There is little evidence that the Executive has done anything since devolution’s restoration to change NI’s economic trajectory

This autumn, as Russia escalated its total-war-style strike campaign against Ukraine’s critical infrastructure and economy, and relations between Kyiv and Washington hit an all-time low, the daily battles along Ukraine’s vast battlefield have faded into the background of the information space.

Despite the reduced attention in

A new federal lawsuit looks to drive a stake through the heart of Donald Trump and his family’s questionable cryptocurrency empire.

The Trump family’s crypto ventures brought in more than $1.4 billion in 2025, as his administration has pressed for crypto-friendly policies. This is part of why polling shows that most Americans think Trump is profiting from the presidency in illegal or unethical ways.

And in a lawsuit filed Thursday, a shareholder of Circle Internet Group — a competitor of the Trump family’s World Liberty Financial crypto company — accuses the Trump business of “corruptly profiting” off crypto deals and says the president has violated the Constitution’s foreign emoluments clause. (A spokesperson for Circle said the company “did not initiate, direct, authorize, or participate in the filing.”)

The lawsuit specifically cites the sale of a major stake in World Liberty to an entity involving the United Arab Emirates’ national security adviser — also known as the “Spy Sheikh” — four days before Trump’s inauguration. The suit also details how a UAE-backed firm led by that same official used World Liberty cryptocurrency to make a $2 billion investment in the crypto firm Binance.

The lawsuit comes as some crypto enthusiasts turn on Trump over his profiting off the industry while in office. The president and his representatives have always said his crypto investments are above board, with a White House spokesperson calling the new lawsuit “frivolous” and adding, “There are no conflicts of interest.” A World Liberty spokesperson called the lawsuit “without merit” and has previously said Trump had no role in the company.

Such claims are disputed by people like Protect Democracy’s executive director, Ian Bassin, who has argued that Trump’s crypto dealings are blatantly unconstitutional. And Matt Pelikan, a lawyer whose firm filed the lawsuit, said in a statement:

President Trump has turned his office into a source of private profit on a scale without precedent in American history. The President’s business dealings are not only corrupt, they are illegal.

This lawsuit only stands to fuel voters’ anger over government corruption: A recent Fox News poll showed nearly 9 in 10 voters as extremely or very concerned about corruption. So, with the midterms less than two weeks away, anything that stands to remind the public about Trump’s terrible track record on this issue seems like a threat to Republicans’ electoral hopes.

The post Trump faces federal lawsuit over his questionable cryptocurrency empire appeared first on MS NOW.

 

A wave of student protests has spread across several European countries in recent weeks, with France at its centre, where demonstrations over staff shortages, underfunded schools and run-down facilities have continued since mid-September.

The French protests began on September 17th, when teachers at a high school in south-eastern Paris protested over staff shortages and students joined them, Australia’s ABC News reported. Demonstrations followed in Spain, Belgium, Italy, Portugal and Albania, and smaller protests took place in Greece, Austria, Ireland and Germany, according to the same report. What began over education has since widened to include the cost of living and public-sector cuts.

In this context, the Forum of European Muslim Youth and Student Organisations (FEMYSO) has come under the spotlight following its announcement of support for student protests in France and Belgium, and subsequently in Albania.

Several European reports have drawn links between FEMYSO and the Muslim Brotherhood, describing the student forum as the organisation’s youth wing. Among the most notable is a report by a French National Assembly investigative committee, published in December 2025, which points to close ties between the forum and networks linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and characterises its role as contributing to the spread of the movement’s ideas across Europe.

In a parliamentary question submitted in 2025, Germany’s Baden-Württemberg State Office for the Protection of the Constitution was cited as viewing FEMYSO as an umbrella organisation for youth groups with links to the Muslim Brotherhood.

FEMYSO, however, rejects these allegations. In a previous statement, the organisation affirmed that it has no ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Statements of Support for Protests Across Europe

On October 9th, the forum announced its solidarity with student demonstrations in France and Belgium. On October 18, it declared its support for student and youth protests in Albania, while also referring to ongoing demonstrations in Spain and Greece in the same context.

On October 15th, 2026, the French Muslim Students Association (Étudiants Musulmans de France, EMF), a member organisation of FEMYSO, went beyond expressing solidarity. It called on students, education workers and the broader social movement to join a nationwide mobilisation scheduled for October 17th, reaffirming its support for demonstrations stretching from Paris to Marseille and from Bordeaux to Strasbourg.

In a statement, EMF stressed the need to build a balance of power through protests. The statement came just two days before large-scale demonstrations took place across France, attracting hundreds of thousands of participants in largely peaceful gatherings before separate groups became involved in acts of violence, looting, arson and attacks on police officers and public buildings. These incidents reportedly resulted in more than 1,000 arrests and injuries to dozens of security personnel.

Such initiatives and calls for participation in demonstrations have raised concerns that political Islamist networks may seek to capitalise on public discontent, particularly when protests are accompanied by public disorder or acts of vandalism. This, critics fear, could turn student and social demands into instruments for expanding organisational influence and securing political leverage.

According to official French data, masked and violent individuals were present at the demonstrations. In several cities, shops were looted, while cars and rubbish bins were set on fire. In the city of Limoges, flames engulfed the historic town hall, a building dating back to 1883.

The same data indicated that 1,800 people had been arrested and more than 500 police officers and firefighters had been injured. In response to the violence and rioting, the French government announced the imposition of curfews in several cities.

Concerns Reach the Heart of European Institutions

These developments come at a time when the activities of organisations suspected of having links to the Muslim Brotherhood are facing increasing political scrutiny.

On September 15th, 2026, French MP Constance Le Grip submitted a written question to the government concerning European funding for projects involving FEMYSO, calling for clarification of funding mechanisms and oversight procedures governing grants.

