dems cling to power like glue).
Yet Plouffe’s blind spots scream: Dems’ “ideological wish list”—pro-LGBTQ indoctrination in schools, anti-Israel virtue-signaling amid Gaza aid waste, open borders enabling criminal influxes—alienates young white men, the demographic backbone Trump flipped.
Fuentes’ no-holds-barred take—calling out Zionist influence siphoning funds from American priorities—draws crowds Dems dismiss as “hate.” Pro-ICE? Essential—remaigrations undermine wages for native workers.
Anti-feminist? Overdue—pushing “universal childcare” ignores men as providers, favoring state over family. Anti-LGBTQ excesses? Spot on—rainbow agendas distract from real threats like crime waves in blue cities.
Plouffe urges “new faces” to “blow the whistle” on broken programs—music to right-centers weary of Dem establishment rot. But without ditching woke traps, Dems risk permanent youth exodus: Polls show 43% under-30 backed Trump in 2024 (up from McCain’s 32%), per exits. Fuentes’ groyper army, pro-white and anti-globalist, fills the void Dems created with identity obsessions. Vance, a pro-men icon fighting criminal leniency and endless wars, shows the GOP path: America First, sans Zionist strings.
Dems’ hole is “deep,” Plouffe admits—MAGA’s too, but Trump’s astride a movement built for endurance. As census favors red growth (84% from minorities, but Trump’s Latino inroads prove assimilation wins), Dems must court young whites or fade. Plouffe’s asymmetry gift? Squander it on more “diversity” drivel, and 2028’s a GOP rout.
January 18, 2026
Visual Timeline of Charlie Kirk’s Assassination
Charlie Kirk, founder of nonprofit Turning Point USA, speaks before being shot during his visit to Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, on Sept. 10, 2025. © Tess Crowley/The Deseret News via AP
Conservative influencer Charlie Kirk was killed by a single gunshot at a crowded event at a Utah college on Sept. 10. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox described the act as a “political assassination.”
Authorities announced the arrest of 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, the suspected assassin, during a press conference on Sept. 12.
Here’s what we know about the shooting and the aftermath so far.
The Assassination
Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, was speaking at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, in the first campus event of TPUSA’s American Comeback tour.
By noon, an estimated 3,000 students had gathered around his tent, which displayed his challenge to the students “prove me wrong.”
Six university police officers were on duty at the event, along with Kirk’s own private security team, according to authorities.
Kirk began fielding the second question of the day.
“Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?” a man in the crowd asked Kirk.
“Counting or not counting gang violence?” Kirk replied. It was about 12:20 p.m. local time.
One shot was fired. Graphic video footage taken by spectators showed the bullet pierce the left side of Kirk’s neck.
Kirk was quickly surrounded by his security team, carried into an SUV, and taken to Timpanogos Regional Hospital, where initial reports said he was in critical condition.
As the thousands of people ran for cover, video footage caught what appeared to be a person running across the roof of a nearby building.
Kirk’s death was publicly announced by President Donald Trump on Truth Social at 4:40 p.m. ET.
Alleged Assassin Captured After Manhunt
Family members of the suspect assisted authorities after identifying their son as the individual allegedly responsible for killing Kirk.
Robinson was convinced by his father to turn himself in, President Donald Trump said during a Fox News interview on Sept. 12.
“The father convinced the son, this is it … I’m always subject to being corrected … but based on what I’m hearing,” the president said.
“Essentially, somebody who was very close to him” recognized Robinson from security footage, Trump said.
The suspect indicated “or implied” to a family member that he was responsible for the shooting, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said in a Friday press conference. That family member then told a family friend, who contacted the Washington County Sheriff’s Office with the information.
One family member told investigators that Robinson had mentioned Kirk’s appearance at UVU over the dinner table recently, Cox said.
“They talked about why they didn’t like him and the viewpoints that he had. The family member also stated Kirk was full of hate and spreading hate,” Cox said.
Messages allegedly from Robinson sent on Discord to an unnamed roommate who spoke with investigators described his attempt to recover the rifle that he allegedly hid in the woods after the shooting, Cox said.
The arrest potentially concludes a manhunt conducted by the FBI and the Utah Department of Public Safety that began immediately after Kirk was killed.
Two persons of interest were separately detained and questioned on Sept. 10, but were cleared and later released.
Following the Killer’s Movements
Beau Mason, commissioner of Utah’s Department of Public Safety, confirmed on Sept. 11 that investigators had determined the suspect arrived on campus at 11:52 a.m. local time on Sept. 10. They were then able to track his movements through campus, up stairwells, and onto the roof to the shooting location.
The roof was on a building named the Losee Center, approximately 200 yards from where Kirk was seated.
The suspect fired a single shot at Kirk. No other people were hit.
Afterward, Mason said investigators tracked the suspect moving to the other side of the building, jumping off, and fleeing campus into a neighborhood.
Mason added that the suspect appeared to be college-aged and “blended well in a college institution.”
The FBI later released images of a “person of interest,” depicting a slim male wearing sunglasses, a black, long-sleeved t-shirt with what appeared to be a graphic of the American flag, blue jeans, and a baseball cap.
The FBI released photos, along with a message urging the public to help identify a “person of interest” in relation to the Sept. 10 fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk. © FBI
Political Messages Inscribed on Bullet Casings
Cox said that investigators recovered a Mauser .30-06 rifle with four rounds of ammunition—one fired and three unfired.
Bullet casings were inscribed with political messages and other engravings, he said.
The fired casing was allegedly marked, “Notices, bulges, OWO, what’s this?” he said.
One unfired round allegedly read, “Hey fascists! Catch!” It also had a drawn up arrow, a right arrow, and three down arrow symbols.
Another round allegedly read, “O bella ciao, bella ciao, ciao, ciao,” seemingly referring to an Italian anti-fascist song from WWII.
The last casing was allegedly inscribed with, “If you read this, you are gay LMAO.”
In terms of forensics, investigators have a footwear impression, a palm print, and forearm imprints for analysis.
