Uncategorized
Long-delayed Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial to begin Monday, igniting pain, fear and hopes for closure
(JTA) — Every Thursday, Brad Orsini gets on a conference call with dozens of other security specialists who, like him, focus on preventing threats to American Jews. But in a few days, and for the coming months, the conference call won’t just address the dangers of the present and future. It will also deal with events that occurred more than four years ago.
That’s because next week marks the beginning of the trial of the gunman who is accused of killing 11 worshippers in a Pittsburgh synagogue in October 2018.
Orsini, who oversaw the city’s Jewish communal security on the day of the attack in the neighborhood of Squirrel Hill, hopes to find a sense of closure in the alleged shooter’s prosecution. But he also knows that the trial threatens to broadcast the white supremacist ideas that lay behind the attack, and continue to pose risks for Jewish communities. And he worries that, in addition to providing a possible pathway for survivors and victims’ families to move into the future, it could also thrust them back into a painful past.
“It’s long overdue,” Orsini said. “This has been looming large over the Pittsburgh community and, quite honestly, the Jewish community in the nation. We’re all looking toward finishing this trial and prosecuting this actor for what he did.”
At the same time, he added, “This trial is going to reopen wounds that this community has suffered for almost five years now, and it’s going to have the ability to retraumatize many people in the community. And we have to be concerned about that.”
Beginning on Monday, those countervailing emotions and expectations will come to bear as the deadliest antisemitic attack in American Jewish history is litigated in court. The trial, which will begin with jury selection, is expected to last about three months. Few doubt the guilt of the accused shooter, Robert Bowers, whose name is hardly uttered by Jewish residents of Squirrel Hill. But what remains unclear is what the trial will mean for American Jews — and for the families most directly affected by the attack.
Some hope for the defendant to get the death penalty — even though that will mean prolonging the legal ordeal — while others have advocated against it. Some hope for the trial to shed light on the threat of white supremacy, even as renewed attention on the attack could inspire other violent extremists. And some hope the trial will help them move past the tragedy, even as they know it will be difficult to hear the details of the shooting laid out in court.
“The country is going to have to undergo this unprecedented trial of the country’s worst mass killer of Jews,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League. “It’s going to be really hard, so I think our community is really going to have to buckle down and brace ourselves.”
The attack on Saturday morning, Oct. 27, 2018, killed 11 people from three congregations, all of which met at the same building, and injured six others, including four police officers. The defendant faces 63 criminal charges, including hate crimes and murder charges. He has pleaded not guilty. The prosecution is seeking the death penalty — a choice some relatives of victims are vocally supporting. Previously, leaders of two of the three congregations that suffered the attack had opposed the death penalty in this case.
“This massacre was not just a mass murder of innocent citizens during a service in a house of worship,” Diane Rosenthal, sister of David and Cecil Rosethal, who died in the attack, told local journalists, according to reporting by the Pittsburgh Union Progress. “The death penalty must apply to vindicate justice and to offer some measure of deterrence from horrific hate crimes happening again and again.”
For the survivors and families of victims, the trial will likely be especially painful. Some told the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle that they intend to take time off work, delay a vacation or be away from family for an extended period of time to be present at the proceedings.
“I want to see justice happen, but at the same time, I hate to think about the families having to potentially see images of what happened and things of that sort,” Steve Weiss, who survived the attack, told the weekly Jewish newspaper. “I’m sure they have mental images, but to have to actually see photos of victims and things of that sort I think can really be difficult for them.”
One thing few people question is the shooter’s guilt, despite his plea of not guilty. He offered to plead guilty in 2019 in exchange for taking the death penalty off the table, but prosecutors, determined to pursue capital punishment for the crime, rejected the plea.
It was the same thing that had happened in the case of the man charged with killing nine Black worshippers in a Charleston, South Carolina, church in 2015. But there, despite the rejected guilty plea, the trial took place a year and a half after the attack, and the shooter was sentenced to death. (In an illustration of the length of death penalty cases, his latest court proceeding happened in October, and he has not yet been executed.)
