A disturbing pattern has emerged in contemporary Jewish political behavior. According to exit polls, approximately one-third of Jewish voters in New York City supported Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist candidate who has been vocally critical of Israel and reluctant to condemn Hamas terrorism. Survey data indicates that 16 percent of U.S. Jewish adults believe Hamas’s reasons for fighting Israel are valid. Reports suggest that roughly 12 percent of Jewish students at Columbia participated in pro-Palestinian campus protests. Multiple Jewish organizations including Jewish Voice for Peace, IfNotNow, Neturei Karta, the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, Jewdas, and Independent Jewish Voices have positioned themselves in opposition to Israel. Even segments of the Reform Jewish movement have adopted positions sympathetic to Israel’s critics. They may not understand that Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the Iranian regime explicitly seek their destruction. This phenomenon is remarkable. It rivals “Queers for Palestine” in its apparent contradiction, a coalition that ignores Hamas’s brutal treatment of LGBTQ individuals in Gaza. The comparison is not hyperbolic. Both represent groups supporting movements that would, by their own stated principles, oppose or harm them. Consider the absence of analogous behavior in other communities. One does not find undocumented immigrants cheering for ICE enforcement operations. It would be extraordinary to discover black Americans seeking membership in the Ku Klux Klan. During the Troubles, Irish Americans did not celebrate British policy in Northern Ireland. No descendant of the Aztecs sends charitable contributions to foundations honoring the Conquistadores. Why, then, do a significant minority of Jews adopt political positions that appear contrary to their community’s interests and even survival? We propose six hypotheses to explain this phenomenon. Hypothesis One: Secular Jews Are Committed to Liberalism, Not Judaism Most of these Jews are no longer Jewish in any lived sense, but liberals/leftists. Liberalism, and especially civil rights activism was, in effect, an accommodation secular Jews made with American life, a way to shed their ethnicity without reverting to religious orthodoxy. They largely retained their “Jewish” identities because doing so carried no penalty in America and even provided a certain aura of distinctiveness. Now liberalism, having shifted from equal rights to racial identity have turned on them, and they are just “white,” exploiting all of the privileges accruing thereto. As Jacob Savage wrote recently in Tablet, “American liberalism, our civic religion, has turned on us.” When the choice is forced upon them, they’re commitment is to liberalism, not Jewishness. Hypothesis Two: Lack of Information Perhaps these Jews simply lack awareness of the positions and goals of the movements they support. They may not have read the original Hamas covenant, which states: “The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: ‘O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.'” They may not understand that Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the Iranian regime explicitly seek their destruction. We find this explanation insufficient. Jewish Americans are, as a demographic group, fairly well-educated and informed. They are disproportionately represented among professionals, academics, inventors, and intellectuals. The Ashkenazi Jewish population consistently scores among the highest on standardized measures of cognitive ability. It strains credulity to suggest that such a well-informed community simply fails to understand the positions of the groups they support. Hypothesis Three: The Influence of Progressive Academia Paradoxically, the high educational achievement of American Jews may contribute to their political positions. Jews are overrepresented not only among college graduates but among those with advanced degrees. And American academia, particularly at elite institutions, has become increasingly hostile to Israel. The professoriate at major universities leans heavily toward progressive and leftist ideologies. Few major universities could pass what might be called the “ideological diversity test“: finding even 10 (not 10 percent, but 10 individuals) faculty members who identify as conservative or libertarian. This ideological monoculture has embraced a framework that categorizes Israel as a colonialist oppressor state and Palestinians as an oppressed indigenous population. Through exposure to critical theory, postcolonial studies, and intersectionality frameworks, Jewish students and intellectuals have absorbed an analytical lens that casts Israel as the villain in the Middle East conflict. The concepts of affirmative action, DEI initiatives, and “decolonization” discourse have been applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in ways that delegitimize Israel’s existence. Jews who have spent years in this intellectual environment may have internalized these frameworks even when they contradict their own community’s interests. Hypothesis Four: Universalist Ethics and Particularist Tensions Jewish intellectual tradition has long emphasized universal ethical principles, justice for all peoples, and skepticism of tribal loyalties. The prophetic tradition called for justice even when it contradicted immediate national interests. Tikkun olam, the imperative to repair the world, has been interpreted by many progressive Jews as requiring support for all oppressed peoples. This universalist ethical commitment can create a genuine tension. Some Jews believe that supporting Palestinian national aspirations, even while opposing Hamas, represents the consistent application of their values. They may distinguish between criticizing Israeli government policies and supporting Israel’s enemies, even if outside observers