Law enforcement officials, including members of an FBI forensics team, investigate near the crime scene where Charlie Kirk was shot and killed at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, on Sept. 11, 2025. © Melissa Majchrzak/AFP via Getty Images
Charging Documents Coming Soon
Cox told reporters to expect charging documents “early next week,” as Utah state law allows three days for authorities to gather evidence while a suspect is in custody before filing official charges.
Trump has called for the death penalty, which is permissible in Utah for those convicted of aggravated first-degree murder.
September 12, 2025
‘Mamdani of Minneapolis’ Highlights Growing Divide Within the Democratic Party Beyond NYC
US Rep Adriano Espaillat and NNYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani attend a news conference in New York City on July 10, 2025. © Jeenah Moon/Reuters
Forget identity politics—what we’re witnessing is a full-scale ideological insurgency. The rise of Zohran Mamdani in New York City and Omar Fateh in Minneapolis isn’t a tale of diversity breaking barriers—it’s an alarm bell signaling a growing socialist push challenging the very foundations of the U.S. Constitution.
Zohran Mamdani, a self-professed democratic socialist, pulled off a political upset in June by defeating former Governor Andrew Cuomo to clinch the Democratic mayoral nomination in New York City. Despite scant executive experience, Mamdani’s grassroots machinery—backed by NYC-DSA volunteers knocking on over 1.6 million doors—delivered him a primary victory commanding 43.5% of first-choice votes, ahead of Cuomo’s 36.4% (ranked-choice results matter). He ran on a platform of fare-free buses, city-run grocery chains, childcare, rent freezes, and significantly, progressive taxation including a flat 2% tax on millionaires.
Mamdani hails from a socialist tradition aligned with figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Critics worry these policies undermine American constitutional principles by expanding government power over markets, property rights, and freedom of association.
In Minneapolis, Omar Fateh—a Somali-American state senator—secured the DFL’s endorsement over two-term Mayor Jacob Frey at a convention marked by opaque processes: e-voting system failures, fraudulent upgrades, and a final “hand‑badge count” decided by the convention chair. Despite procedural controversy, Fateh won over 60% delegate support, representing a brazen socialist push at local party levels.
Mayoral candidate state Sen. Omar Fateh waves to the crowd during the Minneapolis DFL convention at Target Center in Minneapolis on Saturday. © Rebecca Villagracia/The Minnesota Star Tribune
Fateh stands on the same socialist platform: rent freezes, taxing billionaires, eliminating public safety cooperation with ICE, free public college for low-income families. If implemented, these measures push Minneapolis toward socialist governance and away from constitutional limits on government power.
These parallel rises of Mamdani and Fateh aren’t isolated incidents—they’re harbingers of a broader leftward shift within the Democratic Party. According to The Wall Street Journal, they exemplify “a widening ideological divide” between establishment pragmatic moderates and insurgent socialist factions mobilized on affordable housing and Gaza solidarity.
Yet the deeper issue is not policy details—it’s the rejection of individual rights, free markets, and constitutional checks in favor of centralized planning. Both candidates’ platforms—fare-free transit, rent freezes, wealth taxation—reflect a willingness to expand government far beyond its constitutional bounds.
Fateh’s campaign volunteer (and brother-in-law) was convicted of mishandling absentee ballots in his 2020 Senate bid. While an ethics panel cleared Fateh of wrongdoing, the scandal unnerved many.
He also faced a conflict-of-interest probe over a $500,000 grant he sponsored to a nonprofit that advertised his campaign. Again, no penalties followed—only mandated financial training.
Fateh’s vocal support for abolishing the Minneapolis Police and defunding ICE, including a 2023 speech comparing GOP senators to white supremacists, raised alarm among moderates before ethical complaints were dropped.
Mamdani lacks executive leadership experience and has been criticized for muted responses to NYC shootings—raising concerns about future governance ability.
Financial and Electoral Panic Rings the Alarm
Mamdani’s win spooked Wall Street. CNBC reported hedge fund and real estate investors were “alarmed” and “depressed,” while JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon admitted privately that Mamdani’s policy agenda is “Marxist-ish.” Business sentiment sank as real estate markets and luxury housing felt exposed.
As New York City faces a fracturing general election (with Cuomo and Adams running as independents), and Minneapolis gears up for a must-win race—voters must decide if they support vibrant constitutionalism or disruptive socialist crackdowns on liberty.
If Fateh and Mamdani succeed, it heralds serious repercussions in 2026—shifts toward expensive entitlement schemes, defunding of public safety, and erosion of property rights. For swing states and suburban moderates, this could be electoral poison.
The ascendance of socialist insurgents like Mamdani and Fateh represents more than political upset—it’s a constitutional crisis in the making. Their policies rest on centralized control, regressive messaging, and ideological purity. America cannot remain strong if these power grabs go unchecked.
If constitutional liberties—speech, free markets, property, due process—are to survive, conservative and moderate voters must mobilize to defend realism over radicalism in the party and the nation.
August 3, 2025
The images of starvation in Gaza are deeply misleading
The New York Times’ July 25 front page showing a picture captioned: “Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, about 18 months, with his mother, Hedaya al-Mutawaq, who said he was born healthy but recently diagnozed with severe malnutrition. A doctor said the number children dying of malnutrition in Gaza had risen sharply.” On July 30, the paper acknowledged that Mohammed “had pre-existing health problems affecting his brain and his muscle development.”
It’s one of the most emotionally searing images circulated in recent months: a malnourished child behind a fence, desperate eyes piercing through the camera lens, with a woman stretching out a bowl for food. It’s been published by international media, invoked by politicians, and shared by millions online. It has come to symbolize, for many, the reported famine in Gaza.
But there’s just one problem. The photo’s origin and context are hotly disputed — and increasingly, experts say, deliberately manipulated.
Earlier this week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told his 3.4 million followers on X:
“There is no starvation in Gaza, no policy of starvation in Gaza.”
There is no starvation in Gaza, no policy of starvation in Gaza, and I assure you that we have a commitment to achieve our war goals.

We will continue to fight till we achieve the release of our hostages and the destruction of Hamas' military and governing capabilities. They… pic.twitter.com/cND0ZoejgJ
— Benjamin Netanyahu – בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) July 28, 2025

His remarks unleashed a digital firestorm. Former President Donald Trump broke ranks with his usual ally and responded:
“There is real starvation in Gaza. You can’t fake that.”

