Study: States With High Murder Rates More Likely To Be Republican

The Red State Murder Problem

 https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-red-state-murder-problem

The rate of murders in the US has gone up at an alarming rate. But, despite a media narrative to the contrary, this is a problem that afflicts Republican-run cities and states as much or more than the Democratic bastions.

In 2020, per capita murder rates were 40% higher in states won by Donald Trump than those won by Joe Biden.

8 of the 10 states with the highest murder rates in 2020 voted for the Republican presidential nominee in every election this century.

Republican-controlled states have higher murder rates than Democratic ones: study

 https://news.yahoo.com/republican-controlled-states-have-higher-murder-rates-than-democratic-ones-study-212137750.html

Republican politicians routinely claim that cities run by Democrats have been experiencing crime waves caused by failed governance, but a new study shows murder rates are actually higher in states and cities controlled by Republicans.

Republicans wince as their Ukrainian-born colleague thrashes Zelenskyy

 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/15/republicans-spartz-ukraine-zelenskyy-00045949

Spartz is dredging up old dirt on Zelenskyy and his advisers at a time when Ukraine’s future as an independent nation may depend on allying with him, her detractors say.

“I don’t share her criticisms,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who has worked with Spartz on Ukraine-related legislation. “I believe that the Zelenskyy government and the Ukrainian people have risen to the moment. It is in our national security interest to stand with the Ukrainian people and their elected leadership.”

Trump's White House Treated Him Like a Child. Congress Won’t.

 https://time.com/6197446/donald-trump-white-house-jan-6/

While Trump is indeed not a child, the Jan. 6 hearings have made one thing crystal clear: Over and over again, the former President found himself surrounded by loyalists who treated him like one.

Tuesday’s hearing offered just the latest evidence, with Trump’s White House counsel, his press team, even his diehard supplicants thought him infantile. They saw his mood as fragile. They spared him bad news. They placated his whims. And when he wanted to deputize the military and the Justice Department to chase conspiracy theories, his own bureaucrats decided to humor him. They even buried his dangerous plans to name a fringe favorite as a special counsel empowered to seize voting machines in a heap of process.

Defending R Nota Greenblatt

 Many are puzzled how to explain or even understand R Nota Greenblatt's involvement in the Tamar Epstein Get annulment

 The facts are clear and are publicly available

http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/07/kaminetsky-greenblatt-heter-does-gadol.html

Tamar Epstein and her husband were going to a well known and highly regarded beis din - the Baltimore beis din

At no time did Tamar mention the claim that she thought her husband was mentally ill. She wanted a divorce because she and her mother decided she could do better. Not a basis for forcing a get or annulment.

R Shmuel Kaminetsky's son wrote an embarrassingly ignorant  letter outlining the reason for dissolving the marriage without a get that he claimed to have shown to his father and gotten his approval. The letter was sent to many poskim trying to get someone to agree to it.  The letter makes claims  about incurable mental health issues based on an anonymous source as well as claiming to be based on the psakim of Rav Moshe Feinstein. Neither Shalom or Shmuel Kaminetsky are viewed as experts on the laws of Gittin

The letter was widely ignored/ridiculed by those poskim that received it. Which is why it was shown to me even when it was not made public

Tamar's father was a major supporter of the Philadelphia yeshiva so this intervention can not be viewed as neutral and impartial. There were also peripheral figures such as R Rakefet who were providing advice to the mother that the marriage could be annulled

The correct procedure would have been to bring the so called evidence of incurable mental illness to the Baltimore beis din which had been accepted by both sides instead Shalom Kaminetrky bypassed this and tried to get any outside posek to annul the marriage

R Nota was one of the outsiders contacted and he agreed not only to annul the marriage but to remarry her to another man.

This was absurd and in addition he agreed to do this without investigating the facts of the case or speaking to the husband or the Baltimore Beis din. R Shmuel made his acceptance dependent on the approval of Rav Dovid Feinstein. When Rav Dovid decided the heter was invalid he withdrew his support. Rav Nota bizarrely did not.

In sum Rav Notah was annulling a marriage based on facts he didn't know to be true, an invalid heter and he had not been authorized to intervene in the case of the authorized beis din and refused to alter his position when the only basis for his involvement was removed.