The question followed recent reports and studies that raised concerns over the continued involvement of FEMYSO in projects benefiting from European funding, despite an earlier announcement by the European Commission that the organisation was no longer receiving direct funding.

FEMYSO has consequently become one of the most contentious issues in the wider European debate.

A recent study published by CERIF and AK Polis in September examined the organisation’s participation in the EmpowerAction project, which forms part of the TACKLE initiative funded by the European Union through its DEAR programme.

According to the study, the funding does not necessarily take the form of a direct EU operating grant to FEMYSO. Instead, it may be channelled through partner organisations, projects and sub-granting mechanisms.

This has raised concerns that European funds could reach an organisation through a project led by another partner or through a consortium and its sub-granting arrangements.

Against the backdrop of FEMYSO’s visibility in the protests, some of which were subsequently accompanied by violence and looting, as well as allegations of links to the Muslim Brotherhood, concerns have emerged over the possibility that the organisation could gain a foothold in current social unrest and convert it into political influence by winning the sympathy of European communities and left-wing parties.

FEMYSO: Background, Membership and European Footprint 

The Forum of European Muslim Youth and Student Organisations (FEMYSO) describes itself as a European umbrella organisation bringing together Muslim youth and student associations.

FEMYSO currently comprises 32 member organisations across 22 European countries. Its roots date back to 1995, when the first meeting of Muslim youth organisations was held in Sweden.

The following year, FEMYSO was formally established at a meeting in Leicester, United Kingdom, which brought together 19 organisations from 11 countries. In 2000, the forum established its headquarters in Brussels.

A letter to its supporters announced that instead of high profile endorsements and PAC donations, it will quietly mobilize individual donors for direct contributions

Breast cancer, flour crises in Gaza as Israel considers restarting "war" ■ Danger for Palestinians, Americans (including Jews) in West Bank ■ News on Iran, US politics, AIPAC, free speech ■ More

This is the Oct. 22, 2026, edition of “The Tea, Spilled by Morning Joe” newsletter. Subscribe here to get it delivered straight to your inbox Monday through Friday.

“Have they forgotten that people who turn their backs on friends often lose what they cherish most for themselves?”

— Ronald Reagan, April 5, 1982

The president of the United States and the people around him have never understood American history or our constitutional republic’s special place in the world. Because they don’t know that history, they have twisted the meaning of Western civilization from the elevation of individual rights over ruling monarchs and autocrats to political battles over a handful of trans athletes.

Western civilization is not about culture wars or campaigns of conquest. It is defined by the advancement of freedom, science, reason, and discovery.

It is the belief that every individual has dignity, that people find the truth by freely asking questions, and that even the powerful must always answer to the law.

One of the best definitions comes from Winston Churchill in July 1938, as Hitler threatened Czechoslovakia:

“It means a society based upon the opinion of civilians. It means that violence, the rule of warriors and despotic chiefs, the conditions of camps and warfare, of riot and tyranny, give place to parliaments where laws are made, and independent courts of justice in which over long periods those laws are maintained. That is Civilization — and in its soil grow continually freedom, comfort, and culture.”

The West’s birth cry came at the Battle of Marathon in 490 B.C. Against all odds, Athenian citizen-soldiers drove back the mighty Persian Empire.

The March of the Ten Thousand 90 years later found Greek soldiers stranded in Persia after their generals were murdered. Instead of surrendering as armies of the East would do, these mercenaries elected their own leaders and fought their way home — electrifying the rising West. Free men who governed themselves suddenly mattered more than generals or kings.

In 1215, English barons forced King John to accept that even a king must abide by the law. Donald Trump would do well to read the Magna Carta.

Joan of Arc showed how even a young peasant girl could make a difference by rallying a broken France and lifting the siege of Orléans.

Churchill refused to bargain with Hitler, a small group of pilots in the Royal Air Force saved a nation, and the British people defended Western civilization until the New World, in all its might, arrived to join the cause.

On June 6, 1944, Americans and their allies stormed Normandy to free a continent, not conquer it.

In 1989, ordinary people tore down the Berlin Wall with hammers and bare hands, as the West’s twilight battle against Soviet aggression ended in victory.

In 1989, the front line of freedom ran through Berlin. In the 1990s, it moved east to Poland and the Baltics. Today it runs through the heart of Ukraine — and the American president has sided with the invader against Western freedom.

In appeasing Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump is betraying more than Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

He is betraying more than the Ukrainian fighters protecting their wives, children, and homes.

He is betraying more than our allies in Poland, the Baltics, and across the East.

He is betraying the very idea of Western civilization.

That idea born at Marathon, written into the Magna Carta, defended in the skies over London, won back at Normandy, and set free at the Berlin Wall.

The West has never been about who plays on girls’ softball teams. It has always been about whether free nations stand together when tyrants and despots invade free countries and start redrawing their borders with tanks.

Donald Trump’s betrayal of Western democracy will forever darken his legacy in shame unless he starts defending freedom soon.

I am not optimistic.

CHARTS OF THE DAY

Source: New York Times/Siena poll of 3,494 voters conducted Oct. 16-19, 2026. Margin of error: +/- 1.9 percentage points

ON THIS DATE

On Oct. 22, 1962, President John F. Kennedy announced in a televised address that the Soviet Union was building nuclear missile sites in Cuba and that the United States would impose a naval quarantine on offensive weapons bound for the island.

WHAT THEY SAID

Katty Kay on Trump 2.0

“The story of this administration is one of incompetence — they just aren’t very good at what they’re trying to do. They have the ideology, but they’re there because they’re loyal to President Trump, not because they have expertise in what they’re doing. People around the country are exhausted and frustrated: This is not a well-run government, and a government that’s not well run doesn’t produce good results for its voters.”

David French on corruption and the cost of living

“Every two days, there’s a new story about the Trump family enriching itself or about people using money to influence the pardon process. While people are struggling with their paychecks, there’s a French-aristocracy feel from this incredibly gilded White House. The combination of economic headwinds and corruption is really fanning the political flames.

