Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

Beginning in July, eligibility for federal student loans will hinge on how much a given program’s graduates make. That means that many theater, fine arts, design, and music programs will be at risk. Also facing difficulty will be some anthropology, religious studies, dance, and communications programs. The changes are coming as a result of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law last July. The rule has been deemed the “Do No Harm” provision because it will prevent taxpayer money from being used to fund programs that are leaving students worse off than if they had never enrolled. (RELATED: Buyer Beware: The College Edition) For associate’s and bachelor’s degrees, colleges will be judged on whether their graduates from a given program made more than someone with a high school diploma for two out of the past three years. For master’s degrees, colleges will be judged on whether their graduates from a given program made more than someone with a college degree within that same field for two out of the past three years. If colleges can’t get their programs’ graduates up to par, they may have to shut down these programs, knowing many students won’t be able to afford them without federal student loans. (RELATED: A Bag of Rocks for $400,000?) According to the Chronicle on Higher Education, 6.6 percent of associate’s degrees, 1.2 percent of bachelor’s degrees, 1 percent of doctoral degrees, and 4 percent of master’s degrees will fail the test. Additionally, 44.8 percent of undergraduate certificates will no longer be eligible for federal loans under the new provision. Fine arts degrees at Berea College, the California Institute of the Arts, George Washington University, San Diego State University, Seattle Pacific University, the University of New Orleans, and the Cooper Union are all at risk. Dance degrees at Loyola Marymount University, Ball State University, the University of Arizona, the University of Missouri-Kansas City, and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee would also fail to make the cut, according to their current data. Theater programs at CUNY City College, New York Film Academy, Seton Hill University, and the University of Rhode Island likewise don’t have graduates who make sufficient income. There are 377 master’s programs in the United States that will likewise find their access to the easy money doled out by federal student loans cut off. There are some more out-there programs that will no longer be eligible for the taxpayer assistance provided by federal student loans. Centura College-Virginia Beach’s associate’s degree in the discipline of Somatic Bodywork will be at risk, as will CUNY Kingsborough Community College’s associate’s degree in Parks, Recreation and Leisure Studies, Peninsula College’s associate’s degree in Precision Metal Working, and Spelman College’s bachelor’s program in the discipline of “Ethnic Cultural Minority Gender and Group Studies.” That bachelor’s program at Spelman College leaves graduates earning $25,137 annually after graduation, according to the Chronicle on Higher Education. That is equivalent to earning $12.08 an hour when working a full-time job, which is well below what is offered at many entry-level positions for people with no higher education whatsoever. Spelman is considered to be the most elite college for women that primarily serves black women. There are 377 master’s programs in the United States that will likewise find their access to the easy money doled out by federal student loans cut off. No doubt many of these are online programs that are cash cows for universities. When a university puts its students through four years of education only to leave them earning less than someone working at McDonald’s, they have done serious harm. The new rule enacted under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act ensures that colleges are held accountable for such outcomes. Programs that leave students worse off should be ended, and colleges shouldn’t get to pretend that they’re doing good by wasting taxpayer dollars and young people’s time. READ MORE from Ellie Gardey Holmes: Gavin Newsom, ‘King of Fraud’ ‘Experts’ Warn US Is on Brink of ‘Trans Genocide’ Canadians Fear US Invasion After Maduro Seizure

President Trump is considering military intervention to protect Iran’s legitimate protesters from the regime. I am not necessarily recommending intervention, but if we do, I have some thoughts on how it should be done. Unlike Venezuela, where targeting President Maduro was seen as a critical first step to modifying the government, the center of gravity of the Iranian regime is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). It is the glue that holds the rotting edifice together. The frightened old men who constitute the Grand Ayatollah and his Guardian Council are nothing without them, nor are the various ministries that comprise the executive branch of the government; they are technocrats and bureaucrats who have no real power outside their narrow responsibilities. The IRGC is more powerful than the regular armed forces or the police. If it is nullified, the regime collapses under pressure from the mob. Unlike the Taliban and ISIS, the IRGC is very vulnerable to both air and cyber attack. In contrast to the Iranian nuclear program, the IRGC’s internal security forces have to operate in the open from fixed bases to intimidate the general public. We know where their key facilities are. They are not well hardened underground. Their Quds Force special operators are primarily geared toward supporting overseas terrorist groups; they may be relatively covert, but that limits their usefulness against civilian demonstrators. Since its inception during the Iran-Iraq War, the IRGC has been the premier security force in the nation. The survivors of the hordes of young people who suicidally threw themselves against Iraqi fortifications in the 1970s have grown old, managing what has become not just a security force, but a for-profit business organization that owns much of the nation’s