Trump’s Epstein Files Problem Just Got Worse. New Names Exposed.
PDS Published 02/10/2026
-
Donald Trump told everyone to just move on from the Epstein files — right, nothing to see here! — but we haven’t moved on, and oh boy is there definitely something to see here.
[Clip, 00:00 - 00:10] Caption: [Reporter:] “I just wanted to ask you, have you had a chance to review any of the unredacted files over at the DOJ, the Epstein files?” [Becca Balint:] “I did.” [Reporter:] “You did?” [Becca Balint:] “Yeah, I just came from there.” [Reporter:] “What can you tell us?” [Becca Balint:] “There’s a bunch of sick fucks.”
Right, so this week, lawmakers got access to a handful of secure terminals at the Department of Justice where they can examine the Epstein files totally unredacted … or at least they’re supposed to be totally unredacted.
But when Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie came out of there yesterday, they revealed this. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:53 - 01:03] Caption: “Those big black screens of complete redactions? When you go in there and look on the computer, sometimes you lift off the black ink, and there’s white ink redacting files.”
[Clip, 00:51 - 01:03] Caption: “I’d say seventy to eighty percent of them were redacted. The main 302 statements where survivors talked about who raped them, all of that was still redacted.”
[Clip, 01:03 - 01:11] Caption: “And so when we asked the people in the room, who weren’t responsible for the redactions, they said, ‘Oh, we think those are how the files were given to us.”
Right, so they think Trump’s FBI scrubbed the files way back In March, then gave them to the DOJ attorneys who prepared them for release in November, December and January.
But the Epstein Transparency Act doesn’t just single out those attorneys; it’s very clear that the FBI too is responsible for making all of the files available, so legally there’s no excuse for this.
But as for the documents that were actually unredacted for the lawmakers, a lot of them are apparently stuff that shouldn’t be redacted for the public, as Jamie Raskin explained.
[Clip, 02:20 - 02:28] Caption: “I saw the names of lots of people who were redacted for mysterious or baffling or inscrutable reasons.”
For example Leslie Wexner, the billionaire Victoria’s Secret tycoon whose close relationship to Epstein is well known. [Image]
[Clip, 02:39 - 02:51] Caption: “Wexner, his name was redacted from a government document, and I couldn’t understand the logic of that. He was not a victim.”
Raskin also recalled an email Epstein received from his lawyers summing up a conversation they had with Trump’s lawyers about the 2009 period. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 03:41 - 04:04] Caption: “Epstein’s lawyers synopsized and quoted Trump as saying that Jeffrey Epstein was not a member of his club at Mar-a-Lago, but he was a guest at Mar-a-Lago, and he had never been asked to leave. And that was redacted for some indeterminate, inscrutable reason.”
With Representative Becca Balint telling Dropsite News something similar about a document she read. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:43 - 00:59] Caption: [Becca Balint:] “One was related to whether or not Trump had ever kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago, as he claimed.” [Reporter:] “What did you find?” [Becca Balint:] “That is not true.” [Reporter:] “It’s a lie.” [Becca Balint:] “It’s a lie.”
But the revelation that made the biggest splash was that, according to Massie and Khanna, the Justice Department tried to cover up several men.
[Clip, 00:13 - 00:21; Clip, 07:15 - 07:24] Caption: [Thomas Massie:] “The names of at least six men that have been redacted that are likely incriminated by their inclusion in the files. … One is pretty high up in a foreign government.” [Ro Khanna:] “And one of the others is a pretty prominent individual.”
And then today, Khanna got up on the House floor and announced who they are.
[Clip, 00:37 - 01:01] Caption: “These men are Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonic Leonov, Nicola Caputo, Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem (CEO of Dubai Ports World), and billionaire businessman Leslie Wexner, who was labelled as a co-conspirator by the FBI.”
Meanwhile, Massie and Deputy AG Todd Blanche got into a huge brawl on X over these and other redactions.