Jonathan Lemire on the president’s squandered capital

“Trump completed arguably the greatest political comeback in U.S. history in 2024, and then proceeded in 2025 to enact his agenda. Now the administration has blown almost all of that political capital on hard-line deportation and the war in Iran. They’re underwater on every issue, including ones that used to be strengths.”

The post Joe Scarborough: Trump is betraying the very idea of Western civilization appeared first on MS NOW.

“I think that everything that Israel has done since the 7th of October is justified. Israel should not suffer.”

These words were spoken last month by Milorad Dodik, the de facto leader of Republika Srpska, the Serb-majority entity within Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH).

This statement was hardly surprising. In recent years, Dodik has been outspoken in his support for Israel and its genocidal war on Gaza at a time in which relations between Republika Srpska and Israel are growing.

From high-level political endorsements and the opening of an Israeli Chamber of Commerce office in Banja Luka to increasingly explicit expressions of mutual solidarity. Such growing alignment speaks to how both leaderships are seeking to bolster their international legitimacy amid mounting political pressures.

For Dodik, deep relations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could strengthen his access to Washington and bolster his long-standing ambitions to expand the Bosnian-Serb entity’s autonomy, while Israel may see the relationship as an opportunity to cultivate new allies and increase its diplomatic leverage in Europe.

The implications, however, extend beyond bilateral cooperation. In BiH, where the fragile constitutional order rests on the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement, the growing alignment raises questions about the international legitimisation of separatism, the resurgence of ethnic and religious nationalist narratives, and Brussels’ ability to preserve stability in Europe’s “Inner Courtyard.”

Political calculations

Republika Srpska’s mounting tensions with some Western European governments and international institutions provide some of the necessary context for understanding the significance of Israel’s growing engagement with the Bosnian-Serb entity.

According to Dr Asim Mujkić, an associate professor of philosophy at the University of Sarajevo, the sharp decline in international support for Israel’s government has made Tel Aviv more open to unconventional partnerships. 

By engaging with Dodik publicly, Israel demonstrates its ability to maintain existing partnerships while forging new ones. At the same time, Israel’s ties to the Republika Srpska government may provide Tel Aviv with greater leverage in its dealings with European powers.

“I would say the ever-growing lack of international support for [Netanyahu’s] government, the rise of criticism and even boycott by traditionally amicable countries and organisations made Netanyahu open to political adventurism of this kind. For [the] domestic public it is surely advantageous to be able to show that some political leaders in fact visit Israel,” he told The New Arab.

Giorgio Fruscione, a research fellow at the Milan-based Italian Institute for International Political Studies, sees a related but broader set of motivations. He holds that Netanyahu’s government seeks international legitimacy via relationships with political actors that have strong connections to Washington and Moscow.

Fruscione also understands disputes over the interpretation of the Srebrenica genocide as part of the political context shaping Israel-Republika Srpska relations.

Viewed at a regional level, the expansion of Israel’s partnerships with actors in the Balkans serves to counter the influence of Iran, Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, which have their own networks in southeastern Europe.

Put simply, while Israeli officials will frequently stress the importance of commercial cooperation, trade, and investment with Republika Srpska, Albania, and other players in the Balkans, there is no denying that the significance of these partnerships goes beyond stated economic objectives.

Dodik’s search for political leverage

Above all these considerations, Dodik’s main motivation for establishing closer ties with Israel seems to be his desire to enhance his access to Washington.

Although Dodik was officially removed from the Republika Srpska presidency last year, he remains the de facto leader in Banja Luka, and the Bosnian-Serb strongman is determined to continue advancing his political agenda at the expense of BiH’s fragile stability. International support, therefore, remains valuable to Dodik as he pursues his political ambitions, even if full independence is not necessarily his ultimate goal.

In terms of cultivating deeper ties with the Trump administration, Dodik has relied on conventional lobbying. But that alone might not suffice for the Bosnian-Serb leader, who can probably count on Netanyahu as a key intermediary in Washington.

Support, or at least accommodation, from the United States and Russia has benefited Dodik’s political position. With an Israeli Chamber of Commerce office opening in Banja Luka and officials from Republika Srpska and Israel increasing their public engagement, Dodik has an easier time presenting his leadership as globally connected instead of isolated.

At the heart of Dodik’s desire to bolster ties with the United States, Russia, and Israel is his interest in obtaining greater bargaining power when dealing with other actors in BiH and internationally. By invoking independence without necessarily attempting to establish Republika Srpska as an independent state (a process that would be extremely challenging and messy in practice), Dodik can gain such leverage.

There are important economic and security dimensions to Israel and Republika Srpska’s deepening ties. Dodik wants greater cooperation with Israel in technology and investment, while Netanyahu’s government is focused on energy and security as key areas of this bilateral relationship.

Yet, given the lack of concrete details available to the general public, the scale and scope of this envisioned economic cooperation remain unclear.

Nonetheless, with Republika Srpska under financial pressure, it is understandable that the leadership in Banja Luka would welcome Israeli capital alongside any political advantages that could come from this growing partnership.

Belgrade's role

Republika Srpska’s growing ties with Israel should be understood in the context of Belgrade’s relationship with Tel Aviv, given Serbia’s influence in Banja Luka. Particularly in the area of defence, Serbia has strengthened its relationship with Israel, underscored by the establishment of a drone assembly plant involving Israeli defence company Elbit Systems and Belgrade’s arms exports to Tel Aviv.

Fruscione holds that Republika Srpska’s foreign policy is not entirely independent and that Banja Luka’s international relationships remain closely connected to Serbia’s priorities on the international stage.

“Republika Srpska does not have an autonomous foreign policy. Although it may appear so, it is aligned with, if not even piloted by Belgrade. Therefore, relations between Israel and Republika Srpska must be understood within this framework,” he explained to The New Arab.