conflate the two positions. However, this explanation fails to account for Jews who explicitly support Hamas or march alongside those calling for Israel’s elimination. There is a difference between advocating for Palestinian rights and supporting organizations committed to Jewish genocide, (though those lines are now increasingly blurred). The line has been crossed when Jews join movements that celebrate October 7th or chant “from the river to the sea.” Hypothesis Five: A Modern Stockholm Syndrome Jews constitute approximately 0.2 percent of the world’s population. Throughout history, they have been expelled from host countries, subjected to pogroms, and faced systematic persecution. The Holocaust represents only the next most recent and systematic attempt at their annihilation. Even today, Israel faces more United Nations condemnations than all other countries combined. In 2022, the UN General Assembly passed 15 resolutions against Israel compared to 13 against all other nations. Numerous countries accuse Israel of war crimes and genocide. Antisemitism surges on both right and left. Jews face attacks on campuses, in North American and European cities, and online. The libertarian movement, once welcoming to Jewish intellectuals, now includes prominent voices that have turned against Israel and ostracized pro-Israel libertarians. In this environment of near-universal hostility, some Jews may experience something analogous to Stockholm Syndrome. Feeling besieged, isolated, and vulnerable, they identify with their accusers. By joining the chorus against Israel, they hope to be seen as “the good Jews,” distinct from those deserving of hatred. It is a survival strategy born of fear. Hypothesis Six: Anticipatory Appeasement This hypothesis extends the previous one. Some Jews may calculate that antisemitic violence is inevitable and prepare for it through political positioning. They reason that when Hamas supporters or others come calling, they can point to their political credentials: “I voted progressive. I supported Mamdani. I marched with Palestinians. I wore the keffiyeh at campus protests. I was among the Harvard students who condemned Israel on October 8, 2023, before the IDF even responded.” The implicit message: “I am one of the good ones. Pass over my door and find another Jew to attack.” This strategy has historical precedent. The Association of German National Jews (Verband nationaldeutscher Juden), founded in 1921, had between 3,000 and 10,000 members who believed they could accommodate themselves to the Nazi regime. In a 1934 manifesto, they wrote: “We have always held the well-being of the German people and the fatherland, to which we feel inextricably linked, above our own well-being. Thus, we greeted the results of January 1933, even though it has brought hardship for us personally.“ They believed that by demonstrating loyalty to Germany and distinguishing themselves from Eastern European Jews, they would be spared persecution. They were not. The organization was dissolved in November 1935, its founder was arrested by the Gestapo, and most members and their families were ultimately murdered in the Holocaust. A Pattern Without Precedent These six hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. The phenomenon of Jewish anti-Zionism likely stems from multiple, overlapping causes. The influence of progressive academia combines with universalist ethical commitments. The psychological pressure of isolation and hostility intensifies the temptation toward appeasement. What remains clear is that this political behavior is historically anomalous and potentially catastrophic. Jews supporting movements that explicitly call for their destruction represent a form of political self-sabotage without parallel in other communities. Whether driven by misguided political beliefs, miseducation, ideological commitment, psychological vulnerability, or calculated appeasement, the result is the same: Jews providing legitimacy and support to those who would destroy them. The question is not whether these Jews have the right to hold these positions. In free societies, they certainly do. The question is whether they understand the historical pattern they are repeating and the consequences that have always followed. READ MORE: Who Is to Blame for Civilian Deaths in Gaza? It’s Not Fair! Disproportionate Deaths in the Middle East When Seeing Race is Helpful

I’m looking for ways to win Sydney Sweeney over. I thought about sending her flowers, but that’s far too conventional. I looked into the price of a Times Square billboard, but these days any idiot advertises there. I wrote her a poem, but tossed it into the fireplace because it was unbearably corny; only I would try to rhyme love with fudge or glance with marzipan. In the romantic-era courtship manuals I collect, they insist the best way to woo a lady is by serenading her under her balcony. I’ve also considered the pragmatism of love — meaning, asking Jonathan Davino directly how he managed it — but I’m not sure he’d be willing to collaborate with me. Ex-boyfriends these days are strangely unwilling to play matchmaker for their ex-girlfriends. I read that, in ancient times, lovers showed their devotion by sending each other locks of hair. But I wouldn’t want Sydney thinking her secret admirer is a hairless cat. I suppose I could dedicate an entire column to her, inviting her on a date, but I tried that once with Jana Hocking and the result was catastrophic: her blatant indifference still stings. Anyway, I don’t want a date with you anymore, Jana; my eyes are only for Sydney now. Your time’s up. I’m sorry you missed your chance to meet the greatest sex symbol in national journalism — a pot-bellied sex symbol suffering alarming hair loss, but a sex symbol nonetheless. I hope you’re happy now with Charles Gasparino, Adam Brodsky, Douglas Murray, or whoever else writes for the Post. Back to my