This rare division between two strong allies laid bare the intensifying war not just over territory, but over information — a propaganda war playing out across social media, newsrooms, and governments.
Hamas’s Propaganda Machinery and Media Blindness
Many analysts and security experts argue that Hamas is adept at exploiting global sympathy through carefully staged imagery. Images of skeletal children, overwhelmed hospitals, and food queues are frequently disseminated, often with little journalistic scrutiny.
Take, for instance, the viral image of a girl at a community kitchen. On X (formerly Twitter), thousands of users — aided by Elon Musk’s AI chatbot, Grok — claimed the photo was from 2014, portraying a Yazidi girl fleeing ISIS in Iraq.
Claims on social media said this photo was taken in 2014 in Iraq or Syria. In fact it was taken in Gaza City, northern Gaza Strip, on Saturday, July 26, 2025, showing Palestinians struggle to get donated food at a community kitchen. © AP Photo/Abdel Kareem Hana
Grok responded:
“Yes, the photo is from August 2014… on Mount Sinjar in Iraq.”
Citing Reuters, it labeled the image a case of repurposed content.
A girl from the minority Yazidi sect, fleeing the violence in the Iraqi town of Sinjar, rests at the Iraqi-Syrian border crossing in Fishkhabour, Dohuk province on August 13, 2014. © Youssef Boudlal—REUTERS
But BBC Verify journalist Shayan Sardarizadeh debunked that claim. He identified the photo’s true source:
“The image is from Gaza, taken on July 26, 2025, by AP photographer Abdel Kareem Hana.”
Reverse image tools like TinEye confirmed the original publication date and location. Grok was simply wrong.
As Sardarizadeh noted:
“AI chatbots, including Grok, are not fact-checking tools and should not be used for that purpose, particularly in relation to breaking and developing events.”
Still, damage was done. The manipulated claim was spread, repeated, and believed by many — a clear example of how quickly misinformation can overshadow the truth.
The Case of Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq
The New York Times’ July 25 front page showing a picture captioned: “Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, about 18 months, with his mother, Hedaya al-Mutawaq, who said he was born healthy but recently diagnozed with severe malnutrition. A doctor said the number children dying of malnutrition in Gaza had risen sharply.” On July 30, the paper acknowledged that Mohammed “had pre-existing health problems affecting his brain and his muscle development.”
Another image that shocked global audiences was that of 18-month-old Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq. Published by The New York Times in a piece titled “Gazans Are Dying of Starvation”, the toddler was described as emaciated, with his father reportedly killed while searching for food.
“As an adult, I can bear the hunger, but my kids can’t,” his mother was quoted.
But investigative journalist David Collier quickly raised flags. He cited medical records showing Mohammed suffered from severe genetic disorders since birth and had required special supplements even before the war began.
In response, The New York Times issued an editor’s note:
“We have since learned new information… and have updated our story to add context about his pre-existing health problems.”
We have appended an Editors' Note to a story about Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, a child in Gaza who was diagnosed with severe malnutrition. After publication, The Times learned that he also had pre-existing health problems. Read more below. pic.twitter.com/KGxP3b3Q2B
— NYTimes Communications (@NYTimesPR) July 29, 2025

They noted that while Mohammed’s condition had worsened due to the lack of medical care, his malnutrition was compounded, not caused, by the current war.
To critics, the update wasn’t enough.
“So you guys lied, got called out, and issued a complete non-apology,” one user posted on X.
On Wednesday, a UN-backed food security task force warned that famine “is currently playing out” in Gaza. Their analysis said Gaza City had crossed famine thresholds for food consumption and acute malnutrition.
The Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry reports 154 deaths from hunger since October 2023 — including 89 children. However, critics question the credibility of the ministry’s figures, noting its alignment with Hamas and history of inflated or unverifiable statistics.
Meanwhile, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called the situation “a humanitarian catastrophe of epic proportions.” Human rights organizations, including Israel-based B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights, claim Israel is committing genocide through starvation, mass displacement, and bombings.
Yet at the same time, The New York Times also recently reported Israeli military officials denying Hamas’s alleged theft of UN aid — suggesting the crisis may be more due to distribution chaos, logistical breakdowns, and internal Hamas mismanagement than direct Israeli policy.
A Media Reckoning Is Overdue
The Western media’s responsibility in this tragedy cannot be ignored. In the rush to file emotionally evocative stories, due diligence has often been sacrificed. As the New York Budgets Editorial Standards outline: verifying visual content, especially in wartime, is not optional — it is essential.
“Every journalist must ask: Who took this photo? Where? When? Under what conditions?”
Hamas has repeatedly demonstrated it will exploit suffering for propaganda. That doesn’t mean suffering isn’t real — but it does mean every claim must be thoroughly scrutinized. Too often, however, global outlets like The New York Times, The Guardian, and Stuff have published without confirmation, only issuing updates days later.
Starvation in Gaza may well be occurring. Humanitarian groups have sounded the alarm. But in a media landscape rife with misinformation, every image, every anecdote must be questioned — not to deny suffering, but to preserve the truth.
Because when lies masquerade as evidence, the real victims — whether Palestinian civilians or the truth itself — are the ones who suffer the most.
July 30, 2025
Trump may live to regret suing Murdoch for libel regarding Epstein’s birthday card
Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein and Rupert Murdoch in New York County Supreme edit. © Alan Woodward/The NewYorkBudgets
Donald Trump has never shied away from a fight. In fact, it’s practically his brand. But in launching a $10 billion libel lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch, Dow Jones, and two Wall Street Journal reporters over a birthday card allegedly sent to Jeffrey Epstein, Trump may have walked into a legal minefield of his own making.
The lawsuit centers around a Journal story detailing a bizarre 2003 birthday card supposedly authored by Trump to Epstein. According to the article, the note contained several typed lines framed by the outline of a naked woman, hand-drawn in thick marker. The letter reportedly included a third-person conversation between “Trump” and Epstein, with enigmatic phrases such as “enigmas never age” and the cryptic sign-off: “A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.”