This perspective places Republika Srpska’s growing partnership with Tel Aviv within a broader network of political and economic relationships linking its leadership with Belgrade, Moscow, and Washington.

These relationships reflect overlapping, and at times competing, efforts to secure external support and advance political interests. The relationship with Israel also intersects with political cooperation between Milorad Dodik’s Alliance of Independent Social Democrats and the Croatian Democratic Union of Bosnia and Herzegovina, BiH’s principal Croat nationalist party.

Both parties have sought changes to aspects of BiH’s political arrangements, particularly those affecting entity autonomy, political representation, and the distribution of power, although their objectives and interests are not identical.

According to Dr Mujkić, the Netanyahu government’s engagement with Serb and Croat nationalist leaders risks reinforcing political forces that challenge BiH’s Daytonian balance. Taken together, these relationships could increase pressure on the institutions in Sarajevo and complicate efforts to develop a coordinated Bosnian foreign policy.

They also create a regional dynamic in which developments involving Tel Aviv become increasingly intertwined with Belgrade’s ambitions, internal divisions within BiH, and competing US and Russian interests amid an era of intensifying great-power competition.

"Netanyahu’s government has supported [the Croat nationalist hard-liners of the] ethnic party in Bosnia, HDZ, even economically through the presence of Amir Kabiri, [an] Israeli businessman who not only supported Croat nationalism but also distorted [the representation of the] Bosnian Jewish community. It has supported Serb nationalist hard-liners as well, so of course, such a policy [threatens the] Dayton equilibrium,” he told The New Arab.

According to Dr Mujkić, both nationalist movements have increasingly incorporated Christian nationalism and claims of an “Islamist danger” posed by Bosniaks into their political rhetoric.

The irony of history is that contemporary Croat nationalism is heir to the ideology of the Nazi-allied Independent State of Croatia, which sought to exterminate local Jews. Meanwhile, contemporary Serb nationalism draws on a radical nationalist tradition that, under Milan Nedić’s collaborationist regime in 1941, proudly declared Serbia the first Judenrein country in the ‘new Europe’

"Yet today, these are - and not, for example, [the] Jewish Community of Bosnia and Herzegovina - [who] are the ‘allies’ of [Netanyahu],” Dr Mujkić told The New Arab.

The Dayton order and Bosnia's fragile stability

Republika Srpska’s strengthening relationship with Israel stands to reinforce a political environment in which there is greater acceptance of serious challenges to BiH’s territorial dignity.

This development, as Dr Mujkić explains, fits into a wider geopolitical pattern in which Moscow’s support for local nationalist movements and shifts in Washington’s foreign policy during the Trump 2.0 era risk weakening the European Union’s capacity to respond to instability in the Western Balkans.

As Fruscione told The New Arab, Israeli support is not creating a new secessionist dynamic in BiH. Yet, it might accelerate one already underway, particularly as the EU’s internal divisions serve to complicate Brussels’ engagement with the Balkan country.

The challenges surrounding the appointment of a new High Representative, whose office provides a critical international safeguard for the Dayton framework, highlight the serious issues facing the existing system of oversight.

However, the eventual consequences of the strengthening Republika Srpska-Israel relationship remain uncertain. Tel Aviv’s growing engagement may help Dodik bolster his international standing and bargaining power, but how far Washington or Tel Aviv would go to support him remains unclear.

Giorgio Cafiero is the CEO of Gulf State Analytics

Follow him on X: @GiorgioCafiero

Edited by Charlie Hoyle

US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's home raided; Australian MP Helen Haines loses both legs following an attack.

Ukraine is heading into 2027 with a rising fiscal gap. Growth forecasts have been cut, inflation is rising, and the need for external financing seems to just keep going up. The economy is being squeezed by a labor market drained by mobilization and emigration, energy infrastructure has been decimated, and

Washington, DC - The midterm elections in the United States are in full swing, with early voting starting in most states.

The results will set the tone of US foreign and domestic policy for the rest of President Donald Trump's term. Control of both chambers of Congress - the Senate and the House of Representatives - is at stake.

If the Democrats flip one of the two chambers, which are currently under the control of Trump's Republican Party, they can thwart Trump's legislative agenda.

And if they can gain control of the Senate, they can block his judicial nominees. The upper chamber is also responsible for confirming cabinet appointees, ratifying treaties and holding impeachment trials.

There are 35 seats in the 100-member chamber up for grabs in this year's election, which will conclude on 3 November.

The current makeup of the Senate is now 53-47, so the Democrats need to flip four seats without losing any to reclaim the majority in the legislative body.

In most Senate races, the results are all but known before the votes are cast due to the political makeup of the states where the contests are playing out.

Barring a miracle, Republicans will win in Alabama, and Democrats will win in Massachusetts. That leaves a handful of competitive states that will determine the fate of the Senate.

The New Arab looks at the candidates in five key close races and where they stand on the issues.

Michigan (open seat): Abdul El-Sayed (Democrat) v Mike Rogers (Republican)

The Senate contest in Michigan is one of the most closely watched races in the election. Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive public health advocate, is taking on Mike Rogers, a Trump-backed former Congress member.

In recent weeks, Rogers and his allies have tried to focus the race on El-Sayed's Muslim identity, smearing him with baseless accusations of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran.

Trump has repeatedly mocked El-Sayed's name. "His name is actually Abduladadalalala. It's Adulbabababababa Mohammed Al-Sayed," the US president said at a rally last week.

El-Sayed has pushed to refocus the race on the issues - particularly the affordability crisis, tariffs and the rise in the price of gasoline linked to the Iran war and his support for universal healthcare.

The progressive Democrat opposes US aid to Israel and argues that Washington should focus on investing in communities at home.

He has accused Israel of carrying out a genocide in Gaza - an allegation backed by leading human rights groups and United Nations investigators.