platonic love: in France and Italy, couples seal their affection by hanging padlocks on bridges. In Rome, they’ve had to reinforce more than one bridge to prevent them from collapsing under the weight of millions of locks. As a tribute to Sydney, I’ve hung a padlock with both our names on a pair of jeans — very original, I know — but I’m not sure it’s enough to conquer the heart of the beautiful actress. In the romantic-era courtship manuals I collect, they insist the best way to woo a lady is by serenading her under her balcony. I’ve tried it at her mansion in Summerland Key, but unless her security team opens the damn gate, I’ll need a sound system like the Rolling Stones use on tour just so she can faintly hear me from her bedroom — roughly three hundred million miles away from the estate’s entrance. I could compose and record a song in her honor, but I’m trying to win her heart, not convince her to hire a team of hitmen to kill me. I saw a TikToker perform a strange ritual to attract Brad Pitt: she put a piece of paper with his name on it inside a jar of honey. Even though my Christianity keeps me from believing in silly superstitions, I tried it with Sydney. She didn’t show up, obviously, but ants from the entire neighborhood did, because I forgot to close the jar. I also put a small cardboard picture of her in my pocket, pierced by ten needles bearing my name, following an ancient ritual of the Gugu-gugu tribe. I don’t know whether she received any omens in her dreams, but I do know it’s very dangerous to sit down when you’re carrying ten needles in your pocket. The worst part was explaining the source of my testicular pain to the doctor. She looked at me, very seriously, and said: “Stabbing your testicles doesn’t seem like the best way to start a romantic relationship.” Thank you, doctor. I hadn’t thought of that. I’m starting to lose faith in this love story. Maybe we should call it quits, Sydney. But every time I see her on television or read something she says, I fall in love all over again. I suppose you think it’s because of her obvious physical beauty — and yes, that plays a role. But what truly excites me is when Katherine Stoeffel tries to lecture her on moral superiority in GQ, urging her to retract her jeans commercial, and Sydney looks at her with that sweetness that can split you in two and tells wokeism to go to hell in the most elegant, sensual way we’ve ever seen: “I think that when I have an issue that I want to speak about, people will hear.” Let’s admit it took a lot of work to tear down the wall of woke darkness that haunted us for years, but now we live in times of genuine beauty and happiness. Besides, I can’t imagine any way of being a man in this world without being profoundly in love with Sydney Sweeney. And that’s all for today — I’m off to stalk her for a while, to see if I can decipher some secret wink in which she confesses her love for me. Or at least her sense of humor. READ MORE from Itxu Diaz: How Much More Attention Span Do We Have Left to Lose? Today’s Teens: The Generation We’ve Totally Annoyed Bill Gates Has Discovered Something More Profitable Than the Climate Apocalypse

Have you ever interrupted some axe-grinder mid-rant by asking “Who is the ‘they’”? The latest in editorial pandemics  brings up the question: “Who is we?” All over the e-zines and some print media, readers are hit with titles beginning “what we get wrong about …. “ — you name it. Taking the bait won’t pay off in any enlightening revelations. Clicking onto one about Davey Crockett and the Alamo revealed the very same facts I got out of Robert Penn Warren’s “Remember the Alamo” in 5th grade. It was published in 1958. What they misunderstand is that dangerous felons only understand overwhelming physical subjugation. Stale facts are bad enough. This literary affliction gets worse as it moves up the food chain. In the case covered here, an expert explains to the laity that deadly violence is one big misunderstanding. Zohran Mamdami called The New Yorker “The greatest magazine in the world” recently. If he could hold that larcenous streak down to only stealing lines, the city might have a chance. Does the mayor-elect know that the original editor of the periodical, Harold Ross, beat him to it by nearly a century? Of course, Zo and Harold could mean two different things. Ross said it when the weekly was owned by yeast fortune heir Raoul Fleischmann. In the clutches of Conde-Nast, Eustace Tilley is taking on the look of Alfred E. Neuman stripped of the wit. Sounding like a school-marmy noodge without a clue is a fate that would worry Alfred E. himself. What We Get Wrong About … The once revered non-fiction force, Malcolm Gladwell, pulled the cord on the brainiac bus with: “What We Get Wrong About Violent Crime.” Gladwell focuses on the fatal shooting of Jeremy Brown in Chicago’s south side June 2023. A woman named Carlishia Hood, Brown found, was taking too long ordering her burgers at Maxwell Street Express. Jeremy, whose local nom-de-guerre was “the Knock-Out King,” went off on the lady. When she answered back defiantly, the soon-to-be victim started landing blows on her. The King was busy meting out his discipline when Hood’s 14-year-old son unleashed the leaden brand of retribution at 750-feet-per-second. Anybody who wasn’t raised Mennonite, like Gladwell, might have found this end inevitable for a guy with no qualms about publicly pummeling a woman in south Chicago. What “we” don’t get, Malcolm patiently explains, is that this is an example of “System 1 thinking.” The term comes from a high-brow breakdown of violent interaction by University of Chicago Economics professor Jens Ludwig in the book “Unforgiving Places.” Put simply, in momentary heat people do less thinking and that’s when they hurt people. And, when you’ve got a system going on, can it really be their fault? You see Brown, “made an immediate egocentric assumption: if he