With the GOP lawmaker pointing to the FBI’s list of potential co-conspirators drafted soon after Epstein’s death in 2019, and asking why a well known retired CEO is redacted. [Post and Page]
To which Blanche replied: “We have just unredacted Les Wexner's name from this document, but his name already appears in the files thousands of times. DOJ is hiding nothing.” [Post]
But then Massie was like, sure, except this specific document contradicts Kash Patel’s testimony that the FBI had no evidence of other sex traffickers. [Post]
Then for the next fight, he pointed to a list of 20 individuals and said, “Four of the 18 redacted names on this document are men born before 1970.” [Page and Post]
And shortly afterward, the DOJ unredacted 16 of those names, though their photos are still redacted.
With Blanche writing in his defense: “The document you cite has numerous victim names. We have just unredacted all non-victim names from this document. The DOJ is committed to transparency.” [Post]
But Massie shot back: “Here DOJ acts as if they were justified in redacting the men’s names simply because the document contains victims names. Tonight they learned you can redact victim names while still publishing the other names, per our law.” [Post]
And then lastly, they tore out a few tufts of each other’s hair over this email that Epstein sent to someone in 2009 reading: “I loved the torture video.” [Page]
With Massie calling out the DOJ for redacting the recipient’s email address, adding that it appears to be a sultan. [Post]
So Blanche replied, “The law requires redactions for personally identifiable information, including if in an email address. And you know that the Sultan’s name is available unredacted in the files. Be honest, and stop grandstanding.” [Post]
To which Massie was like, bro, “Our law requires VICTIM’s information to be redacted, not information of men who sent Epstein torture porn!” [Post]
Also the “sultan” in question here is one of the six men Khanna named earlier — right, he’s the chairman and CEO of a major global logistics firm based in the United Arab Emirates.
Though it’s unclear if he’s actually a sultan, as Massie and Blanche seem to think, or if that’s just his first name.
Anyway, all this drama is just from one day of a few lawmakers spending a couple of hours looking through the files, many of which they still couldn’t even read because they weren’t unredacted.
So you can imagine how much more we’re gonna hear about, but as Raskin noted, at their current rate, there’s just no way in hell they’re gonna be able to get through all the redactions before Pam Bondi testifies in front of Congress tomorrow.
[Clip, 05:31 - 05:49] Caption: “If every member of Congress who voted for the discharge petition, if all 217 of us spent every waking hour over at the Department of Justice, it would still take us months to get through all those documents. And there are only four computers.”
Plus don’t forget, there are still some two and a half million documents the DoJ hasn’t released yet, by its own admission.
And then apparently there are documents they did release, but which have since gone missing.
[Clip, 02:24 - 02:48] Caption: “Some of these files have been taken down. Like the DOJ produced them, and for some reason they took them down. Maybe they decided that victims’ names were in there and that they needed further redactions. But those documents not only haven’t been put back up on the site with the appropriate redactions, they were not available to us to search, as far as I could tell. We couldn’t search the documents that had been taken off the internet.”
Meanwhile, the fallout from all this continues, with people pointing out that elites in Europe are being toppled by these revelations, but Trump’s commerce secretary, nevermind Trump himself, is still standing.
[Clip, 02:55 - 03:26] Caption: “You have in England the king now calling for an investigation and possible prosecution of his own brother. You have in Norway the princess who no longer has support to be the queen. And yet in the United States of America, we have someone in the cabinet, Howard Lutnick, who is all over these Epstein files, who allegedly had business with Epstein after he was convicted of pedophilia, and he still is in the cabinet.”