In contrast, the Pittsburgh trial is not starting until four and a half years after the shooting there. Part of the reason for the delay stems from the work of the defense team, which has pushed back the trial through various court filings. The alleged shooter’s lead attorney, Judy Clarke, has defended a series of high-profile attackers: the Unabomber, the attacker in the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics bombing and the Boston Marathon bomber, among others. According to Pittsburgh’s local CBS affiliate, her singular goal is to avoid the death penalty for her client.
But in many other ways, the parallels between the Charleston trial and this one are clear. Both concern shootings by alleged white supremacists in houses of worship, tragedies that have become gruesome symbols of a national rise in bigotry. In both, the culpability of the defendant was assumed before the trial began. Like the Pittsburgh defendant, the Charleston shooter has been lionized by white supremacists, including some who cited him as an inspiration for their own violent acts.
And in both cases, there is an understanding that a conviction does not heal the wounds opened by the shooter.
“This trial has produced no winners, only losers,” said the judge in the Charleston shooter’s trial, Richard Gergel, according to the New Yorker. “This proceeding cannot give the families what they truly want, the return of their loved ones.”
Still, some who are watching the Pittsburgh trial closely hope that it will bring new facts and connections to light. Amy Spitalnick, the executive director of Integrity First for America, a nonprofit that spearheaded a multimillion-dollar victory in a civil trial against the organizers of the 2017 far-right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, hopes that the Pittsburgh trial illustrates the links among different white supremacist shootings — such as the attacks in El Paso, Texas; Christchurch, New Zealand; and at a synagogue in Poway, California.
Those attackers spouted similar conspiracy theories and referenced other recent violent attacks in their manifestos. Spitalnick said that the accused Pittsburgh shooter allegedly communicated with the organizers of the Charlottesville rally on the social network Gab, which is known as a haven for right-wing extremists.
“Trials like this can really be illustrative of how deep the poison of white supremacy and antisemitism goes,” she said. In the Charlottesville trial, she said, “The reams and reams of evidence… really helped pull back the curtain on what motivated the defendants, how they operated, the tools and the tactics of the movement, the conspiracy theories at its core.”
There’s also the possibility that, with the attack resurfacing the shooter’s motivations, and putting him back in the spotlight, it will act as an inspiration for other white supremacists. In the years following the synagogue shooting, Pittsburgh became a kind of pilgrimage site for the defendant’s admirers — leading to continued harassment of local Jews.
“We’re giving a platform to an individual who is a Jew hater, who wanted to kill all Jews,” Orsini said. “What does that spark in other like-minded people? We need to be very cognizant throughout this trial on what kind of chatter is going to be out there on the deep dark web, or even in open portals.”
In the face of concerns about retraumatization, Greenblatt said the ADL is preparing resources on how to discuss the trial with students and amid the Jewish community.
“To relive the horrors of, the grief of, the event — this thing being constantly in the news — it’s going to be hard to avoid, it’s going to be difficult and it could be grisly and upsetting,” Greenblatt said. “I would much prefer this trial didn’t happen — I would much prefer this crime never happened, I would much prefer that those people were all still with us today — but this is where we are.”
He added, “If there might be some ability to raise awareness among the non-Jewish population of what we’re facing, [that] would be of value.”
One potential challenge for American Jews as a whole, Spitalnick said, is that federal prosecutors don’t necessarily share the needs of Jews who will be following the proceedings. While the trial will conjure a mix of emotions for Jews locally and beyond, she said, prosecutors will be more focused on the nuts and bolts of what happened that day and the details of the accused attacker’s actions and motives.
“We’re going to probably spend a lot of time hearing from the prosecution about what motivated him, but it’s not through the lens of what we as Jews think about when we think about Jewish safety,” she said. “It’s through the lens of making the case that this guy did what he did motivated by this extremism and hate… It’s going to be very deliberate and tactical and precise, versus where we as American Jews have been thinking about this from a deeply personal, communal safety perspective.”
The deliberate and detailed work of prosecutors, however, may not be at cross purposes with the emotional needs of Jews, Orsini said. When the trial ends, he said, the establishment of Bowers’ guilt may itself prove to be transformative for how Jews relate to the tragedy, in Pittsburgh and beyond.
