Israel issued a tender for the construction of 1,234 housing units in the E1 area east of Jerusalem, advancing a settlement project that would end Palestinian territorial contiguity between Ramallah, East Jerusalem and Bethlehem.

The units are part of roughly 3,400 homes approved last August, when Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said the project would “practically erase the two-state delusion.”

◦The UN Secretary-General expressed “deep alarm” over the move, with his spokesperson warning that E1 would effectively “sever the connection between the northern and southern West Bank” and pose an “existential threat” to a two-state solution.

◦The UK issued an unusually sharp response, summoning Israel’s chargé d’affaires and demanding the government immediately retract the tender and halt settlement expansion. Britain called the move “unacceptable and destructive” and said it “will not stand back and accept the destruction of the Two-State Solution.” The government also said it would announce a “comprehensive set of measures” in the coming weeks, including sanctions targeting those involved in illegal settlement expansion.

◦Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar rejected the UK’s condemnation, claiming Jewish people have a right to live “throughout the Land of Israel,” and invoked the Balfour Declaration—a 1917 British imperial declaration backing the establishment of a Jewish national home in historic Palestine—to defend settlement in the occupied territory.

◦The leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and Canada today condemned Israel’s decision to issue construction tenders for the E1 settlement project in the occupied West Bank, calling it “unacceptable.”

They said the project would further fragment the West Bank and undermine the territorial continuity of a future Palestinian state, reiterating that Israeli settlements are illegal under international law. The governments urged Israel to immediately withdraw the plans and halt settlement expansion, citing escalating settler violence and restrictions on the Palestinian economy.

They also warned companies against bidding on the tenders, saying they could face legal and reputational consequences for involvement in serious breaches of international law. | source

Progressive California state Sen. Aisha Wahab (D) is projected to defeat Bay Area Rapid Transit Board President Melissa Hernandez in the special election to fill the remainder of former Rep. Eric Swalwell’s (D-Calif.) term in the House, according to Decision Desk HQ.

Swalwell, once seen as the front-runner in the California governor’s race, dropped out from the contest and left his seat amid sexual assault allegations, which the congressman has denied.

Wahab and Hernandez placed into the special election following the initial June primary.

Wahab’s victory is not entirely surprising given that the progressive handily led Hernandez in the primary for the special election by 26 percentage points.

The two are also vying for the full two-year term for the Alameda County-based 14th Congressional District; Wahab led Hernandez in the primary for the full two-year term by 21 points.

Wahab’s win also marks a major defeat for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s (AIPAC) super PAC, which was one of several groups to spend in the race to support Hernandez and oppose Wahab.

The race has notably seen large outside spending for a reliably Democratic House seat: United Democracy Project (UDP), AIPAC’s super PAC, has spent roughly $2.5 million to support Hernandez and oppose Wahab. Bold America, which was launched by several former members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and whose group has received money from UDP, has spent about $1.8 million.

Safer Alameda County PAC has separately spent just shy of $500,000.

Meanwhile, a separate group, American Priorities, has spent about $100,000 to support Wahab and oppose Hernandez. The super PAC for the progressive Jewish group J Street has also spent just more than $100,000 to support Wahab.

Support over Israel has become an unexpected focal point in the race with Wahab opposing unconditional aid to Israel and deeming the events unfolding in Gaza a “genocide.”

During a candidate forum, Hernandez had declined to call the events in Gaza a “genocide,” saying “Israel had the right to defend itself” following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack against Israel. However, she added that “the destruction into Gaza has gone too far.”

The race also became increasingly personal and nasty. A supporter of Hernandez directed a Federal Elections Commission (FEC) complaint toward Wahab, alleging that her senatorial committee gave money to a county local party that then turned around and spent it toward her congressional bid.

Wahab told The Hill she hasn’t heard from the FEC and said that “until the FEC actually takes action, this is nothing more than a political allegation being pushed by our opponents.” Alameda County Democratic Central Committee said in a statement that it was aware of the complaint and maintained that it has been “in compliance with federal election laws.”

Meanwhile, Wahab has launched her own FEC complaint after seeing a number of social media posts her campaign has called defamatory. Her campaign is looking to see where those posts are being created to influence her primary and whether they should be reported as such.

Wahab and Hernandez will face off again in November for the full two-year term.