"I oppose the illegal and unjustifiable war in Iran and demand an immediate end to the hostilities," El-Sayed says on his platform.

Rogers initially supported the war with Iran, calling the decision to launch the conflict the "right thing to do".

But the former Republican legislator curbed his enthusiasm for the conflict as it dragged on and proved unpopular with voters. "The war with Iran needs to end, and end quickly," he said in a campaign ad in September.

Rogers is a staunch supporter of Israel. "When I get to the United States Senate, I will continue to unconditionally support Israel's right to defend itself," he said earlier this year.

Texas (open seat): James Talarico (Democrat) v Ken Paxton (Republican)

In a sign that highlights the declining popularity of Republicans, Democrats are mounting a competitive Senate challenge in deep-red Texas, which has been a Republican stronghold for decades.

Public opinion polls have shown Democratic State Representative James Talarico neck-and-neck with Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Talarico has focused his campaign on fighting corruption, closing tax loopholes and lowering the cost of living. Paxton has presented himself as a defender of Trump's agenda, emphasising securing the southern border against irregular migration.

On foreign policy, Talarico calls for conditioning US aid to Israel. He broadly backs Israel's right to "defend itself", while focusing his criticism of Israeli atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

"As a former teacher, seeing the death and the destruction in Gaza, seeing what’s happening to children in particular, makes me sick to my stomach," he said at a CNN townhall last week.

Talarico has stopped short of calling the atrocities a genocide, saying that the issue is a legal determination that should be made by international courts.

He has pledged to work to "end the forever war in Iran that’s driving up the cost of gas and groceries".

In contrast, Paxton has backed Trump's military action in Iran, but in a recently leaked audio recording he bemoaned the war's impact on gasoline and diesel prices.

"It's the war, it's gas prices, it's diesel," he said when asked about the issues dragging his campaign, according to Axios, which first reported on the leaked remarks.

Paxton is a strong supporter of Israel. As attorney general, he has defended and enforced laws to penalise companies and individuals that boycott Israel.

Maine: Susan Collins (Republican incumbent) v Troy Jackson (Democrat)

Maine generally leans Democratic in presidential elections, but Republican Susan Collins has won five consecutive elections in the northeastern state, earning her a reputation as one of the most tenacious politicians in the country.

This time, Democrats are hoping to use the mounting anger against Trump to finally topple the 73-year-old senator.

But the Democratic push was off to a terrible start after the party's nominee, Graham Platner, stepped down due to allegations of sexual misconduct.

Platner was replaced by former state Senate President Troy Jackson.

Collins, who has shown willingness to break with Trump, has promoted herself as an experienced and hardworking "common sense" leader.

Jackson has focused on his deep roots in the state as a former logger and supporter of workers' rights.

The Democrat agrees that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. "When I'm in the US Senate, I’ll never vote in favour of US taxpayer-funded military aid to Israel," he wrote in a social media post in July.

Collins is an unflinching advocate for Israel and has backed continuing military aid to the US ally, calling herself a "strong supporter" of the assistance, which totals at least $3.8 billion annually.

On Iran, the Maine senator has been a rare Republican dissenter against the conflict, voting repeatedly with Democrats to curb Trump's war powers.

Jackson, however, has argued that Collins' presence in the Senate tilts the balance in favour of Republicans and enables Trump's agenda, including the Iran war.

"Senator Susan Collins says that she voted against [the war] nine times, but she didn’t have the votes," Jackson said during a debate earlier this month.

"Well that sounds like then we probably ought to have Democrats in charge of the US Senate so that we have the votes."

Alaska: Dan Sullivan (Republican incumbent) v Mary Peltola (Democrat)

Alaska is another traditional Republican stronghold where Democrats are making gains and hoping to stage a big surprise.

The race pits Trump-backed two-term senator Dan Sullivan against former Democratic Congresswoman Mary Peltola. The Democratic candidate's campaign slogan is "fish, family, freedom", focusing on lowering costs in Alaska.

Sullivan is running on his record of helping push large tax cuts and "historic investments" in the US military. The senator has voted consistently against Democratic efforts to restrict Trump's ability to continue the war with Iran.

Last week, he appeared to blame the Democrats' energy regulations for the rising fuel prices in an effort to defend the war with Iran.

"Ladies and gentlemen, the conflict in the Middle East is temporary. The true forever war is the national Democrats’ war against Alaska oil and gas and our jobs. That’s the forever war," he said, according to Alaska Public Media.

Peltola has been overtly critical of the war and Sullivan's votes in support of Trump's military campaign in Iran.

"This war is driving up our energy bills and hurting Alaskans with no end in sight," she said earlier this month.

Both Peltola and Sullivan are staunch Israel supporters. Sullivan has voted repeatedly on pro-Israel measures in Congress, including sponsoring a measure to deepen military cooperation with the US ally.

When she served in the House of Representatives between 2023 and 2025, Peltola was one of the most uncompromising pro-Israel Democrats.

In 2024, she joined Republicans in voting to ban then-President Joe Biden from withholding weapons from Israel. She backed a bill to impose sanctions on the International Criminal Court in response to the arrest warrant against Netanyahu.

Ohio: Jon Husted (Republican incumbent) v Sherrod Brown (Democrat)

Former Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown is attempting to make a comeback in the Midwestern state that has been trending in Republicans' favour over the past decade.

He is taking on Jon Husted, who replaced Vice President JD Vance in the Senate after the Trump administration took office last year.

Beyond the single seat, the contest is of symbolic importance. It would restore the Democrats' competitive edge in the Midwestern state and serve as an early dig at Vance, who is expected to run for president in 2028.

Brown has made his opposition to the Iran war a key theme in his campaign.

"Jon Husted has voted 14 times to continue the reckless Iran war as gas and grocery prices continue to rise," he recently wrote in a social media post. "I’ll vote to end the war the first chance I get."