“The fact that this individual has not been fully brought to justice… and is not convicted yet of this mass shooting — in some way, yes, that closure and finality will be done at the end of this trial,” he said. “The community can kind of regroup and truly become resilient once this phase is over with.”
—
The post Long-delayed Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial to begin Monday, igniting pain, fear and hopes for closure appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Trump Condemns Far-Right Podcasters Carlson, Kelly, Owens, Jones: ‘They’re Stupid People, and They Know It’
US President Donald Trump points a finger as he delivers remarks in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington, DC, US, July 31, 2025. Photo: Kent Nishimura via Reuters Connect
US President Donald Trump on Thursday dropped a nuclear-level social media bomb to explode on the growing contingent of far-right podcasters who have now emerged as some of his most vehement and volatile critics, especially over the war with Iran.
“I know why Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens, and Alex Jones have all been fighting me for years, especially by the fact that they think it is wonderful for Iran, the Number One State Sponsor of Terror, to have a Nuclear Weapon,” Trump posted on Truth Social, opening a 482-word broadside.
The president then revisited his assessment from earlier this week that Carlson is a “low-IQ person that has absolutely no idea what’s going on,” offering his theory that all four prominent podcasters “have one thing in common: Low IQs.”
“They’re stupid people, they know it, their families know it, and everyone else knows it, too!” Trump wrote. “Look at their past, look at their record. They don’t have what it takes, and they never did!”
The president then took aim at his critics’ professional setbacks, writing, “They’ve all been thrown off Television, lost their Shows, and aren’t even invited on TV because nobody cares about them, they’re NUT JOBS, TROUBLEMAKERS, and will say anything necessary for some ‘free’ and cheap publicity.”
Carlson left his influential perch at Fox News in April 2023, shortly after the network settled a lawsuit with Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million, partially in response to his on-camera statements. Kelly left Fox in January 2017 and pivoted to NBC News, which she left in 2019 following the cancellation of her program “Megyn Kelly Today” after outcry over her statements on the alleged acceptability of blackface in Halloween costumes during her youth. In March 2024, The Daily Wire announced that the conservative entertainment company and Owens “ended their relationship,” following the host’s decision to embrace the example of her friend, rapper Kanye West (now known as Ye) in promoting a variety of antisemitic conspiracy theories.
Trump took a moment to level personal insults at Carlson, Owens, and Jones.
Labeling Carlson a “hand flailing fool,” Trump blasted the broadcaster “who couldn’t even finish College,” calling him “a broken man when he got fired from Fox” and lamenting that “he’s never been the same.” The president further taunted Carlson, suggesting that “perhaps he should see a good psychiatrist!”
Trump also took a side in the defamation lawsuit filed in July against Owens by French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte, following the podcaster’s unwillingness to stop accusing France’s first lady of secretly being male.
“‘Crazy’ Candace Owens, who accuses the Highly Respected First Lady of France of being a man, when she is not, and will hopefully win lots of money in the ongoing lawsuit,” Trump wrote.
The former beauty pageant promoter who married a Slovenian model in 2005 then offered his unapologetic assessment of the two women’s physical appearances, expressing his preference that “Actually, to me, the First Lady of France is a far more beautiful woman than Candace, in fact, it’s not even close!”
Owens responded to the Truth Social post, sharing a screenshot with various lines highlighted in red and writing Thursday to her 7.8 million followers on X that “it may be time to put Grandpa up in a home.”
Trump next turned his ire toward the host of Info Wars. He wrote that “Bankrupt” Jones — who currently owes $1.4 billion following his losses in a series of colossal 2021 and 2022 defamation judgments — says “some of the dumbest things, and lost his entire fortune, as he should have, for his horrendous attack on the families of the Sandy Hook shooting victims, ridiculously claiming it was a hoax.”
Jones also responded on X, accusing anti-Trump Republicans and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of putting hum under a spell.
“We Hope and Pray That President Trump Wakes Up From The Mind Control Spell That The Never Trumper Neo-Cons and Netanyahu Have Put Him Under,” Jones wrote.