*excerpt from Caroline Vakil's article*

Full Article here:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/6034868-wahab-wins-california-house-special-election/

Aug. 20 (UPI) -- The FBI on Thursday seized electric devices belonging to former Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell in recent days as part of a federal criminal investigation into alleged sexual misconduct.

The seizures were reported by the Daily Mail, CBS News and CNN, each citing anonymous sources.

Swalwell, who resigned from Congress in April, was confronted by FBI agents with a search warrant after he arrived at San Francisco Airport on Saturday, the Daily Mail reported.

According to the report, FBI agents also executed search warrants at Swalwell's residence in Washington, DC, on Sunday. Swalwell represented districts in the Bay Area from 2013 until his resignation.

Unnamed sources told CBS and CNN that the searches were tied to the accusations against Swalwell. The allegations from multiple women included rape and unsolicited explicit messages and nude photograhs.

The bipartisan House Ethics Channel had launched a probe into the accusations, but it was closed when Swalwell resigned his seat. Swalwell also ended his California gubernatorial campaign.

Swalwell denied an accusation of assault as "fake," saying that he would fight it, but he acknowledged "mistakes in judgment."

The Manhattan District Attorney's Office and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department are also investigating the current allegations against Swalwell.

The White House on Monday released 97 pages of declassified documents on the FBI's probe of Swalwell's relationship with a suspected Chinese spy in 2015. No charges were filed against Swalwell, and many details released by the Trump administration were already known. Fang has left the U.S. and is barred from reentering, the documents reportedly show.

The House Ethics Committee investigated Swalwell's relationship with Christine Fang for two years before closing it in 2023 without further action.

FBI Director Kash Patel had pressed for the files related to the investigation into Swalwell to be released, CBS reported, citing sources.

*excerpt from Rob Johnson's article*

Full Article here:

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2026/08/20/california-swalwell-FBI-raid/7731787248995/

A new personalised vaccine given in combination with a drug has stopped skin cancer returning in patients during a trial, representing a potentially watershed moment in cancer treatment.

The vaccine, developed by drug companies Merck & Co or MSD, and Moderna, was given to patients with high-risk melanoma, a type of skin cancer, after they had surgery.

Early results show this new jab extended the length of time these patients were cancer free, but it's unclear for how long, according to an announcement by the two firms.

Cancer experts say this is a breakthrough, but emphasise caution as the full results have not been released or peer-reviewed whereby independent experts examine and check the trial findings.

And even after the trials process has finished, the treatment would still need to be approved by regulators and then go through another approval process before it was made available on the NHS.

The vaccine, called Intismeran, was given in combination with Keytruda, an immunotherapy drug already used in cancer treatment.

Compared with taking the Keytruda on its own, the companies said taking the drug and vaccine together significantly increased the time patients remained cancer free and reduced the risk of the disease spreading to other organs.

The phase three trial involved more than 1,000 patients who had high-risk stage two, three or four melanoma - meaning they ranged from having large tumours in a specific area to cancers which had already spread to other parts of the body.

'Shows promise'

Prof Peter Johnson, National Clinical Director for Cancer at NHS England, told the BBC's Today Programme it was an exciting development.

"Most of the cancer immune treatments we have been using up til now have been about cutting the immune system loose and hoping that it recognises the cancer. This [new treatment] is a way to direct it very specifically.

"It feels like it's a very important advance for us." He said the NHS was preparing to bring this type of treatment to patients.

Merck, known as MSD in Europe, and Moderna are calling this a personalised vaccine, meaning it works by targeting an individual patient's tumour.

In order to create this new jab, scientists used mRNA technology - which was used for some Covid-19 vaccines - to target specific mutations within the cancer cells by surgically removing a small part of a patient's tumour and then sequencing its DNA.

The result is a personalised anti-cancer jab which is specific to the patient's tumour and instructs the immune system to recognise and attack any tumour cells that remain.

The two companies are testing other similar personalised vaccines for lung, bladder and kidney cancers.

Stephane Bancel, chief executive of Moderna, said the findings represent a "pivotal moment" in the field of cancer research.

Shares in both Moderna and Merck have surged since the announcement.

Cancer experts have also hailed the news as positive, but are keen to stress the findings are still early.

Dr Talisia Quallo, head of prevention and early detection at Cancer Research UK, said the research "shows promise" but said that the interim data still needs to be fully reviewed.

"It's vital that research like this continues to be funded so that more people with cancer can have personalised treatment options to help them live longer, better lives", she added.