knew that special orders were a norm violation, then Hood must know, too. “Given that System 1 assumption,” Ludwig explains, “from there it is natural that Brown believed the person in front of him was deliberately holding things up.” Alas, if Maxwell Street had adopted the jingle — “Special orders do upset us” — a life might have been saved. Speaking of “assumptions,” how “natural” is it to assume beating someone — even a man — to a pulp for being a slowpoke, is anything less than criminal pathology? Gladwell thinks: “Neither Jeremy Brown nor Hood’s son was evil.” Did Brown’s nickname mean anything to this author? Did he think the dead man had spent time in the ring? We — oops — have all considered throttling nuisance customers ahead of us in line. Anyone who actually assaults human speed-bumps while enduring this kind of frustration needs caging. Decent people rarely even say anything. If you don’t believe the ivory tower has risen to oxygen deprived heights, listen to this: Ludwig argues that this is what most homicide looks like. Much of what gets labelled [sic] gang violence, he says, is really just conflict between individuals who happen to be in gangs. We misread these events because we insist on naming the affiliations of the combatants. Imagine, he suggests, if we did this for everyone: ‘This morning by Buckingham Fountain, a financial analyst at Morningstar killed a mechanic for United Airlines.’ Naturally you’d think the place of employment must be relevant to understanding of the shooting, otherwise why mention it at all?’” If Ludwig pulled his head from the clouds and read a newspaper once in a while, he’d know they do mention it. Physicians, like Sam Sheppard and Jeffrey MacDonald, got rivers more ink than any Mafioso who was caught. We expect gangsters to maim and kill. When people from the mainstream establishment do it, it’s far more of a circulation boost. Does this academic, director of the University of Chicago Crime Lab, have any idea why gangs even exist in the first place? Is it just a ritualistic way to make bromance and male bonding more meaningful? The cultural distance between Rhein-Main, were Ludwig comes from, and the U.S. generally is further than miles or kilometers can describe. Before reading this, who knew that the war in Ukraine is really just a conflict between people who happen to be in countries? Whatever you think of Gladwell’s treatment, it’s hard to beat the comic relief. At one point the article maintains the incident might have been averted by calming talk. Maybe, if the one doing the talking looked formidable to Jeremy Brown. At another, we hear that without the gun on hand deadly bloodshed would have resulted in fisticuffs. Sure, a 14-year-old boy up against The Knock-Out King is a fair match to a Neumanized Eustace Tilley. The gun was probably procured because Brown’s type was not uncommon enough in the neighborhood. The article suggests environmental improvements and maintenance can help cut down on the body count. Possibly, but that is small comfort when confronted by people with codes of honor and decorum that senselessly threaten other people’s safety. Society can only be protected from subjects prone to wanton violence by the presence of capable authority. Brown doubtless slipped through cracks many times before a kid settled things. A man capable of delivering a full force punch, or even a pulled one, on a woman over such a trifle did not belong on any street. Ludwig cites FBI stats that “concluded that only 23 per cent of all murders [over 20 years] were instrumental.” By “instrumental” he means planned, so-called rational murders. “77 per cent … were some form of expressive violence.” Culture, of course, colors most expression. The toleration in certain cultures of everyday rage and casual physical altercations, has no threshold. Culture Matters When hollering at strangers is a norm and abandoning civil discourse is condoned, human interaction is apt to become amped up, rowdy and hostile. In such environments, some individuals will draw their own lines of appropriate behavior. Dismissing breaches of civility as “culture” is what is putting people in the ground. In the 2012 Trayvon Martin incident CNN reported: Zimmerman said he was heading back to the vehicle when Martin jumped out, asking him, “What the f***’s your problem?” He said he told Martin, “I don’t have a problem,” but the youth replied, “Now you have a problem,” and attacked him. He said he fell backward after being punched in the nose, and “he was whaling on my head.” A woman writing for Slate found this exchange “implausible.” It’d be interesting to find out how many fights she had seen or been in. It sounds exactly like things I’ve heard before fists flew, more than once. It would be shameful to assail Gladwell for coming out of a decorously peace-loving background. But it hardly qualifies him to write with such certainty about violence. In 1939 after the invasion of Poland, Senator William Borah (R-Idaho) said: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler — all this might have been averted.” Gladwell and Ludwig believe if they could only fine tune social engineering, maniacal bullies will be pacified. What they misunderstand is that dangerous felons only understand overwhelming physical subjugation. Handcuffs, hands on cops, a few years behind iron bars, and a no nonsense judge would have vastly improved Brown’s chances of long-term survival. READ MORE from Tim Hartnett: Trashing the Culture Remember the College Treachery A Tale of Two Films  