In an accompanying 24-minute video, a confused and dejected Jones spoke in front of a black and green digital map of the United States. He sat at a desk with a printed-out copy of the Truth Social statement, describing incredulously how the president’s posting “demonized the living hell out of us for challenging him saying he would destroy an entire civilization in one night never to come back, the definition of genocide.”
In addition to defending himself, Jones on X also re-posted a video of white nationalist podcaster Nick Fuentes saying, “I love Alex, I’ll always love Alex. And I’ll always be loyal to him as well.”
Holding up his hands and gesturing, Fuentes, a Holocaust denier and fellow conpsiracy theorist, said, “That’s my guy, that’s my GOAT [greatest of all time] … And that’s a real n***er, OK? Alex Jones is our motherf**king n***er and always will be … That is the blueprint, that is the archetype.”
The recent promotion in mainstream media outlets of criticism from Carlson, Kelly, Owens, Jones, and others appears to have motivated Trump’s post.
“These so-called ‘pundits’ are LOSERS, and they always will be! Now Fake News CNN, The Failing New York Times, and all of the other Radical Left ‘News’ Organizations, are ‘hailing’ them, and giving them ‘positive’ press for the first time in their lives,” Trump wrote.
“They’re not ‘MAGA,’” he added, referring to his “Make America Great Again” movement. “They’re losers, just trying to latch on to MAGA.”
Trump asserted that if he wanted to persuade the rogue podcasters to return to his MAGA movement he could do so but had more important things to do with his time.
“As President, I could get them on my side anytime I want to, but when they call, I don’t return their calls because I’m too busy on World and Country Affairs and, after a few times, they go ‘nasty,’ just like Marjorie ‘Traitor’ Brown, but I no longer care about that stuff, I only care about doing right for our Country,” Trump wrote.
On Tuesday, former US Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) joined numerous former supporters of the president in calling for his removal through the procedures outlined in the 25th amendment of the US Constitution, a call backed by Owens and Jones.
Greene shared Trump’s post, writing on Thursday in response that he “has gone mad as he wages war against Iran, a broken campaign promise.” The former lawmaker added that she “fought alongside Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens, and Alex Jones to help get Trump elected. And now he goes off on a rambling rant attacking all of us in one post.”
Uncategorized
Israeli Restaurant in Munich Targeted in Suspected Antisemitic Attack
Broken glass and shattered storefront windows mark the façade of an Israeli restaurant in Munich after assailants smashed the windows and threw pyrotechnic devices inside during an overnight attack. Photo: Screenshot
An Israeli restaurant in the German city of Munich was attacked on Thursday night when assailants smashed multiple windows and threw pyrotechnic devices inside in what authorities suspected was an antisemitic assault — the latest in a series of incidents unfolding against a backdrop of rising hostility toward Jews and Israelis nationwide.
As of Friday morning, local law enforcement had opened a criminal investigation into the attack in southern Germany, with authorities probing a possible antisemitic motive and reviewing security footage and witness accounts as part of the ongoing inquiry.
The restaurant was closed at the time of the attack, and no one was injured, though the perpetrators caused damage estimated at several thousand euros.
Police said the assailants had not yet been identified, and it remained unclear how many people were involved in the attack.
Munich’s State Security Service, which handles politically motivated crimes, took over the case, as authorities worked to determine the circumstances and identify those involved.
“According to the current state of investigations, the display windows were forcibly damaged, and pyrotechnic devices were thrown into the restaurant,” police said in a statement, adding that the origin and type of the devices had yet to be determined and remained a key line of inquiry.
Opened in 2007, the restaurant is located on Hessstrasse in the Maxvorstadt district, Munich’s central university quarter near the Old Town and the main railway station, an area known for its cultural institutions, student life, and busy pedestrian streets.
Restaurant employee Grigori Dratva, the owner’s brother-in-law, told the German DPA news agency that there had been “no direct threats” ahead of the incident.
“We don’t want to make accusations, but we are a visible Israeli restaurant, so the assumption is obvious,” Dratva said.
Despite the attack, Dratva said the restaurant planned to reopen later the same day after the damaged windows were temporarily secured and scheduled for replacement, adding, “We won’t be intimidated.”