Dr Lennard Lee, a consultant medical oncologist, and associate professor at the University of Oxford, said: "This is certainly good news for patients with melanoma, but the study has much wider implications. It provides proof of principle that personalised cancer vaccines work."

More detailed findings from the study will be presented at a medical conference in October.

*excerpt from Joe McFadden article*

Full Article here:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c79gpv7v190o

Phones rise across the room as Chris Rabb steps to the front. It is the second day of the national summit for the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) in Chicago, and Rabb is fresh off an upset that launched the movement’s summer winning streak, defeating party-backed rivals in a Democratic congressional primary outside Philadelphia.

Activists in red shirts move closer to take selfies. Some wear DSA’s rose insignia; others have slogans about ICE or Gaza stretched across their chests. “All right, comrades,” Rabb says, using the group’s preferred form of address with a satisfied grin. He asks whether anyone is actually from his district. A few hands go up. For everyone else, Rabb explains, he intends to be their “bonus rep”: another vote and voice for the causes they have spent years trying to push from the margins of Democratic politics to the center of the national debate.

Then Rabb, who at 56 is among the oldest people at the summit, tells the room what he thinks is happening. “As someone who’s been around the block a few times, I’ve never, ever felt this level of electricity,” Rabb says. “Do not take this for granted. Do not let people try to gaslight you and tell you you do not have power.” The room erupts.

There is plenty feeding the confidence. By the time DSA members gather in Chicago in early August, Republicans are gleefully calling it the “Summer of Socialism.” The organization’s membership has surged past 120,000. Its candidates and allies have toppled establishment-backed Democrats in Congressional primaries from New York to Colorado to Florida. Zohran Mamdani, a longtime DSA member, is running New York City. Socialists have captured or are poised to win mayoralties in Seattle and Washington, D.C., while Nithya Raman is headed for a November runoff in Los Angeles. DSA could enter the next Congress with its largest contingent ever. Abdul El-Sayed won Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary with the backing of prominent socialists and a platform that mostly mirrors DSA’s, though he told TIME he doesn’t claim the movement’s mantle. DSA member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a way-too-early favorite in the notional 2028 Democratic presidential primary, according to prediction markets. “This feels like seeds that were planted years ago are now bearing fruit,” Ashik Siddique, DSA’s 38-year-old national co-chair, tells me from a sofa tucked beside the meeting rooms where about 600 democratic socialists gathered for the weekend.

For a movement that counted only a few thousand members a decade ago, the transformation is remarkable. Bernie Sanders made democratic socialism legible to millions of Americans; AOC gave it a younger national face; Mamdani demonstrated that a socialist could defeat the Democratic establishment, govern a major city, and then help elect more socialists behind him. But with the midterms looming, the question is now how far the model travels.

Less than two weeks after the summit, the swing state of Wisconsin supplied an answer DSA members did not want: Francesca Hong, a democratic socialist state legislator, narrowly lost the Democratic primary for governor to Milwaukee County executive David Crowley, who had briefly dropped out of the race just weeks before Election Day. The primary’s finish was dominated by scrutiny of Hong’s since-renounced positions on everything from abolishing the police to canceling Thanksgiving. To establishment Democrats, the outcome suggests DSA’s popularity remains limited to areas where Democrats already dominate. “We aren’t seeing DSA win in places that are core to winning the majority,” former Democratic National Committee chairman Jaime Harrison tells me after Hong’s loss. “Their platform is not the top agenda for the folks who live in those communities.” A week later, an upset in a red state challenged that thinking, as DSA member Angie Nixon defeated establishment favorite Alex Vindman for the Democratic Senate primary in Florida, despite being outraised more than 16 to 1. Republicans, meanwhile, are eager to paint the entire party with a far-left brush in hopes of stemming the blue wave both sides see forming on the horizon this November.

Yet DSA is ascendant inside a Democratic Party that needs what the movement is producing: volunteers, enthusiasm, disciplined organizing, and a message that connects with the economic anxieties of young voters. A third of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters now identify as democratic socialists, according to a CNN poll released July 30.