In March, Husted proclaimed that the war was going "much better than anyone thought it would".

But like other Republicans in competitive races, he has tempered his support for the conflict.

"The war needs to come to an end as quickly as possible so that we can lower gas prices," he told Politico earlier this month.

Husted and Brown are more closely aligned when it comes to Israel. Both are strong supporters of the US ally.

Ali Harb is a journalist based in Washington, DC. His work focuses on US foreign policy, elections, and Arab American communities

Follow him on X: @Harbpeace

Edited by Charlie Hoyle

Drone attacks on supply lines and safe cities are taking a devastating toll on civilians.

With government backing and little accountability, an ominous pattern casts a shadow over the Palestinian olive harvest.

For years, Serbia’s opposition has struggled to turn public discontent into a credible challenge to Aleksandar Vučić’s political dominance. On Sunday (25 October), a student-led movement that began with demands for accountability after a deadly train station collapse will attempt to do what established opposition forces have repeatedly failed to achieve: translate civic mobilisation into political change.

The upcoming parliamentary elections are about more than the (re)distribution of seats. They represent the endeavour citizens want and need in a democratic society.

For several years now, “the students operate according to the principles of direct democracy,” senior research associate at the University of Belgrade, Vasiljević told EUobserver. They gather in “plenums” and make collective decisions.

The motor behind that movement was anger. The lack of accountability after the collapse of a canopy at Novi Sad railway station on 1 November 2024, which killed 16 people was the main trigger.

Since then, protests have been taken place around in the country. Eventually, they grew into a nationwide challenge to the government. The student movement even marched from Belgrade to Brussels and Strasbourg to appeal to the EU institutions.

“It brought some irreversible changes that will have a lasting impact on society,” said Vasiljević.

And these changes could be now transposed into politics. “The country has been held captive for far too long by one ruling party and, in fact, one ruling elite,” Miloje Savić, a volunteering poll observer, told EUobserver.

For many Serbs, as for Savić, the students’ organisation represent “a tectonic shift in how society is organised and how it should function.”

The Student List, now the electoral vehicle for the mobilisation, has given people frustrated with established politics a new focus for their demands. The main idea being that political participation can be rebuilt from the ground up.

“It is not a good time to be living in Serbia. And during my life, I can’t remember a time when it was,” Ivan Bartoš, a 31-year-old organiser of student protests in Bački Petrovac told EUobserver.

Serbia, as many European countries, is suffering from an ageing population. It brings to the social debate a generational difference. On one side, the middle-aged and “corrupted” regime led by Vučić, on the other, a proposal of change without real political experience.

And the question that is heard in the run-up to the elections is “does Serbia need a professional politician who has been trained for years in kleptocracy, or is society willing to take a risk?”

Vučić’s ‘men in black’?

Yet the movement’s rise has exposed a fundamental tension: society may be changing faster than the institutions through which change must be delivered.

“The institutions have been captured and controlled by the regime. There is not enough institutional space to accommodate these political changes,” Vasiljević said.

Previous Serbian elections have been accompanied by allegations of vote-buying, voter intimidation and ballot-box stuffing. After the last ones, held in December 2023, European MP’s called for “independent investigations into the irregularities”.

Knowing what is at stake, the Student List is trained an unprecedented number of poll monitors (15,000), seeking to protect the vote and document potential irregularities.

Attacks on opposition representatives by groups of unidentified men dressed in black have repeatedly raised concerns during the rule of Vučić’s Serbian Progressive Party (SNS).

The media are not safe either.

This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership

Tehran had 'nothing new' to tell Washington after latest nuclear proposals reportedly offered by mediators.

Meta is finally being forced to pay for its near-decade-old falsehoods about the Cambridge Analytica scandal that saw millions of users’ data harvested for political purposes.

On Wednesday, a judge in New Mexico ordered the social media company to pay a $25 billion penalty following a jury’s determination in late September that the company’s executives broke state laws with knowingly false statements they made in the wake of the scandal.

“The extraordinary number of willful violations found by the jury, the duration and repetition of the conduct, the breadth of subjects on which violations occurred, the involvement of senior Facebook leadership, the size of New Mexico audiences reached, and the clear intentional and systematic nature of Facebook’s repeated misstatements established in the trial record support the highest level of penalty allowed by the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act,” New Mexico State District Court Judge Francis Mathew wrote in a court filing.

To refresh your memory, the scandal involved Cambridge Analytica — a political firm financed in part by pro-Trump benefactors — harvesting private data from tens of millions of Facebook users, which was eventually conveyed to members of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and used for political targeting. To be clear, this case was an entirely separate trial from the other landmark trial Meta lost in New Mexico, which found the company liable for placing profits over consumers and knowingly putting children at risk of harms it knew to exist on its platforms.

As Tech Policy Press reported, the false statements deemed willfully deceptive by the jury include comments from CEO Mark Zuckerberg, former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg and other executives about things like the company’s response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, users’ data protections, and misinformation and hate speech on its platforms.

For example, the statements include comments from both Zuckerberg and Sandberg about when access to users’ private data was closed off. They also include a comment from Zuckerberg in 2017 saying that Meta — then known as Facebook — had “always taken down any post that promotes or celebrates hate crimes or acts of terrorism.” Another comment deemed willfully deceptive came from Zuckerberg in 2020, when he claimed there were no exceptions for politicians who broke the platforms’ rules about content that “may lead to violence or deprive people of their right to vote.” The jury also found willfully deceptive a 2020 comment from former Meta executive Nick Clegg, who claimed that Meta “doesn’t profit from hate” and that the company applied a “zero tolerance approach” to hateful posts on Facebook and Instagram.

Meta, which has allegedly assisted the Trump administration’s efforts to suppress free speech and target critics of federal officials, disputed the jury’s ruling in September, vowing to appeal it and framing its actions as a free speech matter.