The Munich-based Conference of European Rabbis (CER) strongly denounced the attack, warning it reflected a troubling and escalating pattern of antisemitic incidents, while calling for swift measures to strengthen protections for Jews and prevent further violence.
“This attack is not a one-off, but rather part of a dangerous trend that we have been seeing since Oct. 7, 2023,” CER’s General Secretary Gady Gronich said in a statement, referring to the ongoing surge in antisemitic incidents following Hamas’s invasion of southern Israel over two years ago.
“Until now, Munich was a safe place for Jews, and it must stay that way. What’s needed is a clear line: zero tolerance against antisemitism, with harsh punishments that do not lead to repeat incidents, and no room for those who sow hate in our society,” he continued.
Like most countries across Europe and the broader Western world, Germany has seen a shocking rise in antisemitic incidents over the last two years, in the wake of the Hamas-led Oct. 7 massacre.
According to recently released figures, the number of antisemitic offenses in the country reached a record high in 2025, totaling 2,267 incidents, including violence, incitement, property damage, and propaganda offenses.
By comparison, officially recorded antisemitic crimes were significantly lower at 1,825 in 2024, 900 in 2023, and fewer than 500 in 2022, prior to the Oct. 7 atrocities.
Officials have warned that the real number of antisemitic crimes is likely much higher, as many incidents go unreported.
Uncategorized
The Pentagon fears the Vatican’s authority in a battle over Christianity’s power
The Vatican has not been a major player on the geopolitical stage in, well, at least a few centuries. The Catholic state is tiny, and has not had a real army or ruled land since, give or take a century, the days of Machiavelli.
Nevertheless, in January the Pentagon summoned Cardinal Christophe Pierre, then the Vatican’s ambassador to the U.S., to a meeting, according to reporting from The Free Press. There, Elbridge Colby, the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, sparred with the Catholic diplomat in light of Pope Leo XIV’s outspoken opposition to the war in Iran, and to wars in general.
According to the report, which cited anonymous sources, the Pentagon told the cardinal, has the military might to do “whatever it wants” and that the pope “better take its side.” NBC reported its own Vatican sources calling the meeting “most unpleasant and confrontational,” and Catholic outlet The Pillar reported a senior Vatican official describing the meeting as “tense” and “aggressive” though not overtly threatening.
Then, one of the Pentagon reps reportedly referenced the Avignon papacy, a niche bit of church history that the official transformed into a cudgel. During this period, from 1309 until 1376, the papacy moved to France, where seven different popes lived in the territory of Avignon, under the influence of the control and influence of the French crown.
Since the reporting broke, both Pierre and Pentagon representatives have rejected the framing of the meeting as a threatening one. Vatican representative Mateo Bruni said that the meeting “provided the opportunity for an exchange of views on matters of mutual interest.”
The Department of War’s X account posted that the meeting was a “substantive, respectful, and professional” one in which the participants discussed “morality in foreign policy, the logic of the U.S. National Security Strategy, Europe, Africa, Latin America, and other topics.” The department denied any mention of the Avignon papacy.
Still, the fact that the Pentagon met with the Vatican ambassador at all is a first, and notable for demonstrating the impact of the pope’s moral leadership and the importance of Christianity in driving and justifying U.S. military actions — in particular, the war with Iran. And the public’s engagement in the debate over the specifics of the meeting proves that the U.S. government is right to care what the church says about its wars; people take it seriously. Military might is not the only force for influence.
Pivotal to understanding what the meeting meant is the disputed reference to the Avignon papacy, a historical moment in which a country’s secular government clashed with the church over symbolic and moral authority. The fact that there is even uproar and debate over whether an esoteric piece of history was mentioned in the meeting is proof enough of the stakes of the meeting.
To understand why Avignon is so pivotal — and why a Jewish publication would even be covering a piece of Catholic ancient history — it’s important to understand that, during that time period, in the 1300s, Europe was Catholic. Martin Luther wouldn’t nail his 95 Theses to the door of the church for two more centuries, and Protestantism didn’t exist. That gave the Vatican massive influence as the leader of Christendom, which encompassed all of Europe, and arguably much more. Kings were seen as vassals of the Vatican, carrying out its orders.