Also, people are talking about how the CEO of Chappell Roan’s talent agency, Casey Wasserman, exchanged flirty emails with Ghislaine Maxwell in 2003. [Image]
Where you had Maxwell offering to give him a massage that would “drive a man wild,” and Wasserman telling her elsewhere, “I think of you all the time. So, what do I have to do to see you in a tight leather outfit?” [Quotes]
Now Wasserman has apologized for his association with her, saying it was two decades ago, before any of her crimes had become public knowledge. [Quote same link, find “deeply regret”]
But for Roan, that doesn’t cut it, with her announcing on Instagram that she’s cutting ties with the agency and explaining:
“I hold my teams to the highest standards and have a duty to protect them as well. no artist, agent or employee should be expected to defend or overlook actions that conflict so deeply with our own moral values. I have deep respect and appreciation for the agents and staff who work tirelessly for their artists and I refuse to stand by.” [Quote and image]
But tons of other artists still appear to be with the agency, including Kendrick Lamar, Coldplay, Joni Mitchell, Lorde, Tyler, The Creator, Adam Sandler, Brad Pitt, and many others.
Plus Wasserman’s also the chairman of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, so many are demanding that he resign from that as well.
And then, on the right wing, there’s a lot of scrutiny on Steve Bannon right now.
With the likes of Elon Musk, Dinesh D’Souza, and Roger Stone blasting him for his weird conspiratorial conversations with Epstein. [Post, Post, Post]
With Musk calling Bannon “evil,” even though Musk himself had some embarrassing messages with Epstein of his own exposed in this latest dump. [Post]
Go to HelloFresh now to get 10 free meals + a FREE Zwilling Knife (a $144.99 value) on your third box. Offer valid while supplies last. Free meals applied as discount on first box, new subscribers only, varies by plan
-
And on the topic of Bannon, the DOJ is now trying to dismiss its own long-running criminal case against him in the department’s latest unprecedented bid to benefit Trump allies.
Right, back in 2022, a jury convicted Bannon of contempt of Congress charges brought by the DOJ for defying a subpoena to sit for a deposition and provide documents to the committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection.
With Bannon ultimately serving a 4-month sentence in federal prison after an appeals court also upheld his conviction.
But last fall, Bannon appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court — even though he had already served his sentence — claiming that he was protected by executive privilege and that his lawyers had told him not to comply with the subpoena.
And now, the DOJ — which brought this whole case against him in the first place under Biden — is asking the high court to toss it entirely.
With Solicitor General D. John Sauer — a former Trump lawyer — arguing in a filing that the DOJ changed its mind and now believes that, quote, “dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice.”
And claiming that the move was necessary to “undo the prior administration’s weaponization of the justice system.”
Right, and specifically, you had Sauer asking the high court to send the case back to a Trump-appointed district judge so it can be dismissed.
With Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for D.C., also making a separate filing directly asking that lower court judge to officially dismiss the case.
And that’s also significant because if the judge agrees to erase Bannon’s conviction, his appeal at the Supreme Court would likely end anyway. []
Now, very notably here, if the DOJ is successful in this reversal, the move would largely be symbolic because Bannon has literally already served his time.
But experts say it’s yet another unprecedented example of Trump weaponizing the DOJ to boost his allies and go after his perceived enemies.
But this move also doesn’t come as a surprise.
Right, in addition to Trump himself pardoning Jan. 6 rioters, his DOJ has also recently said it would stop defending its own conviction against trade adviser Peter Navarro, who was similarly convicted with contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the Jan. 6 committee.
-
And getting back into the news, judges are getting fed up with Trump’s escalating immigration crackdown - to the point of even threatening sanctions and contempt charges.
Right, the Trump administration has been skirting by or outright ignoring judges’ rulings in regards to their immigrant round-ups for a while now.
And many of those wearing the robes are getting pissed about it.
With US District Judge Michael Davis saying in a recent order,
“There has been an undeniable move by the Government in the past month to defy court orders or at least to stretch the legal process to the breaking point in an attempt to deny noncitizens their due process rights.” []
Sometimes, this looks like ICE racing detained immigrants across state lines in order to thwart judicial proceedings.
Right, when ICE quickly rushes their detainees out of the state, it makes it that much harder for those who were detained to file lawsuits or even hire a lawyer. []
And Team Trump has repeatedly been accused of using those transfers to minimize habeas corpus petitions.
