What has become of Karyna Shuliak?

 Karyna Shuliak, a 37-year-old Belarusian-born dentist, has largely retreated from public view in New York City after being revealed as Jeffrey Epstein’s primary companion in his final years and the chief heir to his estate. Following massive waves of unsealed Department of Justice investigative records in 2026, her deep ties to Epstein, her controversial higher education path, and her financial standing have come under intense scrutiny. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Current Status and Career

• Disappeared from Her Practice: Shuliak successfully completed a postdoctoral dental program at Columbia University in May 2025 and received her New York dental license later that year. She began working as a part-time dentist at a clinic in downtown Brooklyn, but records indicate her last day at that practice was February 12, 2026. [1, 2]
• Whereabouts: While her exact physical location is kept private by her legal team, she is believed to still be residing in New York City. [1, 2]
• Legal Standing: Prosecutors and federal investigators have not accused Shuliak of participating in or facilitating Epstein’s criminal sex-trafficking activities, and she does not currently face criminal charges. [1, 2]

The Fight Over Epstein's Estate

• The $100 Million Inheritance: DOJ files revealed that just two days before his death in August 2019, Epstein amended his private trust to name Shuliak as his primary beneficiary. He intended to leave her up to $100 million in assets, including his Paris apartment, his New Mexico ranch, and a 33-carat diamond ring valued at $1.2 million. [1, 2]
• Will She Get the Money? It is highly unlikely she will ever see the bulk of this fortune. Epstein's estate—once valued at over $600 million—has been heavily drawn down to between $120 million and $200 million due to asset freezes, government taxes, legal fees, and more than $121 million paid out to compensate Epstein’s victims. [1, 2]

Recent Revelations & Investigations

• Columbia University Scandal:
  In May 2026, a high-ranking administrator at the Columbia University College of Dental Medicine was forced to exit their post. Investigations revealed the administrator helped facilitate Shuliak’s "irregular" admission to the competitive program. Epstein had reportedly made a $210,000 donation to the university after initially offering $10 million to secure her entry after she was first rejected.
• "Zorro Smiles" and the New Mexico Probe: In June 2026, a New Mexico legislative "truth commission" issued subpoenas regarding Epstein’s Zorro Ranch. State records unsealed during the probe showed that Shuliak was licensed to practice dentistry in New Mexico from 2015 to 2021 and had applied to open a private practice directly on Epstein's ranch under the name "Zorro Smiles". Investigators are still looking into why Epstein built fully equipped, private medical and dental rooms on his properties.
• Immigration Status: DOJ records also exposed that Epstein heavily financed Shuliak's life after she arrived in the U.S. on a student visa in 2011. To prevent her deportation and secure her U.S. citizenship, Epstein allegedly arranged and funded a sham same-sex marriage between Shuliak and one of his female assistants in 2013. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Through her legal counsel, Shuliak has consistently declined to comment on the ongoing public disclosures or her past relationship with Epstein. [1, 2]

About the Reagan amnesty for certain immigrants (1986)

 The "Reagan amnesty" refers to the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986, a landmark bipartisan bill signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on November 6, 1986. Sponsored by Senator Alan Simpson and Representative Romano Mazzoli, the act remains the largest legalization program in U.S. history. [1, 2]

The Core Provisions

The legislation was designed as a compromise that paired humanitarian legalization with stricter enforcement mechanisms. Its framework consisted of three main pillars: [1]

• Amnesty & Legalization: It granted temporary legal status, leading to Lawful Permanent Residence (green cards) and prospective citizenship, to undocumented immigrants who had resided continuously in the U.S. since before January 1, 1982. [1, 2]
• Agricultural Worker Programs: A separate Special Agricultural Worker (SAW) program provided amnesty to seasonal farmworkers who could prove they had worked in U.S. agriculture for at least 90 days prior to the law's enactment. [1, 2, 3]
• Employer Sanctions: For the first time in U.S. history, it became illegal for employers to knowingly hire undocumented workers. This provision introduced the Form I-9 verification system and established civil and criminal penalties for non-compliant businesses. [1, 2]

Eligibility & Process

To successfully adjust their status under the general amnesty provision, applicants had to meet several stringent requirements within a strict one-year application window (May 1987 to May 1988): [1]