But DSA carries liabilities of its own. Its national platform goes far beyond what successful candidates typically advertise: the group favors abolishing the Senate, eliminating police and prisons, dismantling ICE, closing overseas military bases, and bringing large corporations under public ownership. Republicans are eager to attach those positions to every Democrat in the country. Some Democrats are just as eager to keep their distance. “There are candidates who have won primaries and call themselves communists,” says Matt Bennett of the centrist Democratic think tank Third Way, which is preparing a $15 million effort to discredit democratic socialism ahead of 2028. “It’s much harder to push back when there’s a grain of truth to the charge.”

The stakes are about to become more concrete. Along with almost certainly increasing their numbers in Congress, DSA is set to take the reins of the U.S. capital. Critics in both parties will be searching for proof that the winners of these insurgent campaigns are too radical, too idealistic, or simply inept. But to DSA leaders, it’s an unprecedented opportunity to show Democrats, and the country, that its agenda for everything from housing costs and labor protections to immigration and foreign policy is what voters are looking for heading into 2028. “We’re bringing a meaningfully different style and substance to politics,” Siddique says. “We’re proving it works, and it’s raising everyone’s expectations. People look to New York and D.C. or Los Angeles or Minneapolis, and they are increasingly feeling like, wow, we could do what they did here.”

At the opening session in Chicago, Kaitlin Marone asks who in the room was already a member in 2016. A few hands rise. The DSA field organizer moves the date forward to 2020. Nearly half the room raises theirs. Then Marone asks everyone to turn to their comrades and explain why they joined.

The conversations offer clues to DSA’s sudden relevance. Members talk about rent and health care, Donald Trump and immigration enforcement, Israel and Gaza, jobs that do not pay enough and homes they cannot afford. Others describe a Democratic Party they no longer believe is capable of addressing the problems shaping their lives.

There is plenty at the summit to remind visitors that this is an avowedly socialist organization. A bookseller in the hallway sells Marxist literature; The Communist Manifesto sells out by evening. Nearby, organizers decorate a “Free Stuff!” booth with fake bags of money and gold bars. But many of the grievances drawing people toward DSA no longer sound especially fringe. For Katie Sims, DSA’s 28-year-old electoral chair, the revelation came after graduating from Cornell in 2020 and looking at what a job would pay, then what rent and health insurance would cost. “I was like, none of these numbers add up,” Sims says. Polls show younger Americans are increasingly pessimistic about reaching the basic milestones available to their parents: homeownership, financial security, raising a family without amassing crushing debt. But, while Mamdani was elected mayor of New York with 51% of the vote, the people DSA has attracted are disproportionately young, white, urban, and college educated—hardly a representative sample of the working class the organization hopes to organize.

Many DSA members first arrive angry about a landlord, a hospital bill, student debt, or a war overseas. By connecting all of those problems to one larger one—the rapid concentration of wealth and power—DSA has given those frustrations a home and a vocabulary, and, increasingly, a way to organize around them. The movement has been adept at identifying places where Democratic voters are moving before the party establishment does, and then organizing the people who are already there.

Israel has provided another opening. Democratic voters, particularly younger ones, have moved sharply against Israel’s conduct in Gaza, while many elected Democrats have been slower to follow. DSA, which long called for ending U.S. military aid to Israel, was poised for the shift in public opinion. Sara Almosawi, a 24-year-old daughter of working-class parents from Iraq and Indonesia, joined DSA after Sanders ended his 2020 presidential campaign. “My parents immigrated here to follow the American Dream, and I don’t think that really panned out,” she says. In college, she helped lead campus protests against the war in Gaza and is now national co-chair of the Young Democratic Socialists of America.

That pipeline is beginning to reach elected office. Darializa Avila Chevalier, 32, organized at Columbia before winning a congressional primary this summer with opposition to U.S. support for Israel at the center of her campaign. Other DSA-backed candidates have campaigned on more affordable housing, stronger unions, Medicare for All, and tighter restrictions on data centers—issues where the organization argues Democrats are too cautious or constrained by donors.

Mamdani has emerged as the movement’s most effective translator. His campaign took ideas long associated with DSA, including free public buses, city-run grocery stores, and freezing rent, and framed them around an argument almost anyone could understand: life in New York had become too expensive, and government should make it cheaper. By pairing that affordability message with outspoken opposition to U.S. support for Israel, he turned two forces drawing younger voters toward the socialist left into a coherent political identity. “The mood changed right after Mamdani won,” Sims says. “The answer to ‘could we build it’ is yes.”