Which is a legal right to due process that allows people to challenge government detention.
With one federal judge in Minnesota saying,
“These practices are deeply concerning and generally suggest that ICE is attempting to hide the location of detainees." []
With another calling it an effort to, quote, “frustrate judicial review.”
And there’s also ICE dragging their feet to let immigrants actually go home after their release has been expressly ordered - sometimes for weeks at a time. []
With a Minnesota judge saying,
“Detention without lawful authority is not just a technical defect, it is a constitutional injury that unfairly falls on the heads of those who have done nothing wrong to justify it.”
“The individuals affected are people. The overwhelming majority of the hundreds seen by this Court have been found to be lawfully present as of now in the country. They live in their communities. Some are separated from their families.” []
Then on top of all this, the immigration court system is under serious strain - thousands of immigrants have been filing habeas corpus petitions.
And the overwhelming problem in immigration court isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.
Especially with this new federal appeals court ruling allowing the administration to move forward ending deportation protections for more than 60,000 migrants from Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua. []
And it seems like Trump is planning on further taking advantage of the immigrant court being stretched to the point of breaking to target specific groups.
Right, dozens of asylum cases for Somali migrants have been randomly expedited over the weekend - moved up the docket by years at a time in some cases. []
With attorneys for those migrants saying this looks like an attempt by DHS to reject Somali asylum applications without court hearings - fast-tracking their deportation and limiting due process. []
And so now, they’re scrambling - many lawyers going from zero hearings on their calendar to dozens, with many of those at conflicting times across several states. []
It also didn’t go without notice that the cases that were expedited were specifically Somali cases.
You know, the group that Trump and his cronies have most recently targeted with hateful rhetoric.
With one immigration attorney saying,
And all this has led to judges rapidly losing their patience with ICE and the DOJ - resulting in threats of contempt charges and even sanctions.
Right, in some 2 dozen cases just in Minnesota, judges have thrown around terms like “contempt” and “noncompliance” to get the government’s attention.
Because, surprise surprise, Team Trump isn’t really complying with judicial orders.
Especially in cases where an immigrant was unlawfully arrested and must immediately be released.
And this isn’t a small problem - the chief judge of Minnesota’s state court, Judge Patrick Schiltz, found that ICE has violated nearly 100 judicial edicts. []
Adding that’s probably an undercount and saying,
“ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.” []
But it isn’t just Schiltz - we’ve seen other judges speak out against this issue as well.
Saying things like,
“This is clearly not tenable. I can’t continue to have (federal prosecutors) violating really important orders … If somebody should be released, that has to happen.” []
With a Georgetown Law professor saying that these types of threats are rare - but adding,
“And yet, it’s become almost routine under this administration.” []
Now, as of this moment, no sanctions or contempt charges have actually happened but this situation is very rapidly reaching a boiling point.
In fact, we even saw Schiltz planning on pulling in the head of ICE, Todd Lyons, last month to explain why he shouldn’t be held in contempt for the noncompliance on his watch. []
In that case, the hearing was cancelled after ICE finally released the immigrant detainee in question at the time but Schiltz made it very clear that the threat of contempt wasn’t off the table entirely.
“The court warns ICE that future noncompliance with court orders may result in future show-cause orders requiring the personal appearances of Lyons or other government officials.” []
Use code “PHIL10” for 10% OFF your first SeatGeek order & returning buyers use code “DEFRANCO” for $10 off AND your chance at weekly $500 prizes! Seatgeek
-
And today, Lyons did find himself in the hot seat.
Right, the House Homeland Security Committee held a hearing grilling Lyons and other members of the Trump administration.