Trump has vehemently denied authorship of the card. In a furious social media post, he declared: “These are not my words, not the way I talk. Also, I don’t draw pictures.” He further asserted the note was a forgery fabricated by “unnamed Democrats,” and called the Journal a “useless rag,” promising “a POWERHOUSE Lawsuit against everyone involved.”
For Murdoch, 93, and Trump, 78, this isn’t their first confrontation. The media mogul’s outlets — most prominently Fox News and the Journal — were skeptical of Trump during the 2016 primaries before eventually aiding his path to the presidency. Their relationship has since oscillated between strategic alliance and mutual contempt. But this lawsuit could mark a definitive rupture.
The legal hurdles Trump faces are towering. The landmark Supreme Court case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) still stands — despite Justice Clarence Thomas’s wish to revisit it. Under Sullivan, public figures suing for libel must prove “actual malice” — that the publisher knowingly printed falsehoods or acted in reckless disregard for the truth. That’s a near-impossible standard to meet when the defendant is The Wall Street Journal, not a tabloid like the National Enquirer.
Moreover, reports suggest the card came from Department of Justice archives. If so, the Journal’s sourcing may have been both legitimate and well-documented. Dow Jones has vowed to “vigorously defend” its reporting, stating, “We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our journalism.”
If Trump hoped to intimidate Murdoch into silence or submission, he may have miscalculated. Libel suits, historically, are double-edged swords — especially for the plaintiff. They often invite forensic dissection of the very allegations the plaintiff seeks to bury. Legal legend Roy Cohn, Trump’s onetime mentor, famously advised clients: “Never sue for libel.” The reasons are obvious. Oscar Wilde, Alger Hiss, Gen. William Westmoreland, and Ariel Sharon all sued — and saw their reputations battered further. Some even ended up in prison.
Trump’s reputation is already uniquely impervious to additional tarnish. A New York jury found him liable for sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll. He’s been convicted of 34 felony counts related to hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. His boasts about women and his own sexuality — including in the notorious Access Hollywood tape — are publicly etched in American memory.
So what’s the damage here, really?
Legal analysts suspect Trump’s motivations may have more to do with uncovering sources through discovery than restoring his name. His lawyers have already requested that Murdoch be deposed quickly, citing his advanced age and reported health concerns. “I hope Rupert and his ‘friends’ are looking forward to the many hours of depositions and testimonies,” Trump posted. That may sound like bravado, but it betrays an ulterior aim: flushing out who leaked the card and what else they may know.
But discovery cuts both ways. Murdoch’s attorneys will be free to interrogate the origins and nature of Trump’s long, checkered relationship with Epstein — one that spanned at least 15 years. How close were they? Did Trump know about Epstein’s illegal activities? Did he ever participate, enable, or turn a blind eye? Why did their relationship allegedly sour in 2004 over a Palm Beach mansion? Was that really the end?
Those depositions may expose far more than Trump bargained for — not just about his ties to Epstein, but about his broader conduct and associations.
Trump has filed and settled media lawsuits before. He reportedly reached a $15 million agreement with ABC after George Stephanopoulos mistakenly said he had been “convicted of rape.” A recent $16 million CBS settlement over a 60 Minutes segment seemed more about easing Paramount’s merger path than Trump’s legal merit. But those cases were relatively tame compared to what this Journal suit could unleash.
Murdoch’s legal team is not likely to blink. While The Wall Street Journal ran a curious follow-up story on Epstein’s “Birthday Book” that included letters from Bill Clinton and billionaire Leon Black, it offered little new insight — possibly a strategic nod or an effort to show editorial balance. But sources close to the matter insist Murdoch has no intention of settling.
Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein with President Bill Clinton at the White House in 1993. © THE WILLIAM J. CLINTON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY/MEGA
And perhaps he shouldn’t. Trump is often at his most reckless when wounded. Peggy Noonan aptly observed that “he fights even when he will hurt himself, because the fight is all.” But in this case, the fight may well invite ruin. Trump could inadvertently open the floodgates to evidence, testimony, and revelations far more damaging than a birthday card.
He may soon learn what every good trial lawyer knows: In libel litigation, the courtroom is often the last place you want your secrets to surface.
July 29, 2025
The continuing saga of the Hunter Biden cover-up
Hunter Biden in U.S. News Papers. © The NewYorkBudgets
In Washington, the worst-kept secrets are often the most dangerous ones. And in the case of Hunter Biden, the attempt to keep those secrets buried has created a scandal less about personal misconduct and more about how deeply politicized our justice system has become. The more we learn, the more it becomes clear: the cover-up is still very much underway — and it reaches the highest levels of American power.
This month, Hunter Biden reemerged on the national stage not to answer questions, but to posture as a victim — blaming Republicans, the media, and even some Democrats for his legal troubles. But far more revealing than his public statements was the quiet release of explosive congressional testimony from special counsel David Weiss, the man who has overseen the increasingly murky, five-year federal investigation into Hunter’s business dealings.
Weiss told the House Judiciary Committee that investigators lacked the evidence to charge Hunter under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), a claim that flies in the face of years of frustration expressed by IRS agents on the case. Those agents — Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler — risked their careers and reputations to blow the whistle on what they saw as a systemic campaign of obstruction by senior DOJ officials, particularly when leads brought them close to Joe Biden.
According to their forthcoming book The Whistleblowers vs. the Big Guy, the IRS team had compelling evidence that Hunter Biden’s business model revolved around foreign lobbying while his father was Vice President — including for Burisma, the corrupt Ukrainian energy giant that paid him up to $1 million a year; Chinese government-linked firms like BHR and CEFC; and clients in Romania and Kazakhstan. All roads, they say, led to “Political Figure 1” — DOJ’s euphemism for then–Vice President Joe Biden.
In fact, the very first email revealed from Hunter’s now-infamous laptop was from a Burisma executive thanking him for arranging a meeting with his father the previous night. That wasn’t just a casual hello. Hunter had reportedly invited his dad to a private dinner at Café Milano in 2015, attended by businessmen from Ukraine, Russia, and Kazakhstan, as confirmed by his former associate Devon Archer in congressional testimony.