Okay this is absolutely wild. In all my years of reporting I have never heard of this happening. A football player at the University of Alabama at Birmingham allegedly stabbed two of his teammates shortly before the Blazers were set to hit the gridiron. BREAKING: UAB Football Player Daniel Mincey Stabs Two Teammates in Training Facility Hours Before Their Game Against South Florida Today pic.twitter.com/bbkpFbuLnd — TaraBull (@TaraBull) November 22, 2025 AP broke the story and reported more details on the stabbing: The two wounded players were in stable condition, interim head coach Alex Mortensen said at the postgame news conference. He added that the team decided to play to honor graduating seniors in the last home game of the season, though several players understandably opted to sit it out due to the incident. The teammate suspected in the stabbing was in custody, the university said. The school did not release the names of the players involved. Daniel Mincey, an offensive lineman who transferred to the school in May, was arrested and booked on charges of aggravated assault and attempted murder in the afternoon, according to Jefferson County Jail records. He was in custody in Birmingham and appeared to be the only UAB player who was arrested Saturday. It was not immediately clear if Mincey had legal representation. Attempts to reach family members for comment were not immediately successful. Here’s the mugshot: Daniel Mincey, a 20-year-old, 6’3″, 315 lb. redshirt freshman offensive lineman, has been arrested for aggravated assault / attempted murder and is currently in the local county jail after allegedly stabbing two teammates this morning at a UAB athletic facility.Here’s Mincey’s… https://t.co/kzhCIfcTUn pic.twitter.com/nHG58QhPXx — michael j. babcock (@mikejbabcock) November 22, 2025 ESPN reported more details on Mincey and reported on the final results of UAB’s game against the University of Southern Florida: The team’s online roster lists Mincey as a 6-foot-4 redshirt freshman from Pompano Beach, Florida, who was previously at the University of Kentucky. Mortensen said that once the team decided to play, the Blazers focused on their normal game-day routines. He also said counseling was being made available for players who want it. The coach declined to share further details about the incident, citing the ongoing investigation. The stabbing occurred on campus at the Football Operations Building. The Blazers lost 48-18 to USF to fall to 3-8 this season and 1-6 in the American Conference. Their last game is Nov. 29 at Tulsa.

It’s been quite a hectic month for Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Last week the Representative from Georgia made national headlines after President Trump announced he was withdrawing his endorsement from her. Just days after Trump axed his endorsement, Greene announced she would be resigning from Congress at the beginning of next year. The move shocked many of her supporters due to the fact it was so sudden. Following Greene’s announcement that she was resigning from office, Time reported Greene’s sudden move may be linked to her running for president in 2028, per Time: Marjorie Taylor Greene is leaving Congress, but that may not be the end of her political ambitions. The Georgia lawmaker has privately told allies that she has considered running for president in 2028, according to two people who have spoken with her directly about the prospect and three others familiar with her thinking. The possibility comes amid the dramatic rupture in Greene’s relationship with President Donald Trump, which contributed to her decision to announce on Friday that she would resign from the House of Representatives in January. Greene did not respond to multiple calls and text messages seeking comment. A spokesperson for the congresswoman also did not reply to multiple requests for comment. NOTUS previously reported that Greene was telling people she wanted to run for president. A hard-right firebrand who built her name as one of Trump’s fiercest defenders, Greene has become an unexpected critic of the President in recent months. She has challenged Trump’s insistence that costs are falling, criticized his handling of the U.S.–Israel relationship, and, most provocatively, pushed him to force the Justice Department to release the Epstein files over his initial objections. Trump responded by calling Greene a “traitor” and publicly disowning her. “I am withdrawing my support and Endorsement of ‘Congresswoman’ Marjorie Taylor Greene, of the Great State of Georgia,” he wrote on Truth Social. “I understand that wonderful, Conservative people are thinking about primarying Marjorie in her District of Georgia, that they too are fed up with her and her antics and, if the right person runs, they will have my Complete and Unyielding Support.” If Greene ultimately decides to run for president, House GOP members familiar with her thinking say they suspect she could play a role akin to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in 2024: a candidate capable of siphoning off votes from the GOP nominee, positioning her to leverage that political capital into a possible role within a future Republican administration. In response to Time’s report, MTG’s daughter Lauren Greene said the report was a lie. Take a look: This is a lie. https://t.co/wNpnvzQDIe — Lauren Greene (@LaurennGreeneS) November 22, 2025 AP reported more on MTG’s sudden resignation: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, a loyal supporter-turned-critic of President Donald Trump who faced his political retribution if she sought reelection, said Friday she is resigning from Congress in January. Greene, in a more than 10-minute video posted online, explained her decision and said she didn’t want her congressional district “to have to endure a hurtful and hateful primary against me by the president we all fought for,” she said. Greene’s resignation followed a public falling-out with Trump in recent months, as the congresswoman criticized him for his stance on files related to Jeffrey Epstein, along with foreign policy and health care. Trump branded her a “traitor” and “wacky” and said he would endorse a challenger against her when she ran for reelection next year. She said her last day would be Jan. 5, 2026.