I will now try to defend this absurd behavior which was universally condemned by all the major rabbis and rabbinic leaders

Defense:

R Nota viewed the request to be involved by a recognized gadol as binding at least as a rabbinic halacha.

R Kaminetsky is on record claiming the request of gedolim is at least as binding as any rabbinic takkanah

https://mishpacha.com/they-dont-teach-corporate-in-yeshivah-the-conversation-continues/

As long as R Kaminetsky did not ask him to withdraw his heter he felt he was obligated to support it.

In sum R Nota did a horrible perversion of halacha because he felt the need to obey the words of a gadol and the gadol insists  incorrectly that Rav Nota was an independent authority that can be relied upon. As a result of this nonsense a marriage was destroyed and an adulterous relationship was given credibility to the loud acclaim of feminists and incompetent "orthodox" rabbis.

It appears to me that Rabbi Kamenetsky still actively supports the annulment, stating that it is a machalokes and that Tamar may rely on Rabbi Greenblatt. it also seems that the beis din convened by Rabbi Feinstein was intended by Rabbi Kamenetesky as a smoke screen so that he could pretend he doesn't support the annulment.

Response to the Eulogy for Rabbi Nota Zvi Greenblatt by Rabbi Shalom C. Spira

 The Gemara, Berakhot 31b derives from Hannah’s response to the High Priest in I Samuel 1:15 that if an innocent person is suspected of wrongful behaviour, then he/she is required to clear himself of the accusation. It is precisely for this reason that in a cause-célèbre involving his refusal to allow the writing of a get to free an agunah on the second day of Shavu‘ot, Rabbi Shlomo Kluger justified himself in a detailed appeal before Rabbi Moshe Sofer, “so that the sound of the lady’s blood should not cry out against me to say that I am culpable for her blood.” The appeal was accepted and vindicated by Teshuvot Chatam Sofer, Orach Chaim 145.  

This obligation derived from I Samuel 1:15 has now been  activated by a valuable insight offered by Rabbi David Greenblatt in a eulogy for his later father Rabbi Nota Zvi Greenblatt. Speaking at the funeral held in the beit midrash of MTJ on 30 Nissan, 5782, R. David Greenblatt said as follows (with Yiddish-style pronunciation): 

 

My father was matir a woman a year or two ago. He was only matir two women in 60 years. The rest of them, for the other thirty thousand, he travelled on buses and planes, and spent the night, and went to South America, all on his own cheshbon, everything, for thirty thousand. But there were two women he was matir. The last time he was matir a woman, he got tremendous flack. Big Jews criticized him. What happens to us when we get criticized? What happens to a person who’s not a gadol? ‘Ah, you’re criticizing me. You don’t know me. You don’t know why I did it. You should have called me. Do you know who I am? You didn’t let me explain it to you.’ We’re all… We’re all defending… We’re all defending our negi’os. It makes us defend ourselves. ‘What an insult to me.’ But my father said to me, literally in my ear, he said ‘Dovid,’ he said, ‘you understand the problem.’ He said: ‘Now, if a woman needs a heter, a Rav is not going to give her a heter no matter what, because he’s not going to want to take the flack. We’ve now made it hard for a woman who deserves a heter to get a heter.’ He didn’t think one second about himself. This was only about what is this going to do to nebach to the woman that deserves a heter and has a gadol who’s going to say ‘I don’t want to end up with that flack.’ I think it’s a small story but I think it’s the difference between gadlus and… and… and… and… and… and being one of… and being me… being the rest of us. 

In essence, then, we are now being informed that R. Nota Zvi Greenblatt held that it is a transgression for one rabbi to criticize another rabbi who authorizes a lady to remarry without a get. If so, this would stand as a significant accusation against the article that this student published at <http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2020/08/response-to-r-shmuel-kamenetzky-tanar.html?m=1> explaining why the Jewish faith requires Ms. Tamar Epstein to separate from her second husband [and possibly even encourages her to return to her first husband, although the latter question is more complex, as tentatively elucidated in Section J of my essay. And see also the conceptually relevant analysis of Rabbi Avishai Natan Meitlis, Me'orot Torat ha-Mishpat III, no. 91, available at <https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=65659&st=&pgnum=117&hilite=> .]  