When the French king, Philip IV, asked for the church to fund his war against Britain, the pope refused. In 1302, Pope Boniface VII drove the point home with a papal bull stating that submitting to the pope was required for eternal salvation, placing the Vatican’s authority over all royal power. And he threatened to excommunicate Philip.
In response, the king had Boniface VII beaten to a pulp, and he died shortly thereafter. His successor, not incidentally, forgave the king and restored his religious authority. France used its power at the time to stack the church with French-allied clerics, and the move to Avignon followed shortly thereafter, with the next seven popes all of French background.
Fundamentally, the Avignon papacy was a conflict over symbolic authority. Philip IV wanted his wars to be blessed, and righteous. The Pentagon, clearly, wants the same for the war on Iran, with historically freighted roles. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has declared the war a Christian mission for the U.S., fighting alongside Israel as the world’s Jewish state — together targeting the Islamic Republic.
The idea that the Pentagon might have summoned the ghosts of the Avignon papacy shows that the U.S. still cares about the moral authority of the peace-preaching Vatican as a rival to military might. And the debate over whether anyone referenced what sounds like a nerdy piece of history is really a debate over the influence of the U.S. as a world leader, and its bona fides as what the current government purports to be a Christian nation.
Catholicism is becoming increasingly high profile in the historically Protestant U.S. Six out of nine Supreme Court justices are Catholic. Vice President JD Vance is a Catholic convert. Unsubstantiated rumors are flying online that the pope is considering excommunicating Vance. There is clearly still power in the church, at least culturally.
And Leo XIV has leaned into that cultural authority. In numerous speeches, including his Easter address, the pope has appeared to directly respond to American government officials and decisions, expressing sympathy for migrants as Trump’s deportation efforts accelerated, and critiquing “imperialist” military might as he entered into war with Iran. Despite being the first American pope, he has refused multiple invitations to the White House, including one for July 4 this year to celebrate the country’s 250th birthday; instead, he is pointedly visiting migrants on the same day.
“The Pope may well never visit the United States under this administration,” a Vatican official told The Free Press.
The particular clash between the White House and the pope also centers in large part around Hegseth, who is a member of an extremist Reformed Christian church, not a Catholic. (Though he does have a tattoo reading “Deus Volt,” a rallying cry during the Crusades — which were certainly Catholic.) After Hegseth gave a speech declaring that God had blessed the war with Iran and asking troops to pray for military victory, the pope said that God “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them.” Despite their different Christian movements, summoning a Vatican representative to the Pentagon, whatever was said, shows that Hegseth wants the pope on his side, and recognizes his speeches as a major factor in geopolitics.
The battle for Christian moral authority between the government and the pope also comes alongside a more internal Catholic clash in the U.S. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is fighting high-profile Catholic influencers such as Candace Owens and Nick Fuentes, who regularly justify their open antisemitism with Catholicism. Though the pope himself has yet to weigh in, it’s another face of an ongoing struggle to define what Christianity means.
In today’s world, it’s hard to imagine a speech from the pope or the threat of excommunication carrying real weight, among so many churches with many theologies about war, antisemitism and the Middle East. The Vatican is no longer the singular authority over the West, and the pope’s power is largely symbolic. Whether or not anyone in the Pentagon meeting said that the U.S. has the military force to do anything it wants, it’s true.
Yet the fact that the government is engaging so seriously with the Vatican is a sign of the increasing centrality of Christianity, both Catholic and otherwise, in the U.S. government, and in American society. As Christian nationalists in the Trump administration seek to go back to the imagined glory days of Western culture, when Christendom rules, it becomes increasingly difficult to ignore the oldest, largest and most public face of the religion, or to deny its moral authority.
In a world in which the Vatican has only soft power, the pope’s decrees carry only as much power as they are given. But however soft the pope’s power may be, that surreal Vatican visit to the Pentagon suggests that even the best-armed military in the world is afraid of it.
The post The Pentagon fears the Vatican’s authority in a battle over Christianity’s power appeared first on The Forward.