As the Santa Fe New Mexican reported: “‘Meta’s platforms are forums for free expression. We have a First Amendment right to manage those platforms in a way we believe best serves the interests of our community,’ the spokesperson wrote in an email. ‘This means prioritizing free speech, protecting our users’ information and giving them control over their data.’”

The post Meta ordered to pay $25 billion over data privacy deception appeared first on MS NOW.

This is the Oct. 21, 2026 edition of “The Tea, Spilled by Morning Joe” newsletter. Subscribe here to get it delivered straight to your inbox Monday through Friday.

“Whether it’s in Ohio in the governor’s race or in our foreign policy, we’re seeing moral depravity play out in real time.”

— Mika Brzezinski, Oct. 21, 2026

Ukraine is bracing for a brutal winter. As frigid temperatures approach, Russia has only escalated its attacks as Vladimir Putin seems emboldened by the American president’s recent turn toward Moscow.

Russia’s arms factories have already made enough missiles and drones to take down Ukraine’s electrical grid, as well as the heating systems that millions of people rely on to stay warm. Left dark and cold, many homes across the country will become deadly.

But as I argue in my latest piece for The Atlantic, three upcoming events that could decide Ukraine’s fate will all take place thousands of miles from Kyiv.

The first is America’s Election Day, now less than two weeks away. Ukrainian leaders fear that if Democrats win one or both chambers of Congress, Donald Trump may abandon them further in those final weeks of full Republican control of Washington.

The second is a proposed summit in mid-November in southern China, where Putin hopes to meet with Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to plan for ending the war — with no seat at the table for Ukraine.

The third is December’s Group of 20 summit, to be held at, where else, the president’s Miami-area golf club. Trump wants Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy to meet there and agree to a deal, even if it’s a bad one for Ukraine.

What’s behind Trump’s latest anger at Ukraine? As I write:

Trump has demanded an energy cease-fire — he even announced one earlier this month that had no basis in reality — yet has focused his ire entirely on Ukraine’s attacks on Russian oil refineries. He blames those strikes for the rise in energy prices while ignoring the real culprit, Iran’s ability to defy the United States and close the Strait of Hormuz. He’s convinced himself, three people close to him have told me, that Ukraine’s attacks on the refineries are, in part, meant to undermine Republicans’ chances next month — and, by extension, Trump.

The president has ignored Moscow’s attacks on Ukraine’s electrical grid, and Monday, hours after a drone strike on a public park killed six people, including two children, he downplayed its strikes on Ukraine’s cities, declaring that Russia had not “been doing much.” An image of one of the dead children, a 1-year-old killed as she sat in her stroller, was broadcast around the globe.

The calendar is now Ukraine’s foe — and so, Ukrainians fear, is Trump.

Read the full piece here.

MORNING JOE FAMILY MEETING

Every Tuesday at 12 p.m. ET, MS NOW Members can join a live conversation with Joe Scarborough.

If you are interested in asking Joe a question directly over video, please let us know. These questions can be about politics, news of the day, or anything else that’s on your mind!

Participants will need to complete a short pre-interview and be available from 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. ET on Tuesday, Oct. 27, to take part.

If you’re interested, please fill out this form by Friday, Oct. 23. Participants will be notified via email if selected.

CHARTS OF THE DAY

Source: Reuters/Ipsos poll of 1,679 U.S. adults conducted Oct. 16-19, 2026. Margin of error: +/- 2.4 percentage points

WHAT THEY SAID

John Heilemann on the Ramaswamy campaign’s latest ad

“In 35 years, I’ve never seen an ad that crosses more ethical and moral lines of decency than this one. Amy Acton had about a 5-point lead over Vivek Ramaswamy because Ohio voters don’t like him and don’t think he’s a person of principle. An ad this desperate and disgusting is usually a sign a campaign sees the writing on the wall — that they need to do something dramatic to alter the trajectory of the race.”

Jessica Taylor on the midterms

“If Democrats take back the Senate, it would be a historic night — and it’s not out of the realm of possibility. ‘Morose’ is one of the words that comes to mind from some of my conversations with Republicans.”

David Drucker on what comes after the midterms

“Even if Democrats win control of the Senate to go along with the House, the president is still going to have a veto pen. Democrats are going to have to find those areas where they have leverage and power — and then be willing to negotiate with the president.”

STEVE RATTNER’S CHARTS: THE MONEY MACHINE

With two weeks to go, the Democrats’ momentum shows up not only in the polls but also in their candidates’ fundraising, despite a massive Republican advantage in political action committee cash. Democratic candidates are raising money at a pace that has left their Republican opponents far behind — in some Senate races, by a factor of 5 or 10.

The real Republican advantage comes from super PAC money, with one man playing a disproportionate role: Elon Musk. The Senate Leadership Fund, the main super PAC for Senate Republicans, raised $273 million in the third quarter, an unprecedented sum. Of that, $158 million came from Musk, in two checks written in September.

Democratic candidates themselves, on the other hand, have posted far stronger fundraising numbers than their Republican competitors. Democratic House candidates have raised $1.25 billion this cycle to $966 million for Republicans and hold $414 million in cash to the Republicans’ $320 million.

MS NOW

The post The calendar is now Ukraine’s foe — and so, Ukrainians fear, is Trump appeared first on MS NOW.

Egypt, a regional military power, has pledged to provide all forms of assistance to defend Saudi Arabia amid escalating Houthi attacks from Yemen, in a move aimed at maintaining its strategic position in the Gulf.

But analysts view another geopolitical objective behind the Egyptian support for Riyadh: countering Israel’s bid to play a security role in a region vital to Cairo’s political and economic interests.

On 17 October, President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said Egypt would take any necessary measures to protect Saudi Arabia if Riyadh requested assistance. He called an emergency parliamentary session to authorise possible troop deployment.