Be-mechilat Kevod Torato, R. Nota Zvi Greenblatt’s accusation of my having transgressed can be respectfully countered. The Gemara, Yevamot 16a records that when the Sages heard a rumour that Rabbi Dosa ben Horkinas not only theoretically permitted yibum for the co-spouse of an incestuous relative [like Beit Shammai] but actually practically implemented that permission, they sent an emergency delegation of Rabbi Yehoshua, Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah and Rabbi Akiva to remonstrate with him. And the Gemara, Chagigah 9b indicates that mistakenly permitting remarriage of an eshet ish is more severe than mistakenly permitting marriage with an incestuous relative. Hence, synthesizing the conclusions of Yevamot 16a and Chagigah 9b together, it emerges that I acted ethically and correctly by publishing the aforementioned essay. [Indeed, as I subsequently wrote at at <http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2021/05/daas-torah-and-legacy-of-rabbi-joshua-h.html>, by publishing the aforementioned essay, I am following the legacy of Rabbi Joshua H. Shmidman.] 

Admittedly, there is one dimension of the aforementioned responsum of Chatam Sofer that is subject to significant controversy. Chatam Sofer claims that the second day of Shavu‘ot is more stringent than Yom Tov Sheni of Pesach, Sukkot or Shemini Atzeret, thereby equating the second day of Shavu‘ot with the second day of Rosh ha-Shanah. This equation is rejected by Rabbi Yisrael David Harfenes, Teshuvot Mekadesh Yisrael, Shavu‘ot no. 107. The latter is available online at <https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=59547&st=&pgnum=420>.  

However, to borrow a metaphor that Rabbi J. David Bleich employs in other contexts (Contemporary Halakhic Problems Vol. 4, p. xix; Bioethical Dilemmas Vol. 1, p. 96), it is important that a Jew not lose the forest for the trees. Rabbi Harfenes’ challenge of Chatam Sofer only concerns the peripheral aspect of the responsum which equates the second day of Shavu‘ot with the second day of Rosh ha-Shanah. Rabbi Harfenes never disputes the central thesis of Chatam Sofer’s responsum, viz. that R. Shlomo Kluger was correct to refuse to write a get on the second day of Shavu‘ot, and this despite the fact that the get was designed to relieve the plight of an agunah. Indeed, Rabbi Harfenes has more recently announced his personal opinion that – as a matter of policy – kiddushei ta‘ut should never be invoked nowadays in order to rescue an agunah. See <https://daattorah.blogspot.com/2019/10/bitul-kiddushin.html>. Hence, it is all the more logical to presume that Rabbi Harfenes would congratulate me for publishing the aforementioned essay. 

Tosafot to Berakhot 31b (s.v. moreh) comment that the High Priest in I Samuel 1:15 was in fact none other than the gedol ha-dor. And still, it remains the fact that it was a mitzvah for Hannah to respond to him to clear herself of the accusation. Likewise, Rabbi Shlomo Yosef Zevin, Ha-Mo‘adim ba-Halakhah, Shavu‘ot, ch. 1, reports that the protagonist who believed that a get could indeed be written on Yom Tov Sheni [contra R. Shlomo Kluger] was none other than Rabbi Elazar Landau, eminent author of Yad ha-Melekh. And still, it remains the fact that it was a mitzvah for R. Shlomo Kluger to respond to him to clear himself of the accusation. By the same token, there is no contempt  intended toward the late R. Nota Zvi Greenblatt (or his distinguished son, yibadel le-chaim R. David Greenblatt) by my presently clearing myself of Rabbi Greenblatt’s accusation. Rather, I am discharging the obligation that the Jewish faith has foisted upon me. 

I will conclude with a beautiful story. As documented in Section G of my aforementioned essay, Rabbi Bleich originally did not grant this student authorization to publish an analysis of Epstein vs. Friedman until the background facts were verified at a Jan. 3, 2019 Montreal event in memory of the late Rabbi Pinchas Hirschprung. At the latter event, a transcript of anecdotes concerning Rabbi Hirschprung was distributed. [See attached scan.] One of these anecdotes relates that when the (now deceased) Lubavitcher Rebbe met Rabbi Hirschprung for the first time, the former stood for the latter and asked him: “Are you Akiva the son of Joseph whose name extends from one end of the world to the other?” This is a line borrowed from the aforementioned scene in Yevamot 16a. [N.B. In the distributed transcript, a typographical error mis-identifies the source as Yevamot 17a.] The take-home message is refreshing: in our age no less so than two thousand years ago, we are summoned to follow the example of Rabbi Akiva and profess our belief in the sanctity of Jewish marriage.