war production as well as the nuclear program. Its increasingly elderly leadership will do anything to maintain their elite status. If that organization is neutralized or forced underground by U.S. air strikes on their fixed installations and cyberattacks on their command and control systems, their ability to disrupt legitimate protests becomes nil. They might make effective insurgents in a civil war, but they would no longer be running the country. By bombing their barracks and forcing them into hiding, we could ensure that they cannot intimidate the crowds trying to advocate regime change. Military analyst William Lind once said that the best way to ultimately defeat an insurgency is to let them take over the government because, for once, we will know where they are. The Revolutionary Guard Corps is no longer either revolutionary or a true corps in the military sense of the word. By bombing their barracks and forcing them into hiding, we could ensure that they cannot intimidate the crowds trying to advocate regime change. As in 1979, without the iron hand of the palace guard, the regular army and police with likely refuse to try to suppress the crowds. Selective targeting of the IRGC barracks, headquarters, and supply facilities would paralyze their efforts to prop up the corrupt and increasingly fragile regime. Unlike Venezuela, we really don’t care what a post-theocratic regime in Iran looks like. Even if it is hostile to U.S. and Western interests, it will be years before Iran can cause organized mischief in the region or rebuild its nuclear program. It would be great if Iran evolves into a stable democracy, but that is the business of the Iranian people. As heartless as it sounds, an internal civil war would not be in our worst interest as long as long as it it does not cross borders and destabilize the rest of the region. A civil war would likely be a multi-sided affair involving monarchists, regime loyalists led by the IRGC, and those claiming to seek pure democracy. The latter would likely include radical socialists and what is left of the communists; that is a good reason for us to stay out of post-regime internal politics. What Iran looks like in the future will likely be determined by which side the regular security forces — army and police — come down on. What we should avoid at all costs is a U.S. ground intervention. It is not needed and might actually incite the nationalistic Iranians to support the regime against us. If President Trump wants to assist the demonstration with U.S. power, it would be in our interest to use our air and cyberspace power to disrupt the IRGC and allow the Iranians to sort things out themselves. READ MORE from Gary Anderson: Regime Modification in Caracas Stop Building Battleships, Start Building Fear Learning From the Past, Leading in the Present Gary Anderson has experience with regime change and/or nation-building attempts in Lebanon, Somalia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Image licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International by the Mehr News Agency.

Two years ago this month, I wrote an essay here at American Spectator entitled “We are at war with Iran’s mullahs.” In it, I noted all the ways in which the theocratic Iranian regime had long been waging war against the United States, sometimes pinpricks, sometimes more deadly actions, but always an insistent drumbeat of actions aimed at advancing the cause of radical Islam and undermining U.S. interests in the Middle East and throughout the world. (RELATED: We Are at War With Iran’s Mullahs) In the intervening two years, this problem only became worse, largely because Joe Biden did nothing meaningful to counter the threat, leaving Donald Trump the unenviable task of unpicking a mess many years in the making. Today, however, we find ourselves in a much better position than ever before, largely because the supine response of the Biden years has been replaced by a muscular rejection of the mullahs’ assault on our interests and those of our Israeli allies. Smash Hamas? With our encouragement, Israel has achieved massive results, although the job is not yet fully done. Subdue the Houthi attacks on shipping? Again, not “mission accomplished,” but mission substantially advanced. Corral the worldwide threat posed by Hezbollah? Consider the extent to which Israel, again with our encouragement, has diminished their military capabilities and crippled — via exploding pagers, quite literally crippled — much of their leadership. And now, through our arrest of Nicolás Maduro, we’ve begun the neutralization of a burgeoning Hezbollah military presence in our own backyard. Above all, rather than the endless coddling of Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability, and again, in concert with Israel, Donald Trump did what his predecessors utterly failed to do, smashing the industrial foundations of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, delaying for years, perhaps forever, a looming threat that had exerted a paralytic effect on our policy in the Middle East and elsewhere — even here at home. Our war with the mullahs was in no way a war with the people of Iran. When I framed the problem two years ago, I insisted that we simply needed to fight back for a change. This we have done. But I also insisted on an important distinction, namely that our war with the mullahs was in no way a war with the people of Iran. It was clear then that the people of Iran no longer wanted to live under a stiflingly theocratic and economically incompetent dictatorship. On more than one occasion, they’d taken to the streets to signal their unhappiness, and on each occasion they’d received nothing in the way of encouragement from the U.S. Obama wanted a deal with the mullahs more than he wanted to help the suffering people of Iran — this much was clear. The same was true of Biden. Now, as the people of Iran take to the streets once again, this time more massively, more powerfully, more insistently than ever before, we’ve reached a crossroads. Instead of the indifference and the sometimes