The following day, the National Defence Council, Egypt’s top security body, pledged to provide all necessary and possible support to safeguard Saudi Arabia’s security, stability, and territorial integrity.

The Egyptian pledge came after US President Donald Trump said on 16 October that Israel had been helping Saudi Arabia counter Houthi attacks from Yemen and suggested Riyadh should accept further Israeli assistance.

It followed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s visit to Cairo last month to seek support against the Iran-backed Houthis. The visit highlighted the importance of Egyptian-Saudi coordination on issues affecting the Red Sea and wider regional stability.

For Cairo, which has longstanding strategic ties with Riyadh, the prospect of Israel becoming a more prominent security partner for the kingdom adds urgency to its efforts to reinforce its role in regional security.

“Egypt’s interest lies in doing everything possible to strengthen its ties with Saudi Arabia, or at least to ensure that its relationship with Riyadh is closer than Israel’s,” Ahmed Aboudouh, an associate fellow at Chatham House in London, told The New Arab.

Strengthening ties with Saudi Arabia offers Egypt significant economic and geopolitical benefits as Cairo seeks foreign investment, financial support, and foreign currency. The kingdom is also important for millions of Egyptians working there, whose remittances provide a vital source of foreign currency.

Closer coordination with Riyadh also helps Egypt protect its interests in the Red Sea, particularly shipping through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, a key route to the Suez Canal and a major source of revenue for Cairo.

During Trump’s first term, the US brokered the Abraham Accords in 2020 to normalise relations between Israel and Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia’s neighbours, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain, allowing Tel Aviv to expand its economic, diplomatic, and security partnerships in the Gulf.

The American president has also pushed for normalising ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel, but Riyadh insists that any normalisation depends on resolving the Palestinian issue, including the establishment of a Palestinian state.

If Riyadh accepts any Israeli assistance against Houthi attacks, cooperation in areas such as intelligence sharing and air defence could expand, potentially giving Israel a greater role in Gulf security.

For Egypt, that possibility raises concerns about a changing regional balance in which Israel could become a more influential security partner for Arab states traditionally linked to Cairo.

Cairo's bid to keep Israel at bay

“Egypt would oppose any attempt by Israel to become a player in the Arab world’s collective security, regardless of who was involved, and Saudi Arabia would certainly stand with Cairo. This means keeping Israel out of regional military and intelligence cooperation,” Egyptian military expert Samir Ragheb told The New Arab.

Egypt was the first Arab country to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1979, following decades of conflict and several wars, but their relations have remained largely cold despite formal diplomatic ties.

The relationship has been marked by mutual distrust, periodic tensions, and regional competition, particularly over Gaza and broader Middle East security arrangements.

Egyptian political analyst Mokhtar Ghobashi said Egypt’s pledge to defend Saudi Arabia could deter Israel from seeking a security role in the Gulf.

“Relying on Israel as a security guarantor for a country in the Arab world, amid divisions and conflicts between Arab states, is an extremely dangerous proposition,” he told The New Arab.

Since the 2020 Abraham Accords, security cooperation between Israel and some Gulf states has expanded, including arms sales and coordination on air and missile defence amid shared concerns over Iran.

Egypt’s support for Saudi Arabia reflects its interest in preserving its regional influence and maintaining a central role in shaping the security arrangements in the Middle East.

Cairo could face greater competition for influence if Riyadh turns to Israel for certain defence capabilities. While this would not necessarily weaken Egyptian-Saudi relations, it could reduce Egypt’s role in shaping the kingdom’s security policy.

The implications extend beyond bilateral relations. Closer security ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia could give Tel Aviv a greater role in shaping regional responses to threats, from Yemen’s Houthis to Iran.

Protecting Egypt's strategic interests

Red Sea security is another concern for Cairo. A broader Israeli security role in the Gulf could give Tel Aviv greater influence over decisions affecting the Bab el-Mandeb, a vital maritime corridor central to Egypt’s national interests.

Aboudouh said another objective behind Egypt’s pledge to defend Saudi Arabia is to protect its strategic interests in the Red Sea and around Bab el-Mandeb.

“Egyptian officials may have concluded that expanding the country’s regional role is now crucial to protecting maritime traffic through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait against any Houthi attempt to exploit a conflict with Saudi Arabia to disrupt shipping, as they have done in the past,” he told The New Arab.

Egypt has been hard-hit by regional instability following Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip and Houthi attacks on shipping in the Red Sea since 2023, losing an estimated around $20 billion in Suez Canal revenues.

Sisi framed Egypt’s potential role in Saudi Arabia as defensive, saying Cairo had no intention of attacking any party but was prepared to defend Saudi Arabia if requested. “We do not want to fight or attack anyone. We will only defend Saudi Arabia,” he said.

Egypt joined the Saudi-led coalition that intervened in Yemen against the Houthis in 2015, but its role remained limited. A deeper commitment now could expose Cairo to a costly conflict, particularly if operations extend beyond the defence of Saudi territory.

It could also strain Egypt’s resources and increase its exposure to instability along the Red Sea.

The extent and form of any Egyptian assistance will therefore be crucial. Intelligence-sharing, logistical support and maritime security cooperation would carry different risks from deploying troops to Yemen.

Cairo may seek to bolster Saudi Arabia’s defences while avoiding involvement in an open-ended conflict.

Mohamed Sabry is an Egyptian journalist based in Cairo with over two decades of experience covering Egypt, regional politics, foreign policy, and diplomacy. His work has appeared in Al-Monitor and InsideOver

Follow him on X: @MohamedSabry079

Edited by Charlie Hoyle

The pledge, which Trump says will go through tax-friendly 'Trump accounts', comes two weeks before the US midterms.

Don't ignore the Palestine issue because "it's complicated." It's un-complicated! Keep up in just a few minutes a day with IAK's curated and accurate Daily Updates.