And while he pledged to provide reports into the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, he also refused to apologize to their families.[]
With Rep. Eric Swalwell’s line of questioning getting the most attention there:
“Mr. Lyons, will you apologize to the family of Renee Good for being called a domestic terrorist by the president and his leadership?...no sir…why not?...sir, I welcome the opportunity to speak to the family in private but I am not going to comment on any active investigations.” (0:04-0:19)
“Will you apologize to the family of Alex Pretti for also being called a domestic terrorist?...sir again, I am not going to speak to any ongoing investigation.” (0:39-0:47)
And we also saw a heated exchange when Swalwell started asking Lyons about firing ICE agents.
“How many ICE agents have been fired for their conduct under your leadership…I can get that data, I’ll get that back to you…is it more than one?...I’m not going to speak on, but I will get you that data?...can you tell us if, God I hope at least one person has been fired for their conduct since these operations have begun, are you saying you can’t tell us one person has been fired….sir I am not going to talk about personnel, but I can get back to you…but two people have been killed so far?”(0:32-0:59)
For his part, Lyons repeatedly referred to attacks against ICE agents and law enforcement, but that only invited even more scrutiny.
With Rep. Dan Goldman saying:
“You said in your opening statement that references to ICE as the Gestapo or the Secret Police encourages threats against ICE agents…yes, 100%… The problem is, you have it backwards, sir. If you don't want to be called a fascist regime or secret police, then stop acting like one.” (0:00-0:36)
And that wasn’t even the biggest condemnation Lyons faced, because Rep. LaMonica McIver basically told him he is going to hell.
“Mr. Lyons, do you consider yourself a religious person?...Yes ma’am…Oh? Yes! Well then how do you think judgement day will work for you with so much blood on your hands?...I’m not going to entertain question…okay, of course not. Do you think you’re going to hell Mr. Lyons?...I’m not going to…of course not!” (0:04-0:22)
So the hearing painted a very clear picture of lawmaker’s frustrations with ICE.
And on that note, Democrats are even willing to send DHS into a shutdown over ICE funding.
Right, Congress is facing a Friday deadline to fund the department, but some lawmakers say they do not want to pass another continuing resolution to keep it afloat, as they are demanding real changes with immigration enforcement.[]
With Sen. Angus King, an Independent from Maine telling NBC that:
“What ICE is doing is unconscionable, and it’s got to be reined in. I can’t, in good conscience, vote for it. I would feel complicit in what they are doing.”
And King is one of eight Senators whose vote has proven crucial in voting on this matter, so his statement is a big deal. []
As things currently stand, negotiations between both parties and the White House are ongoing,
Last week, Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer sent a letter to Republicans with a list of demands, asking that agents no longer wear masks or enter homes without warrants,
And that they wear body cameras, IDs, and stop racial profiling.
But Republicans have called these demands “unrealistic and unserious.”[]
So, no surprise, Democrats have rejected the plan Republicans sent forward this week, with both Schumer and Jeffries shut it down, saying that it is:[]
“both incomplete and insufficient in terms of addressing the concerns Americans have about ICE's lawless conduct.”
And because there is such a massive public outrage against ICE, Democrats are feeling very emboldened to stand their ground.
Right, recent polling shows that over 60% of Americans believe the agency has gone too far and is making the country less safe, and only 34% approve of their actions.
So you have Sen. Chris Murphy saying that:
“I don’t think there’s a lot of interest in continuing to fund this agency that’s out of control — killing American citizens, tear-gassing elementary schools — without reform. People are going to get killed. More people are going to get killed if we continue to fund DHS.”
As for what happens if the Friday deadline passes with no deal in sight, the shutdown only impacts DHS, right, not other areas of the government.
But DHS’s umbrella still includes agencies like TSA and FEMA.
Meanwhile, ICE itself actually would likely continue operating as it already got $75 billion in funding earlier this year. []
But for Democrats, it really is the principal of the matter, that with everything going on, that ICE needs to fundamentally change if it is going to get even more cash padding its budget.
-
Israel is finally, once and for all, taking over the West Bank.