Okay, Donald Trump Jr. has some explaining to do… A recent video of Donald Trump Jr. kissing the feet of an idol in India has gone viral on X. In a video posted by CNBC-TV18, Donald Trump Jr. is seen entering the Ganpati Temple in India and proceeding to kiss the feet of an Indian idol. His new girlfriend was also seen kissing the idol’s feet. Watch the moment it happened here: US President Donald Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr visited Vantara in Jamnagar. Accompanied by Anant Ambani, he toured the facility & offered prayers at the Ganpati Temple inside the premises Trump Jr had earlier visited the Taj Mahal in Agra#DonaldTrump #Trump #TrumpJr… pic.twitter.com/VSa1dAn9HM — CNBC-TV18 (@CNBCTV18News) November 21, 2025 Here’s how users on X reacted: MAGA is going to go into a mental breakdown https://t.co/0Gufs9cxho pic.twitter.com/tipshP3ybq — Sidharth (@Cloudwatch199) November 21, 2025 Don Jr. offering alms and prayers to the famous H-1B statue in India on behalf of his orange father https://t.co/xV30VKngRi — Starbage (@TGP144) November 21, 2025 NDTV explained why Donald Trump Jr. was in India in the first place: Donald Trump Jr. and his girlfriend, Bettina Anderson, shook a leg to the beats of a Bollywood song at a grand wedding in Udaipur. The occasion was the sangeet ceremony of Netra Mantena, the daughter of US billionaire Padmaja and Rama Raju Mantena, and Vamsi Gadiraju, co-founder and CTO of Superorder, in the city of lakes. The three-day star-studded festivities kicked off on Friday (November 21). The sangeet, hosted by Karan Johar, was a night to remember, with performances by top Bollywood stars, including Ranveer Singh, Shahid Kapoor, Kriti Sanon, and Varun Dhawan. But it was one moment that truly took the spotlight – Ranveer Singh getting Trump Jr. and Anderson to groove to his hit number “What Jhumka?” from Rocky Aur Rani Kii Prem Kahaani. The guests went wild as the actor playfully pulled them onto the stage. The video of the impromptu dance, which has now gone viral on social media, shows Trump Jr. and Anderson dancing together before Ranveer made them dance to the Hindi song. Bettina looked stunning in a gold lehenga-choli, while Ranveer shone in a black formal suit. He also got everyone on stage to dance to Simmba’s song “Aankh Maare” and entertained the guests by singing Gully Boy’s “Apna Time Aayega”. Honestly this was a bad look for Don Jr. What do you think about it? Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below!

Yeah, there’s no chance he will be able to pull this off. A new report has revealed former President George W. Bush is looking to “take back” the Republican Party. The Bush family which were once considered the leader of the Republican Party have in the last decade become outsiders in the Conservative movement after President Trump completely revamped the GOP. WIBC reported more on the rumors that Bush is attempted to make a comeback: Reports from the Daily Mail suggest that new “rumors” are circulating about an alleged effort to bring an end to what some call the “Bush Exile.” This supposed initiative is described as an attempt by certain Republicans to regain control of the GOP from Donald Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement. According to the outlet, there are claims that a sort of behind-the-scenes Republican network—still tied into influential connections nationwide—has been quietly positioning itself to step in once Trump is no longer on the scene. While the former president is said to be unwilling to openly criticize Trump—something that has reportedly frustrated some of his past advisers—he is believed to be open to subtly influencing the party’s direction for the long term. A source identified as a “former Bush official” told the Daily Mail that Trump “knows that there’s no third term option,” and noted that Vice President JD Vance “has a head start” over other Republicans eyeing the 2028 presidential race. The same former official forecast that “there will be a big open field within the Republican Party” in 2028. The outlet also reported that former Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Michael Steele has urged the former president to reengage with GOP politics, saying he possesses “a voice that would resonate with a lot more Americans.” Breitbart News has previously highlighted several remarks George W. Bush made about Trump. In a 2021 conversation with CBS News anchor Norah O’Donnell, Bush expressed that he believed Trump “lacked the ‘humility’ necessary to be an effective leader.” Additionally, Breitbart News reporter John Binder noted that back in October 2019—during Trump’s first term—Bush argued that Trump’s “isolationist United States” was “destabilizing around the world,” warning that an isolationist turn by the U.S. was “dangerous for the sake of peace.” These comments followed Bush’s own tenure in office, during which he led the United States into the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, resulting in the deaths of more than 4,500 American service members in Iraq alone, including over 3,500 killed in combat. Bush has mostly has been keeping quiet from the public but did give a speech recently at former Vice President Dick Cheney’s funeral. Watch a clip of his speech here: Former President George W. Bush: “Twenty-five years ago, I had a big choice to make, a big job to fill. I wanted to know all my options, so I enlisted the help of a distinguished former White House chief of staff and secretary of defense to lead my search for a running mate. Dick… pic.twitter.com/WNI9FcjEcR — CSPAN (@cspan) November 20, 2025 KOMO News reported how Donald Trump Jr. responded to the report: First son Donald Trump Jr. said that the Bush family cannot have control of the Republican Party after his father is out of office. Trump Jr. quote tweeted a post that read, “Report: The Bush family is planning to reclaim control of the Republican Party when the Trump presidency comes to an end.” He responded and said, “We will never let this happen.” According to a report from Breitbart earlier this week, the Bush family is planning to retake control of the GOP after President Donald Trump leaves office. Here’s the post from Don Jr.: We will never let this happen. https://t.co/oO8RC3w4AW — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) November 21, 2025