Emails showed that Hunter’s lobbying firm, Blue Star Strategies, was retained to influence U.S. officials — a textbook FARA violation. When IRS agents tried to include references to Joe Biden in search warrant requests, they were explicitly told to remove them. Assistant U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf reportedly wrote in August 2020, “There should be nothing about Political Figure 1 in here.”
Why? Optics.
Wolf also blocked a warrant for a guesthouse on Joe Biden’s Delaware property where Hunter had been living. Even after agents found a July 30, 2017 WhatsApp message in which Hunter demanded $10 million from a Chinese executive — while claiming his father was physically present with him — they weren’t allowed to confirm Joe’s location at the time using geolocation data.
“I am sitting here with my father,” Hunter wrote. “We would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled… I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows… you will regret not following my direction.”
To most, this message was not only a glaring contradiction of Joe Biden’s repeated claim that he “never discussed business” with his son, but also strong circumstantial evidence of his involvement in influence-peddling. Yet investigators were denied the ability to pursue it.
“The message was clear,” wrote Shapley and Ziegler. “Although we were investigating Joe Biden’s son — who, it seemed, had often involved his father in his shady overseas business dealings — none of our materials were supposed to mention Joe Biden.”
When warrants were denied, when lines of inquiry were shut down, when Hunter’s attorneys were tipped off — it wasn’t incompetence. It was protection. And it was political.
Compare this with how the FBI handled investigations of Donald Trump. The bureau treated the unverified Steele dossier — funded by the Clinton campaign — as legitimate evidence, using it to launch a full-blown surveillance operation. They raided Trump’s home in Florida over classified documents. They indicted his associates for FARA violations, including Paul Manafort. And when whistleblower Gal Luft provided DOJ officials with early evidence implicating Hunter and Jim Biden in Chinese influence schemes, not only was his information buried, but Luft himself was later charged with FARA violations and now sits jailed in Cyprus.
The selective enforcement is staggering. It seems FARA is used as a sword against political enemies — but becomes invisible when it implicates the sitting President’s son.
Even when Weiss finally brought felony tax and gun charges against Hunter, it was only after the sweetheart plea deal unraveled under scrutiny. That original deal would have immunized Hunter from further prosecution — even over future FARA violations. Weiss stripped Shapley and Ziegler from the investigation after suspecting whistleblowing activity. The Office of Special Counsel has since found that the IRS illegally retaliated against them for protected disclosures to Congress.
Meanwhile, the mainstream press has continued to downplay or ignore the core allegations: that Hunter Biden monetized his father’s position — and that Joe Biden, despite repeated denials, may have known, enabled, or directly participated in the scheme.
In the closing days of his presidency, Joe Biden reportedly considered — and may still pursue — a broad, retroactive pardon for his son that could sweep away lingering legal risks, including those stemming from the CEFC deal, Romanian payments, and other offshore transactions dating back over a decade.
At every stage — from laptop censorship, to law enforcement interference, to media disinterest — the effort to protect the Bidens has been unmistakable. And the result is not just the slow death of this investigation. It’s a chilling message to every future whistleblower and investigator: some people, and some families, are simply untouchable.
The Hunter Biden saga is no longer just about one man’s poor choices. It’s about the institutional corruption that has metastasized around him — a rot so deep that even the truth struggles to survive.
Until that changes, the cover-up continues.
July 29, 2025
Mamdani’s anti-police stance spells crime and chaos for NYC — it’s part of his agenda
Zohran Mamdani claims he “no longer believes,” as he did just five years ago, that the New York City Police Department is a “wicked and corrupt” institution that must be “defunded” and “dismantled.”
He says he really didn’t mean it when he blamed “the police themselves” for “perpetrating an enormous amount” of violent crime, “especially with regard to sexual violence.”
He insists he was misunderstood when he tweeted, “The NYPD is racist, anti-queer and a major threat to public safety.”
Bull. Mamdani will be a disaster for public safety in New York City if he becomes our mayor.
A look at his agenda makes it crystal clear.
First and worst of all, he’ll add no police officers to the force — and will cut the hours of those who remain.
The NYPD’s 32,000-officer headcount is well below the 34,300 force of 2019, the safest year in more than 40 years. Index felony crimes are 26% higher today.
The city has compensated for the reduced patrol strength via overtime, which pays for extra subway police patrols, arrest processing and investigations and keeping order at protests and public events.
Yet Mamdani has long railed against police overtime and plans to eliminate it to fund his other programs — notably his Department of Community Safety.
Reducing overtime without expanding the force means fewer police on the street, making the city less safe and more chaotic.
Mamdani also remains full-steam-ahead on closing Rikers Island, which currently houses some 7,600 inmates — and replacing it with new borough-based jails containing room for just 4,100. (As a candidate for Assembly in 2020, he advocated building no Rikers replacement at all.)
That will put thousands of the most dangerous repeat offenders in the city on the street, with 2,500 of them lodged in “supportive housing” in a neighborhood near you, under the aegis of Mamdani’s DCS.
Mamdani has signed on to the Democratic Socialists of America’s “Agenda for Decarceration,” which calls for fully eliminating cash bail, repealing all mandatory minimum sentences, decriminalizing sex work and more. He has not repudiated those principles.
We’ve seen this movie before: When the city released 2,000 Rikers inmates under “bail reform” in 2020, crime shot up by 20%. When we released another 2,000 during the COVID-19 pandemic, shootings and murders doubled.
Now the city’s jail population stands at about 7,600, and crime has begun to slowly decrease.
Mamdani’s decarceration agenda will reverse that progress, as he pressures DAs to release defendants and drop prosecution of minor crimes.
His enforcement policies, too, will handcuff police instead of wrongdoers.
Incredibly, Mamdani would halt NYPD response to domestic-violence calls, claiming that poor police training escalates such situations. He’d have social workers respond instead.
He opposes any consequences for turnstile jumpers, thereby making farebeating legal. Why pay?
Mamdani opposes involuntary commitment of those with mental illness — you know, the guy sleeping in the subway or ranting at imaginary demons on the street.
“People should be allowed to make their own mental health care decisions,” no matter how delusional they are, he told The City.