That’s what many have been saying about new policies approved by Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu’s security cabinet over the weekend – with some saying they amount to open defiance of Donald Trump’s stated opposition to annexation.
And all this is coming as the IDF is reportedly getting ready for a new offensive into Gaza, possibly throwing a wrench into Trump’s peace plan just as the peacekeeping force he promised just seems to be taking shape.
But starting with the West Bank, notably, Netanyahu avoided making the announcement himself.
He left that job to two government ministers who run the country’s West Bank policy, including the far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich (Bets-uh-lel Smote-rich - LISTEN).
Who once said the starvation of millions in Gaza might be “justified and moral” and who has otherwise been the Israeli official probably most aggressively pushing for a West Bank takeover.
And you’ve had him again making his intention crystal clear – saying in a statement:
“We are deepening our roots in all parts of the Land of Israel and burying the idea of a Palestinian state.”
And with that, the bulk of any future Palestinian State would be made up of The West Bank and East Jerusalem, which were captured by Israel in 1967.
And they’re now home to more than three million Palestinians, along with roughly 700,000 Israelis living in settlements the international community overwhelmingly considers illegal.
Although you’ve also had the government retroactively authorizing settler “outposts” considered illegal even under Israeli law.
But, until now, at least one thing standing in the way of settlement expansion has been a decades-old law banning the sale of property in the West Bank to anyone besides local residents – with “local” here referring to Palestinian. []
This rule actually goes back to before 1967 when Jordan controlled the territory.
And it has stayed in place because international law says that an occupying country can’t change existing legislation except for security reasons or the benefit of the local population.
Despite that, however, the measures approved by the security cabinet include repealing the law – essentially making it possible for Israelis to buy land anywhere in the West Bank. []
With opponents of this plan fearing that settlement groups with deep pockets will take advantage by buying property deep inside the enclave.
Which would then leave the Israeli government with no choice but to also move deeper into the territory – because the military is obligated to protect Israelis wherever they are. []
But with all that, that’s not the only way the security cabinet has paved the way for annexation.
It’s also repealing a requirement for a “transaction permit” before closing a land purchase.
And that’s important because these permits? They have at least somewhat helped tackle the relatively widespread use of forgeries and other fraudulent methods as a means of “buying” property from Palestinians who didn’t actually want to sell. []
Another big thing is that land records that have until now been sealed will be opened to the public.
And this has actually been a key goal of the settlement movement for a while – with the reason being that it will make it easier for them to track down Palestinians who might be willing to sell.
Although, notably, this may also end up putting Palestinian lives at risk.
And that’s because a law enforced by the Palestinian authority actually makes selling land to Jews punishable by death. []
But in any case, beyond everything related to buying and selling land, the Israeli government is now also asserting greater control across the West Bank.
Right, the 1993 Oslo Accords left the Palestinian Authority administrative power over about 40 percent of the West Bank.
But now, according to the security cabinet, and in apparent violation of that agreement, even those areas will fall under Israeli control when it comes to the management of heritage and archaeological sites, environmental hazards, and water.
With Israeli enforcement agencies claiming the power to destroy any Palestinian structures deemed to be violating laws in these domains.
Although, of course, you have activists arguing that Israel could find any excuse to carry out such demolitions. []
And similarly, you have them saying the security cabinet calling for more involvement in major Palestinian cities is just a pretext for greater control.
In Hebron, for example, the largest city in the West Bank, the Israeli military will take over planning and construction in the area of a small Jewish settlement.
And there are fears that this will lead to not only settlement explanations but also unwelcome changes at a religious site that is sacred to both Muslims and Jews. []
Similarly, in Bethlehem, a new Israeli agency will be set up to run Rachel’s Tomb, another holy site shared by the major monotheistic religions.
And, of course, with all that, the backlash has been severe.
Eight Muslim-majority countries, mostly in the Middle East and North Africa but also including Indonesia, signed a joint statement condemning the changes.
With them accusing Netanyahu’s government of "accelerating attempts at its illegal annexation and the displacement of the Palestinian people.”