Let’s hopefully everyone impacted pulls through. On Saturday, a senior citizen apartment complex exploded in Ohio leaving several people hospitalized. Here are some photos from the scene: Explosion rocks an Ohio senior living apartment building. Residents describe it as “a bomb” and “an earthquake.” Multiple injuries reported.INFO: https://t.co/pWvQYhxSJ4 pic.twitter.com/Rm5x0rRu8s — WTRF 7News (@WTRF7News) November 22, 2025 “IT FELT LIKE AN EARTHQUAKE” — MASSIVE EXPLOSION AT OHIO SENIOR APARTMENTSChaos erupted in Austintown, Ohio, after a violent explosion ripped through the Phoenix House senior living apartments just before 1 p.m. Residents say the blast felt like a bomb going off — shaking the… pic.twitter.com/Rc6IyIKRHs — Wienerdogwifi (@wienerdogwifi) November 22, 2025 Fox News provided a more in-depth report on the explosion and provided witness statements: Several people were injured in a large explosion Saturday at a senior living apartment complex in Austintown, Ohio. The explosion, which took out a large portion of the Phoenix House apartment building, happened just before 1 p.m. local time, FOX 8 reported. Austintown Fire Department Assistant Chief Tom O’Hara told the outlet several people were injured, though no fatalities were immediately confirmed. Resident Cindy Duke told FOX 8 the explosion “felt like a bomb.” Another resident, Don Lampley, who has no legs, told the outlet he was watching the Ohio State game with a friend when “there was a big, loud blast, then BOOM!” The cause of the explosion has not yet been released. The Austintown Township Police Department and Mahoning County Sheriff’s Office did not immediately respond to inquiries from Fox News Digital. The explosion comes a year after a Chase Bank exploded in Youngstown, Ohio. Here’s a video from that explosion: Here is the dramatic security video of the explosion at the Chase Bank Building in downtown Youngstown. pic.twitter.com/QdapO52uME — 21 WFMJ (@21WFMJ) May 28, 2024 WPXI reported the explosion at the Chase Bank Building was due to a cut gas line: The National Transportation Safety Board has wrapped up its first full day on the scene of a deadly building explosion that happened at a Chase bank in Youngstown. NTSB officials say that their preliminary investigation has led them to believe that a cut gas line caused the explosion. Officials say crews cut a gas line they did not know was pressurized. The line was cut in the basement of the building. Crews reported smelling no gas but knew something was wrong after a third cut and pulled the fire alarm. The explosion happened just six minutes later. “There is nothing at this point to indicate there was anything nefarious about what happened. All the indications are that this was very much an accident,” said Tom Chapman with the NTSB.

Okay this is big if true. Candace Owens has claimed French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Bridgette Macron have paid for her to be assassinated. Owen’s claims come after the Macron’s have sued Owens for making multiple videos claiming Bridgette Macron was born a man. The Times Now reported more on Candace’s claims that the Macron’s placed a hit on her: Far right American commentator Candace Owens has levelled a shocking charge against the French President, Emmanuel Macron, with whom she is engaged in a legal tussle over her claims about French First Lady Brigitte Macron’s gender identity. In a post on X, Owens wrote that “the Macrons” had paid for her assassination. “Two days ago I was contacted by a high-ranking employee of the French Government. After determining this person’s position and proximity to the French couple, I have deemed the information they gave me to be credible enough to share publicly in the event that something happens. Candace further wrote: “Again, this person provided concrete proof that they are well placed within the French government apparatus. Further to this point, this person claims that Charlie Kirk’s assassin trained with the French legion 13th brigade with multi-state involvement. “Journalist Xavier Poussard’s life is also at risk. This is deadly serious. The head of state of France apparently wants us both dead and has authorized professional units to carry this out. “I ask that every person RETWEET and share this. I do not know who in the American government can be trusted, since this source claims our leaders are aware. But I have more specific information which is definitively verifiable, should they care to reach out to me. To the brave official in France who did this because they were so moved by the evil of Charlie’s public execution to risk their own life— May God bless you. Truly. Let all be revealed.” The Macrons are yet to comment on the matter. Take a look: URGENTTwo days ago I was contacted by a high-ranking employee of the French Government. After determining this person’s position and proximity to the French couple, I have deemed the information they gave me to be credible enough to share publicly in the event that something… — Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) November 22, 2025 Full text: URGENT Two days ago I was contacted by a high-ranking employee of the French Government. After determining this person’s position and proximity to the French couple, I have deemed the information they gave me to be credible enough to share publicly in the event that something happens. In short, this person claims that the Macrons have executed upon and paid for my assassination. Yes, you read that correctly. More specifically, that the green light was given to a small team in National Gendamarie Intervention Group. I am told there is one Israeli that is on this