He’d further restrict City Hall’s limited cooperation with federal immigration enforcement — meaning that he would release illegal aliens convicted of violent crimes onto our streets without informing ICE.
And a Mayor Mamdani would do lasting damage to public safety via the judges he appoints to the Criminal Court bench.
These judges, who set bail on criminal cases, will be taking their cues from the mayor — and will presumably be on board with his desire to basically do away with incarceration.
Under state law, judges decide whether to set bail, and in what amount. What do you think Mamdani’s judges will do?
And all of this is to say nothing about NYPD morale under a mayor who sees its officers as racist, homophobic sexual predators.
Recruitment and retention are difficult now; just wait until Mamdani takes office.
Politicians can normally be forgiven some of the stupid statements they’ve made in the past, when they were pandering to the public will (or their perception of it).
But Mamdani is no politician. He is a radical socialist and an anti-police ideologue.
He truly believes what he said in 2020: When it comes to crime, he cares more about the 7,600 people in city jails — victims, he believes, of an evil capitalist system — than about the city’s 8.5 million law-abiding citizens.
Under his watch, Rikers will close, jails will empty, criminals will walk free, police officers will be second-guessed and police patrols will decline.
We’ll see fewer arrests made, fewer crimes solved and far more dangerous streets.
But we’ll all be comrades in the glorious Democratic People’s Republic of New York City.
Jim Quinn was executive district attorney in the Queens District Attorney’s Office, where he served for 42 years.
July 17, 2025
Tennis Used to Be Dominated by Teenagers — Not Anymore
The 18-year-old Brazilian João Fonseca. He began this season beating Andrey Rublev at the Australian Open and captured his first career title in Buenos Aires a month later. (Yves Herman/Reuters)
Wherever 18-year-old João Fonseca goes, he hears his name chanted as if he were akin to his countrymen, the Brazilian soccer stars Ronaldo, Pelé and Neymar. Mirra Andreeva, also 18, gets interview requests while she waits in line at a pharmacy in New York City.
Teenage tennis prodigies used to be as common as gut tennis strings. Chris Evert was 16 when she reached her first U.S. Open semifinal in 1971. Steffi Graf was 17 when she captured the first of her six French championships. Monica Seles, Arantxa Sánchez Vicario, Martina Hingis and Maria Sharapova were all under 20 when they catapulted to fame.
Bjorn Borg was 18 when he won the first of his six French Open titles in 1974. Boris Becker was 17 when he grabbed his first Wimbledon. Stefan Edberg, Pete Sampras, Michael Chang and Rafael Nadal were all teenagers when they won their first majors.
Over the years, as the sport became more physical and endurance minded, necessitating more mature bodies, the tide changed. Equipment, fitness and nutritional advances have also allowed players to continue competing into their mid-30s. Forty-year-old Stan Wawrinka, for example, a three-time major winner, is playing in his 20th French Open, which begins on Sunday.
Jakub Mensik, 19, is the only teenage man ranked in the ATP’s top 60. (Aleksandra Szmigiel/Reuters)
There is only one teenage man, Jakub Mensik, 19, of the Czech Republic, ranked in the ATP’s top 60 and only one teenage woman, the Russian Andreeva, who is ranked a career-high No. 6, in the WTA’s top 60. Fonseca is No. 65.
Mirra Andreeva, 18. Last year, she reached the semifinals of the French Open by upsetting second-seeded Aryna Sabalenka. (Alessandra Tarantino/Associated Press)
The game’s current teenagers are coming of age in a potent social media landscape, and that has enhanced their popularity. When Fonseca defeated Learner Tien to win the U.S. Open juniors in 2023, there was a smattering of family members and friends watching on an outside court.
By the time he appeared in Indian Wells and Miami in March, Fonseca’s following was huge. South Americans, many wearing green and yellow soccer jerseys, mobbed the practice courts and screamed so loud during his matches that opponents were left shaking their heads.
“He has the potential to be really a superstar of this game, no doubt about it,” Novak Djokovic said.
Andreeva has been a familiar face for the last few years. Her mental fortitude on the court, along with her quick quips off it, have endeared her to fans worldwide. Her devastating drop shots don’t hurt, either.
Last year, Andreeva reached the semifinals of the French Open by upsetting second-seeded Aryna Sabalenka. Earlier this year, she captured back-to-back WTA titles in Dubai and Indian Wells, beating Iga Swiatek, Elena Rybakina and Sabalenka. She has grown exponentially since teaming with her coach, Conchita Martinez, a former Wimbledon champion, a year ago.
Even Andreeva’s compatriots have taken note.
“It’s incredible what she’s been able to do at such a young age,” said Jessica Pegula, last year’s U.S. Open runner-up. “I think she’s going to win a lot of tournaments and a lot of matches for the next 10 years. She moves really well, but it’s her court sense and her ability to compete. And she’s only going to get better.”
A little more than a year ago, Fonseca was still considering playing college tennis at the University of Virginia, where he planned to major in business. His father, Christiano, runs a hedge fund in Brazil. The family has always stressed education.
“I think every teenager needs to think about going to college,” said Fonseca, who altered his plan when he reached the quarterfinals at the Rio Open in his hometown last year. “At least to visit, to talk to coaches, not simply just say, ‘I’m going directly to the pros.’”
For Fonseca, the transition to the pro tour has appeared seamless. After winning the ATP’s Next Gen Finals last December, he began this season beating Andrey Rublev at the Australian Open and captured his first career title in Buenos Aires a month later. This will be his first French Open main draw. He was also named to Team World for this year’s Laver Cup in San Francisco.
Fonseca’s game is well-suited for hard courts and the clay he grew up on. His greatest attribute is his lack of fear.
“I like what I’m seeing from him,” said the third-ranked Alexander Zverev. “He has tremendous power from both sides and quite a good serve. This is the best time because everything seems so easy. You see the tennis ball, the guy across the net, and there’s no thought of anything else.”
Fonseca doesn’t see it that way. “Actually, it is not easy,” he said. “There are a lot of expectations. I’ve had a lot of struggles, and I was losing more matches even though I was playing better. I had to understand that I was young and I needed more maturity.”