You also had a high-ranking official with the Palestinian Authority calling on the Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the UN Security Council to take action.
But it’s not clear what any of those bodies can really do – although you did have UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres urging Israel to backtrack.
With him noting that existing Israeli settlements in the West Bank – including in East Jerusalem – are ALREADY “in flagrant violation of international law.”
While you also have many experts agreeing that the security cabinet’s latest moves are just the latest in a long list of violations.
And with that, this is just the continuation of a strategy that Netanyahu’s government has been pursuing for years – one that has only picked up speed since October 7th 2023.
Right, in that time, the government has approved dozens of new settlements, including the largest single expansion since 1993.
With last year being the fastest rate of settlement expansion since monitoring began according to the UN.
There’s also been record-setting settler violence, and military operations have resulted in the largest displacement of Palestinian civilians in the territory since 1967.
And all of that having already happened is key to why what we’re seeing now is being described by many Palestinians as de facto annexation.
That said, it’s not yet clear when these new policies are meant to go into effect, and there’s technically still a chance for anti-settlement groups to challenge them in court.
But you’ve had even people belonging to these groups saying their chances are pretty slim. []
Although, potentially, one thing that could actually have an impact is opposition from the United States.
Right, you had Trump saying last year that he wouldn’t allow Israel to annex the West Bank – telling Time Magazine:
“It won’t happen because I gave my word to the Arab countries.”
“Israel would lose all of its support from the United States if that happened.”
But at the same time what Israel is doing isn’t outright annexation.
And you have people like the former head of Palestinian affairs in Israeli military intelligence telling The New York Times that this may all be a way for the government to advance the annexation agenda while also avoiding open confrontation with Trump – saying:
“I’d define it as taking steps toward annexation without saying the word annexation.” []
And with that, while an unnamed White House official reportedly reiterated Trump's opposition toward Israel annexing the West Bank, there’s been no statement condemning or even addressing the new measures approved by Israel’s security cabinet. .
And while Netanyahu is set to travel to the US and meet with Trump at the White House tomorrow, it seems that the focus of their conversation will be Iran.
But as that happens there’s also a lot we need to talk about with another occupied territory: Gaza.
Right, because you’ve just had the Times of Israel reporting that the Israeli military is drawing up plans for a new offensive in Gaza to disarm Hamas once and for all.
Although, with that, as we’ve talked about before, the fighting has never really stopped.
In fact, just today, there were reports that an Israeli drone strike killed two cyclists in Gaza – the latest in hundreds of deaths since the October ceasefire began.
And that’s as many others die for other reasons.
For example, you also had an Israeli court recently rejecting an appeal to allow a five-year-old Palestinian boy with an aggressive form of cancer enter Israel for life-saving treatment.
With that being because of a government policy barring bars residents registered in Gaza from crossing the border – even when they no longer live there, which is reportedly the case with this boy, who now lives in the West Bank.
And this is just one case of many – right, as of last November, there were reportedly as many as 11,000 Palestinian cancer patients still trapped in Gaza. []
With the World Health Organization saying around the same time that 900 people in need of outside medical treatment, including children and cancer patients, had already died while waiting for evacuation. []
But with all that, a new offensive could mean things getting even worse once again.
With an official reportedly telling the Times of Israel that disarming Hamas force is likely to take many years, and the outlet explaining that, quote:
“Should hostilities renew, fighting is liable to be more intense and more widespread than previous rounds, as Israeli forces will no longer be constrained by the presence of hostages on Gazan soil.” ASSET []
And with that, you also had the paper noting that getting back to large-scale fighting could complicate Trump’s Gaza plan and threaten the support of its international backers.
Which is really notable because you just had Indonesia announcing that it’s getting ready to send up to 8,000 troops to Gaza to be part of a peacekeeping force under that plan.
With the Indonesian president claiming the total number of troops in that force will ultimately amount to about 20,0000.