assasination squad and the plans were formalized. Again, this person provided concrete proof that they are well placed within the French government apparatus. Further to this point, this person claims that Charlie Kirk’s assassin trained with the French legion 13th brigade with multi-state involvement. Journalist Xavier Poussard’s life is also at risk. This is deadly serious. The head of state of France apparently wants us both dead and has authorized professional units to carry this out. I ask that every person RETWEET and share this. I do not know who in the American government can be trusted, since this source claims our leaders are aware. But I have more specific information which is definitively verifiable, should they care to reach out to me. To the brave official in France who did this because they were so moved by the evil of Charlie’s public execution to risk their own life— May God bless you. Truly. Let all be revealed. Owen’s later stated she had evidence of her claims: There will be no official response from the L’Elysees palace because what I have shared is TRUE and I have evidence to support my claim. I even have names. They are likely trying to figure out where the leak came from. We are talking about the murder of citizens for speech. https://t.co/0i2w3Gq6P7 — Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) November 22, 2025 BBC reported the latest on the Macron’s lawsuit against Owens: Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte, are planning to present photographic and scientific evidence to a US court to prove Mrs Macron is a woman. Their lawyer says the French president and Mrs Macron will present the documentation in a defamation suit they have taken against the right-wing influencer Candace Owens after she promoted her belief that Brigitte Macron was born male. Ms Owens’ lawyers have responded with a motion to dismiss the claim. Speaking to the BBC’s Fame Under Fire podcast, the Macrons’ lawyer in the case, Tom Clare, said Mrs Macron had found the claims “incredibly upsetting” and they were a “distraction” to the French president. “I don’t want to suggest that it somehow has thrown him off his game. But just like anybody who is juggling a career and a family life as well, when your family is under attack, it wears on you. And he’s not immune from that because he’s the president of a country,” he said. Mr Clare said there would be “expert testimony that will come out that will be scientific in nature” and while he would not reveal, at this stage, its exact nature, he said the couple were prepared to demonstrate fully “both generically and specifically” that the allegations are false. “It is incredibly upsetting to think that you have to go and subject yourself, to put this type of proof forward,” he said. “It is a process that she will have to subject herself to in a very public way. But she’s willing to do it. She is firmly resolved to do what it takes to set the record straight. “If that unpleasantness and that discomfort that she has of opening herself up in that way is what it takes to set a record straight and stop this, she’s 100% ready to meet that burden.”

Imagine this. You are driving in your car to work and boom! All of the sudden you find a cat crashing through your vehicle’s windshield. A driver in North Carolina experienced exactly that! The Associated Press provided more details on the bizarre incident: A motorist in western North Carolina escaped injury when the carcass of a cat crashed into the passenger side of her front windshield along a highway near the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. In a call to 911, the unidentified driver on U.S. Route 74 in Swain County, near Bryson City, told a dispatcher that a bald eagle dropped the cat. Bryson City is about 65 miles (104 kilometers) southwest of Asheville. It’s not clear if the feline slipped from the eagle’s talons Wednesday morning or was discarded simply because the big bird didn’t have a taste for it. “You may not believe me, but I just had a bald eagle drop a cat through my windshield,” the incredulous driver said on the recorded 911 call. “It absolutely shattered my windshield.” Take a look at the aftermath here: I won’t complain about love bugs anymore. Imagine this! A bald eagle flew by this car on US-74 in North Carolina yesterday, dropping a cat through the windshield. The driver was OK. That cat didn’t make it. From NC Highway Patrol. pic.twitter.com/kmFFViVZGP — Mike’s Weather Page (@tropicalupdate) November 20, 2025 Here’s the 911 call: A driver called 911 in North Carolina, claiming a bald eagle dropped a cat through their windshield on US-74 early Wednesday morning, shattering the glass. The driver told the dispatcher that a witness called it “the craziest thing” they had ever seen. pic.twitter.com/0IfKwRJ0Q3 — ABC News Live (@ABCNewsLive) November 21, 2025 Discover Magazine reported how much weight bald eagle’s can carry: Bald eagles and golden eagles can carry several pounds, depending on wind resistance. In a 1940 study in Nature, scientists wondered how much weight an eagle could carry. Given the birds’ relatively large size, they were curious if they could carry their own weight or more. They found eagles can only lift a fraction of their own weight. Working with a trained golden eagle, the researchers strapped various weights to its legs and measured how far it could fly. The bird flew easily with two-pound weights but strained with four-pound weights. It couldn’t fly past 14 yards when carrying an eight-pound weight. Depending on a pet’s size, a raptor could pick up a small cat, puppy or small dog. But they may not be able to carry it as intended, and the animal could be dropped from a deadly height. In Austin, construction workers said they heard a dog crying and saw a hawk-like raptor drop a one-pound chihuahua puppy. The workers rushed the puppy to the emergency vet, where it received treatment for its puncture wounds. The puppy survived and was placed with a foster family while it healed.