That's why they're running the disclaimers now - the trial hasn't been held yet and they're bracing themselves for impact.
Unlike Fox News, who could settle with Dominion for $787M and carry on as usual, Newsmax's pockets don't run nearly as deep. If the court rules against them in September, they'll most likely be utterly screwed.
It really is insane. Just imagine a different PAC whose sole purpose is to advocate for any other foreign nation - and not just the obvious "baddies" like Russia, China, etc. - spending millions of dollars to oppose the election of congress members who don't follow their agenda, and then openly bragging about it on social media. People would lose their goddamn minds, and rightfully so.
A few US outlets have mentioned it fleetingly, but here's a more balanced account from Haaretz.
Here is a flyer circulated by the protest organizers:
Here is a flyer advertizing the real estate sale itself:
Here is an archived copy of the real estate sale web page (which is currently unavailable):
https://web.archive.org/web/20240624010428/https://homeinisrael-il.com/
Here is a listing for property in Efrat, which is an illegal Israeli settlement located in the West Bank:
https://web.archive.org/web/20240324124658/https://homeinisrael-il.com/property/efrat-hamoshava/
Much as it was when the counter-protesters showed up at UCLA last month and attacked the protesters with pepper spray and sticks for hours while the police stood by and watched.
Yes, to be fair I now see the LA Times did mention it. Fair play to them, as I've read several articles about this incident and this the first time I've seen the reason for the protest actually included in the article.
Important context: the synagogue in question was holding a real estate sale for land allegedly stolen from Palestinians in the West Bank.
This protest was not against Jews praying at a synagogue. This protest was not antisemitic. This was a protest against the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank and against settlements that Biden's own administration considers illegal.
But I suppose the AP doesn't consider that relevant information.
I wonder why the majority of the US news media is neglecting to mention this highly relevant fact 🤔
Funny how all the US media sources are either downplaying or not even mentioning the reason why the pro-Palestinian protesters showed up. According to Haaretz
The clashes occurred after Palestine supporters arrived in front of the Abas Torah Synagogue to protest a real estate event promoting the sale of land plots in Jewish settlements in the West Bank taking place inside.
Here is a poster for the event:
And here is some of the property being sold to Westerners.
This wasn't a demonstration against Jewish people innocently attending a synagogue, this was a protest against profiting off the illegal seizure of land from a people currently undergoing a genocide.
Ooh, Robert Eggers? Now I'm interested.
The Death of Stalin is great.
It's quite a bit more complicated than that. Firstly, ultra-orthodox Jews (a.k.a Haredim) are mostly non-zionist. They also only make up roughly 33% of Israeli settlers.
Traditionally, the Haredim have voted for their own center-right Haredi parties, but a minority (especially the younger generation) are now drifting further rightward towards the nationalist Religious Zionist party of Ben Gvir and Smotrich that is particularly popular amongst the settlers. Despite this recent trend, though, the majority of Haredim remain Anti-Zionist.
It's this stance, combined with the facts that Haredi men have been able to avoid military service and have relied heavily on social security to fund their living costs, that has caused a lot of resentment towards them from the majority of Israeli society. As the article above notes, this removal of their military service exemption has overwhelming support amongst the general population.
But you're definitely right in saying that this throws a spanner in the works, albeit mostly for Netanyahu. His brittle coalition relies heavily on support from the two main Haredi parties in the Knesset. This new policy could backfire on him.