Fonseca never had posters of former champions on his bedroom walls. He never pretended, during hours of practice, that he was playing in the final of Roland Garros against Nadal.
“I did have three shirts of Roger Federer,” Fonseca said, “but I was just thinking, ‘Let’s see if I have time to play Roger [before he retires].’ But I missed it.”
Fonseca has a long way to go to equal the feats of the Brazilians Maria Bueno and Gustavo Kuerten. Bueno, a Hall of Famer and world No. 1 in 1959, won seven major singles and 12 major doubles titles.
Kuerten, a three-time French Open champion, has made it a point not to put pressure on Fonseca by bombarding him with advice. Instead, he funnels information through his coach, Guilherme Teixeira.
Fonseca did share a locker room once with Kuerten, during Brazil’s 2023 Davis Cup tie against China in Florianopolis, Brazil, when Fonseca was a practice partner for the team.
“He just talked about maturity, told us to enjoy playing Davis Cup,” Fonseca said. “Playing for our country was very important to him.”
After he won the Buenos Aires title in February, Fonseca said he received messages of congratulations from Neymar and Ronaldo, who both began their pro soccer careers while still in their teens. Fonseca was stunned to be recognized by his idols.
If he has a dream, it is not to win majors and become No. 1, though that would be OK, too.
“If I had one goal,” Fonseca said with a sly smile, “it would just be to make history for Brazil.”
May 23, 2025
Come what may in his federal trial, Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs deserves to remain the outcast he has become
The federal trial against Sean Combs that begins Monday in the Southern District of New York follows an indictment that accuses the entertainment mogul of human trafficking and drug trafficking, and of using his considerable wealth and power and brute force to keep his alleged victims silent. Combs has denied all the charges the government has brought against him and rejected a plea deal. The founder of Bad Boy Records is no stranger to the courts or to having trouble swirling around him. But this is the first time he stands accused by the U.S. Department of Justice; he’s never faced charges as serious as those he faces now.
The founder of Bad Boy Records is no stranger to the courts or to having trouble swirling around him.
In November 2023, R&B singer Cassie, whose legal name is Casandra Ventura and who had an on-again, off-again relationship with Combs, filed a lawsuit accusing Combs of beating, kicking, stomping and raping her and forcing her into sex with male prostitutes. Combs, who denied the claims the artist made against him, settled with her the next day. A statement from Combs’ attorney Ben Brafman said, “Mr. Combs’ decision to settle the lawsuit does not in any way undermine his flat-out denial of the claims.”
Then, in May 2024, CNN released a 2016 security video from a hotel hallway showing Combs physically assaulting Cassie, including kicking and dragging her. Combs responded in an Instagram post that what he did happened during a dark time in his life. “I was f—-d up. I hit rock bottom. But I make no excuses. My behavior on that video is inexcusable. I take full responsibility for my actions in that video.”
Combs was arrested in September and accused of hosting what he reportedly called “freak offs,” which the government describes as coerced sexual acts that Combs organized and recorded.
Since November 2023, according to The Washington Post, there have been well over 70 lawsuits accusing Combs of sexual assault. He has denied all such allegations. And those cases against him haven’t been proved. But it’s hard not to put him in the same category as celebrities such as R. Kelly and Harvey Weinstein, powerful men accused of sexual abuse going back decades. We should ask ourselves why our society seems so willing to ignore the whispers and rumors and bits of evidence that link powerful men to violence against women.
The violence Combs inflicts on Ventura in that unearthed hotel surveillance video is so awful it’s nearly unwatchable. It’s bad news for Combs, then, that U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian has ruled that it’s admissible evidence the jury will get to see. Prosecutors say the hotel surveillance video shows Combs, wearing only a white towel around his waist, trying to drag Ventura back to a room where a “freak off” was happening.
Since November 2023, according to The Washington Post, there have been well over 70 lawsuits accusing Combs of sexual assault.
To be sure, that video does not automatically make Combs guilty of the charges the federal government has brought against him. But it’s clear why his team fought so hard to keep it out of evidence.
Combs’ team has argued that CNN sped up the hotel surveillance video and ran it out of sequence. CNN has said it did not alter the video its source presented to the network.
Combs has spent a career being a “shiny suit man” who nonetheless has been accused of disturbing flashes of violence. He was found guilty of criminal mischief in 1996 for threatening a New York Post photographer with a gun, and he paid a $1,000 fine. In April 1999, he was booked and charged with two felonies against rival record executive Steve Stoute, who says Combs and his bodyguards beat him with their fists and with a Champagne bottle and a chair. Combs publicly apologized and Stoute asked for a dismissal of the charges. Combs, whose childhood nickname “Puffy” was a description of the way he’d huff and puff when he lost his temper, pleaded guilty to harassment and was sentenced to a day of anger management classes.
Combs was acquitted, though, after being criminally charged after a December 1999 shootout in a club in New York that left three people injured. A jury decided that the state didn’t prove Combs to be in possession of a gun or that he’d bribed witnesses in that case, but jurors convicted Bad Boy artist Shyne (real name Moses Barrow) and he was sent to prison.
Combs’ history of brushes with the law may have added to his allure. But the fact that he’d never been convicted of a felony seemed to make him edgy and cool enough for Hollywood A-listers and the country’s movers and shakers to keep him as an associate. At the height of his popularity, there didn’t appear to be any celebrity who was too big (or considered him too toxic) to appear at a Combs party.
There didn’t appear to be any celebrity who was too big (or considered him too toxic) to appear at a Combs party.
Too many people reflexively assume that when word gets out that a celebrity is abusive to women that it’s nothing but a smear campaign meant to tarnish that person’s legacy. The race factor also has a peculiar impact. Some people might not always love the person who’s being accused but don’t trust that they’re being treated fairly. And the accused should be treated fairly. No matter how awful the charges against Combs, he has the right to a fair trial.
That said, many might still be denying that Combs has been violent and characterizing him as some kind of victim, but for the hotel surveillance video that captures him attacking Ventura in the exact manner she had described in her November 2023 lawsuit. Ventura is likely to be a prominent witness as the Department of Justice attempts to prove to jurors that Combs has a penchant for abusive behavior and violent tactics.