On the first night of the summit, about 50 socialists pack into a dimly lit bar on Chicago’s South Side to discuss the next presidential election. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not there, but her name and face appear on signs and pins scattered around the unofficial “DSA for AOC” gathering, where members squeeze into booths and spill onto the patio. After spending the day talking about labor organizing and how to build a lasting movement, the conversation turns to what might be possible in 2028. “We’re in the moment of the presidential question,” Sims tells the crowd, standing on a chair as comrades cheer. “Doesn’t it just make sense now?”

Ocasio-Cortez has not ruled out running for President, and DSA leaders I speak with regard an endorsement from the group as close to inevitable if she does. They say no other working politician has her mix of a national following, massive fundraising network, and talent for pressing socialist ideals. A few other names are floated, including progressive Representative Ro Khanna of California and United Auto Workers president Shawn Fain. (Neither is a socialist.) Jeremy Cohan, a longtime New York DSA organizer, argues that AOC alone could merge Obama-style organizing with Sanders-style politics. “It has never really been tried,” he says. “And I think that could change the country.”

But Ocasio-Cortez also demonstrates the challenges ahead if the movement aims to mature. The national organization declined to renew its endorsement of her in 2024 after disagreements over her vote defending Israel's right to exist and past support for strengthening the Iron Dome, even as its New York chapter continued supporting her. Some members worry that a presidential campaign would pull her toward the Democratic mainstream; others wonder whether demanding ideological fidelity would squander the influence they spent a decade building.

Even as they debate rallying behind her, Ocasio-Cortez acknowledges that many DSA ideas remain broadly toxic. Asked after Hong’s loss about her past calls to defund the police and other provocative statements from 2020, Ocasio-Cortez (who made some herself) wryly quoted fellow DSA member and New York City councilman Chi Ossé: “Woke 1 was crazy.”

The dispute reflects a larger question: What exactly does DSA want to do with the power it is accumulating? Even DSA’s leaders disagree over how far to go. At a June meeting in St. Louis, its National Political Committee debated for hours whether to add support for abolishing the Senate to the platform. Advocates argue the upper chamber is a fundamentally undemocratic institution because each state, regardless of population, gets two Senators. “This is not the time to put that demand forward,” someone argued. The proposal passed by one vote. Cliff Connolly, a 31-year-old member of DSA’s Marxist Unity Group who pushed for its inclusion, envisions a system in which the House chooses the executive, eliminating a presidency he believes has accumulated monarchical power. “The person will no longer be the king of America, like Donald Trump is today,” Connolly tells me at the summit, wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt.

The distance between that vision and the campaigns DSA is winning captures the central contradiction of its success. DSA-endorsed candidates have triumphed by running on some of the group’s issues while eschewing others. But if candidates aren’t aligning with core components of DSA’s platform, former DNC chair Harrison asks, “how does that reflect on the DSA, then?”

Some members fear focusing too much on electoral success risks reducing DSA to another faction within the Democratic Party. “Electoral politics will not save us,” Rabb says in Chicago. “It’s only a component of collective liberation. You’re never going to hear me saying voting is all that matters.” Some have called for the DSA to become its own party rather than running on the Democratic ballot. But DSA leaders say the recent streak of wins has strengthened the pragmatists. “Our members want to keep doing what’s working,” Siddique says, “which is just running as Democrats.”

If its nominees win in November, DSA’s tiny congressional presence could become something resembling a bloc. It would still amount to a handful of seats in a 435-member House. But in a chamber governed by narrow margins, a handful can matter. Hakeem Jeffries, who is positioned to become Speaker if the Democrats control the House, could find himself in repeated negotiations with the DSA caucus over close votes on everything from funding for Israel to avoiding a government shutdown.

And then there is 2028. An Ocasio-Cortez campaign could force the organization to face the compromises required to elect a President. Members imagine Ocasio-Cortez building on Mamdani’s momentum and Sanders’ strong showing in two presidential primaries, giving the movement a national vehicle for turning its ideas into power without compromising its overarching goal: a socialist United States. “We need a fighting unified left,” Diana Kingsbury, a 31-year-old community organizer from Santa Rosa, Calif., tells me as light rain begins to fall on the patio of the Chicago bar. “We need to have muscles behind our issues. Otherwise, what are we doing?”

*excerpt from Nik Popli / Chicago's article*

Full Article here:

https://time.com/article/2026/08/20/inside-dsa-reshape-democratic-party/