• Provide extensive documentation proving continuous residency and employment history.
• Submit fingerprints and undergo medical examinations.
• Pay a $185 application fee.
• Demonstrate "good moral character" and basic English language proficiency to transition to permanent residency. [1, 2]

Impact and Legacy

According to official data and historical assessments available through the Library of Congress and the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, the law had profound societal effects: [1, 2]

• 2.7 to 3 Million Legalized: Approximately 2.7 to 3 million previously undocumented individuals—predominantly of Hispanic descent—successfully gained legal status, pulling millions out of underground economies and protecting them from deportation.
• Reagan's Rationale: President Reagan approached the bill from both economic and moral angles, viewing immigrants as industrious individuals and arguing that legalization would prevent them from being exploited by unscrupulous employers.
• Enforcement Shortfalls: Despite intentions to curb future unlawful entries by penalizing employers and boosting Border Patrol funding, the employer sanctions were weak and poorly enforced. Over time, a lack of robust enforcement allowed unauthorized immigration to continue expanding unabated.
• Modern Political Shift: The perceived failure of IRCA to permanently solve unauthorized migration severely impacted future immigration debates. In contemporary politics, the term "amnesty" has largely become polarized, with many lawmakers demanding strict border security and enforcement mandates before considering paths to legal status. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]

About Israel's Pulsa diNura

 

Pulsa diNura (Jewish Babylonian Aramaic: פולסא דנורא, meaning "the lash of fire" or "stroke of fire") is a controversial modern ritual framed as a kabbalistic death curse. The ceremony purports to invoke destroying angels to block divine forgiveness for a person's sins, theoretically causing all biblical curses to fall upon them and result in their death. [1, 2]

Despite its terrifying reputation in contemporary politics, religious scholars and historians emphasize that the ritual as performed today is a modern political contrivance rather than an ancient mystical tradition. [1, 2]

1. Etymology and True Talmudic Origins

The phrase is ancient, but its original meaning was completely different from a human-directed curse:

• The Words: Pulsa traces back to the Latin pulsus (a blow or stroke), while Nura is Aramaic for fire. Combined, it means a fiery lash.
• Celestial Discipline: In the Babylonian Talmud and early mystical texts, Pulsa diNura is strictly a metaphor for divine or angelic discipline. It describes a punishment meted out by God to angels or deceased souls. For example, the Talmud mentions the archangel Gabriel receiving 60 fiery lashes as a heavenly reprimand. It was never a formula for humans to curse other humans. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

2. The Modern Ritual

The transformation of this phrase into a physical ritual is a 20th-century invention. Academic consensus indicates that it lacks any foundation in traditional Kabbalah or the Zohar, likely being fabricated by mixing ancient magical texts (like Sefer ha-Razim) with the traditional Jewish practice of communal excommunication (cherem). [1, 2, 3]

As detailed in discussions on Quora, users note that the ceremony typically involves a quorum of at least ten pious men who fast, blacken candles, blow the shofar, and recite Aramaic curses and imprecatory biblical texts (such as Psalm 109). [1, 2, 3]

3. High-Profile Political Use

The curse gained dark notoriety in modern Israel because it was targeted at prime ministers making controversial territorial concessions:

Target	Year	Context & Outcome
Yitzhak Rabin	1995	Performed by right-wing extremists opposed to the Oslo Accords. Rabin was assassinated a month later by Yigal Amir. While the curse had no physical reality, it contributed heavily to a dangerous, radicalized political climate.
Ariel Sharon	2004/2005	Invoked by extremists over the Gaza disengagement plan. Sharon suffered a catastrophic, permanent stroke months later, which believers attributed to the curse.
Naftali Bennett	2021	Sent via mail after he formed a broad coalition government that angered hardline religious factions.

4. Position in Jewish Law (Halacha)

Mainstream Judaism and orthodox authorities overwhelmingly reject the ritual. Traditional Jewish law strongly condemns praying for the death of a fellow human being, teaching instead that people should pray for the eradication of evil or the repentance of the sinner rather than the destruction of the person. [1, 2]

Furthermore, kabbalistic tradition warns that attempting to force the hand of the Heavenly Court carries immense personal risk: if the target is deemed innocent, the curse is believed to rebound entirely onto the person who sent it. [1]