 

Rabbi Spira works as Editor of Manuscripts and Grants at the Lady Davis Institute of Medical Research [a Pavillion of the Jewish General Hospital] in Montreal, Canada.  

Social Media Posts Misleadingly Edit and Misrepresent Biden Remarks from Teleprompter

 https://www.factcheck.org/2022/07/social-media-posts-misleadingly-edit-and-misrepresent-biden-remarks-from-teleprompter/

President Joe Biden quoted the Supreme Court majority opinion on ending the constitutional right to abortion in remarks he made on July 8. Social media posts falsely claim he mistakenly read teleprompter cues. A White House press secretary told us Biden intentionally said “end of quote” and then said “repeat the line” for emphasis, and the full, live remarks support that explanation.

LITTLE COULD BE MORE DAMAGING - understanding Schesinger twins

 https://mishpacha.com/little-could-be-more-damaging/

Parental alienation refers to the situation wherein one parent deliberately attempts to cause his or her children to become estranged from the other parent. Most often, this occurs during or following a contested, messy divorce. In some cases, it can take place even within intact families. Generally, perpetrators harbor intense hatred for their ex-spouses, which they justify with the irrational belief that any contact with the ex-spouse would be psychologically and emotionally damaging for the children. As a result, the perpetrators will use any and all means to manipulate support for their diabolical and, at times, demonic tactics.

Biden staff removes Israeli flag from presidential vehicle - in Jerusalem

 https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/356580

US President Joe Biden's staff on Friday morning removed the Israeli flag from his armored vehicle, before visiting Jerusalem's Arab areas.

Danny Danon, head of World Likud and a former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations, slammed, "It starts with a visit of a US President to a Palestinian institution in east Jerusalem. It continues with the inability of [Prime Minister Yair] Lapid to set a red line, to act as a diplomat and prevent this dangerous precedent. And it ends with the removal of the Israeli flag from Biden's entourage - in the capital of the State of Israel."

"Lapid gets a clear and unequivocal 'fail' on this visit, and it's scary to think what future visits here by diplomats will look, in the coming months. We must replace this awful government."

Religious courts committed to reform of get procedures, says leading peer

 https://www.thejc.com/news/news/religious-courts-committed-to-reform-of-get-procedures-says-leading-peer-2iK9CyRLGT61XvVDpKidCB

A leading Jewish peer has suggested that batei din are prepared to reform their procedures for arranging a get.

Lord Jon Mendelsohn is one of the peers who successfully pressed for the official recognition of get refusal as a form of abuse - which was set out in statutory guidance to the Domestic Abuse Act published by the government a few days ago.

Health Ministry says uptick in recurring COVID infections

 https://www.ynetnews.com/health_science/article/hkbz1gxjc

However, in some cases, the symptoms were lighter the third time round, and although these numbers are relatively low, the ministry expects them to rise.

Health experts estimate that one of the leading reasons for the third infection is the fact that masks were no longer in use by most Israelis who were no longer concerned

Ben Shapiro vs. Rabbi Shmuel Bloom and a Lost Manuscript From Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l

 https://vinnews.com/2022/07/14/ben-shapiro-vs-rabbi-shmuel-bloom-and-a-lost-manuscript-from-rav-moshe-feinstein-ztl/

Ben Shapiro asked a pertinent question. Why is he the only one that actively voiced the Torah opinion against abortion? The verse in Genesis tells us, “one who spills blood within man – is culpable..” How can we stand by idly while so many lives are being put to death? Where were all of the other Torah organizations? Why was orthodox Jewry not at the forefront of such a campaign?

Confirmation of Ohio rape victim's abortion story forces retreat from some conservative doubters

 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/child-rape-case-proven-true-after-prominent-republicans-cast-doubt-00045817

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) — prior to the arrest of the man charged in the case — had echoed Yost’s sentiment.

“Another lie. Anyone surprised?” Jordan said in a tweet, which he deleted after the rapist had been arrested and charged. Jordan said in a subsequent tweet that the suspect “should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”