One of the messages of the #MeToo movement was that for too long, we, the public, have helped enable men, especially powerful men, to routinely hurt women. And as Combs goes on trial, we should be asking ourselves how much has changed since the start of #MeToo.
In trying to keep the hotel surveillance footage out of the trial, Combs’ lawyers said the video “immediately and dramatically turned the tide of public opinion” against their client. They’re right. No matter what happens at the trial, for what he did to Cassie, the bad boy can expect to be a permanent pariah — as he should be.
May 11, 2025
Israel’s new plan strongly suggests it is engaged in ethnic cleansing in Gaza
Young Palestinians pass destroyed buildings Monday in Khan Younis, Gaza. (Abed Rahim Khatib / Anadolu/Getty Images)
Israel has unveiled a startling new plan for escalating its domination of the Gaza Strip that all but openly declares an ethnic cleansing agenda meant to permanently alter life and demography in the enclave. The signs that things were headed in this dark direction have been clear for a while. But Israel can be so plain-spoken in part because President Donald Trump is not just supporting Israel, but also celebrating neocolonialism as a legitimate foreign policy goal.
NBC News reported that Israel’s security Cabinet has “unanimously approved a plan to seize all of the Gaza Strip in what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said would be an intensive military operation aimed at defeating Hamas.” The Israeli army is calling up tens of thousands of reserve soldiers for the effort. Netanyahu said the plan to take over the territory means the Israeli military will no longer “enter and then exit” from combat zones but do the “opposite” — indefinitely control any territory it seizes. And the plan calls for a mass displacement of Gaza’s Palestinian population to the southern part of the territory. BBC News reported that far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said that “an Israeli victory in Gaza would see the territory ‘entirely destroyed’ and its residents ‘concentrated’ in the south, from where they would ‘start to leave in great numbers to third countries.’” Smotrich and his colleague Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir have in the past also called for new Israeli settlements in Gaza.
This is an all-out assault on human rights and the concept of self-determination.
Alongside those plans, Israel’s security Cabinet approved a plan to change the way international aid flows into Gaza, which would involve Israel wresting control of the distribution of aid from international organizations. Under the new policy, aid would be distributed through designated hubs that would, according to The Washington Post, only distribute a tenth of what Israel did during the ceasefire, would be protected by American security contractors and would use facial recognition screening. The United Nations rejected that plan as “dangerous” and described it as “designed to reinforce control over life-sustaining items as a pressure tactic — as part of a military strategy.” Currently, Gaza is in the midst of its third month of a total Israeli blockade of food, fuel and medicine — and the plan to reopen (insufficient) humanitarian aid is only meant to take effect after the population is herded to the south.
Israel’s retaliation against Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, war crimes has been going on for so long and with such intensity that its conduct may have begun to feel normal to many. But it must be said that this is the stuff of nightmares. This is an all-out assault on human rights and the concept of self-determination, and the U.S. cannot claim credibility on those matters either while supporting it.
Israeli officials say there is a “window of opportunity” for a new ceasefire deal during Trump’s visit to the Middle East next week that could forestall the occupation plan, but there’s little reason to be optimistic given Netanyahu’s decision to unilaterally renege on the last one. Hamas has also said that there was “no point” to negotiations while the blockade remained in place.
Israel’s starvation and bombardment regime — which many human rights organizations, human rights experts and genocide scholars have described as genocidal — has long telegraphed an agenda to render Gaza uninhabitable and force one of two outcomes: death or displacement. But this plan of calling up reservists for indefinite occupation is new. I asked Yousef Munayyer, the head of the Palestine/Israel Program at the Arab Center Washington D.C., whether Gaza is entering a categorically new phase since Israel began its response to the Oct. 7 attacks.
“It is and isn’t. In some ways it is, because now you have the Israeli government and the security Cabinet within the Israeli government formally adopting this as a plan and making very clear their intentions to the public,” Munayyer said. “But I would also argue that this has been the intention all along, if you judge them by their actions and their lack of willingness to articulate a vision for Gaza that was different than this.”
In other words, Israel is feeling more empowered to be forthright about its endgame of making Gaza uninhabitable for Palestinians.
Daniel Levy, president of the U.S./Middle East Project and a former Israeli peace negotiator under Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Yitzhak Rabin, told me Israel has gotten here by constantly pushing the boundaries of how it can mistreat the Palestinians since Hamas’ attacks and seeing what happens. “Israel has been consistently testing the waters of what it could get away with, whether impunity is still in place,” Levy wrote in an email. “Each time the answer comes back that there is no meaningful pressure.” Each subsequent move, he wrote, “brings into sharper focus the prospect of mass displacement or mass ethnic cleansing.”
The permissiveness began under President Joe Biden, who offered unconditional support for Israel as it began its brutalization of Gaza and offered only modest public criticism and a one-off suspension of one shipment of munitions to Israel as it leveled the territory. It’s unclear how Biden would have reacted to these latest plans — if that “red line” that never emerged under his watch would have finally made an appearance.
The situation is ripe for a bigger, more permanent Israeli presence in Gaza than its pre-2005 settlements in the enclave. “The International arena is different in terms of a U.S. and Western zeitgeist, which is far more indulgent of aggressive and excessive Israeli actions,” Levy wrote in that email. “Israeli society is in some ways more divided, but in others, more unified in its willingness to support extreme and genocidal measures against Palestinians.”
“Things are far more fluid than in the past, with a far more zero-sum mindset guiding policy,” he added.
Munayyer and Levy noted that Trump’s own language has likely emboldened Israel to be blunter and more aggressive. Specifically, Trump’s idea to transform Gaza to create a Middle Eastern “Riviera” there, populated by “international people.” Trump’s erasure of Palestinians and fantasy of a new population dovetails with the right-wing segment of the Israeli government who want to annex Gaza. As Trump talks about taking control of the Panama Canal and Greenland and tries to undercut Ukraine’s position in peace negotiations with Russia, Israel may be wagering that it has a rare window of impunity for territorial control and possible annexation. Unfortunately, that calculation may be sound.
May 11, 2025