thinly-veiled hostility of the Obama and Biden years, we make it clear, in no uncertain terms, that the U.S. stands with the people of Iran in their pursuit of freedom. Unlike his predecessors, Donald Trump has sent a clear message, both powerful and surprisingly nuanced. He has bluntly called out the Iranian regime’s violence toward its people, threatening a range of coercive measures if the regime continues its attempt to violently suppress the will of the people. At the same time, he has carefully avoided calling for regime change or aligning the U.S. directly with emerging political factions. This is critical. It may be messy, and it may not produce results that perfectly align with our own interests, but letting the Iranian people themselves throw out the mullahs represents the best possible next step. And as Stephan Kapustka cogently argues, resist the temptation to put our hands on the scale as the Iranian people work out their future. (RELATED: The Prince and the Protests) The Iranian “street” wants the mullahs gone, and the only thing that is keeping them in place is their monopoly on the instruments of violence. If we can change this part of the equation, if we can freeze the use of force to suppress the demonstrations, then the regime will inevitably collapse. Its only strength is its monopoly on the instruments of violence. We understand that even now, the Department of War is providing the president with targeting options to achieve just such a result. One hopes that these include striking at the pillars of the theocracy’s power structure, most notably the IRGC, the “Revolutionary Guard,” and its Basij internal security forces. Down through the years, the Basij has demonstrated its eagerness to attack unarmed demonstrators — they might well be a bit less eager if their bases and barracks become subject to Tomahawk missile attacks. Any such action, however, should concentrate on the IRGC, and, at least at the beginning, avoid targeting the Artesh, Iran’s regular army. The Artesh is frequently described as “non-political,” in contrast to the IRGC. This is misleading — the higher reaches of the Artesh command structure are filled, inevitably, with regime loyalists. But the very nature of how the army is recruited means that the enlisted ranks and many junior officers are “of the people” as much or more than being creatures “of the regime.” Thus far, we’ve not seen the army leave its barracks to support the demonstrators, but it may be that this will only take a little nudge on our part. Cripple the IRGC, let the generals of the Artesh know that we are watching them very carefully, and use all our communications capabilities to persuade the troops to stand with the demonstrators, at the very least to disobey if ordered to fire on the demonstrators. This is the classic pattern of regime overthrow, repeated again and again down through the centuries. It can happen in Iran, and contra Obama, we should do our best to encourage this. Should we fear blowback from the Iranian regime? Our Jed Babbin has analyzed this, concluding that the dangers are real, but manageable if we are on our guard. A particular concern, one that I’ve written about repeatedly, is the infiltration of terrorist cells through our southern border–we know this occurred, including considerable numbers of potential Iranian/Hezbollah elements, during the years of the Biden border flood. And we know that there are more than a few home grown American sympathizers, the same people who fill our streets with a “hate America” message, but sit on their hands as the Iranian people cry out against the cruelest oppression. Not least of the current ICE efforts should be to deal with this threat, although it can’t be accomplished quickly enough. (RELATED: A Dying Regime With a Loaded Gun) Much can go wrong in the days to come, as such historical examples as the 1956 Hungarian revolt remind us. But to stand aside as a suffering people are standing for themselves? To be offered a golden opportunity to see the world rid of one of its most cancerous geopolitical growths? Acting carries significant risk, but doing nothing is also a form of action, and in this instance, undoubtedly the worst form of action — we’ve let this threat fester for far too long. Cripple the regime’s capacity for coercion. Let the will of the Iranian people prevail. Be on guard against the thrashings of a monster in its death throes. This moment may not soon come again. Ignore the naysayers, and rebuke those who ignore real humanitarian disasters in favor of self-serving (or Communist China-serving) anti-ICE resistance cosplay. In much the same manner as the recent arrest of Maduro, this is a moment for the grown-ups, not the Squad and its ilk. Remember the present moment, so full of hope, so fraught with consequence, is only a moment. The mullahs must go, and when that happens, the world will be a better place. However, the poison of radical Islam will still be coursing through the world’s bloodstream, and much will remain to be done, at home and abroad, before health is restored once again. But seize the present moment and seize it now. READ MORE from James H. McGee: The New York Times Keeps Getting It Wrong on Nigeria Arresting Maduro: Not a ‘Green Light’ to Xi or Putin Protecting Nigeria’s Christians: Trump’s Strike Against ISIS James H. McGee retired in 2018 after nearly four decades as a national security and counter-terrorism professional, working primarily in the nuclear security field. Since retiring, he’s begun a second career as a thriller writer. He’s just published his new novel, The Zebras from Minsk, the sequel to his well-received 2022 thriller, Letter of Reprisal. The Zebras from Minsk find the Reprisal Team fighting against an alliance of Chinese and Russian-backed Venezuelan terrorists, brutal child traffickers, and a corrupt anti-American billionaire, racing against time to take down a conspiracy that ranges from the hills of West Virginia to the forests of Belarus. You can find The Zebras from Minsk (and Letter of Reprisal) on Amazon in Kindle and paperback editions.