'Intentional flight into a building as an act of suicide'

And the beef, ladies and gentlemen, is officially over

'The closing of a chapter'

One of the men was reportedly knocked out cold

'What we’re seeing in California is just a preview of what’s to come'

President Donald Trump recommends that young left-wing activist Greta Thunberg “go to an anger-management class.”   “Well, she’s a strange person. She’s a young, angry person,” Trump told reporters when asked about the Israel Defense Forces’ interception of a boat carrying Thunberg about 100 miles off the coast of Gaza. “I don’t know if it’s real anger,” the president continued. “It’s hard to believe, actually, but I saw what happened. She’s certainly different.”   Thunberg, 22, and a group of pro-Palestine activists were intercepted when attempting to deliver aid to Gaza late Sunday. Following her apprehension, the group backing the activist’s voyage released a video of Thunberg claiming she had been kidnapped.   “I think Israel has enough problems without kidnapping Greta Thunberg,” Trump said.   "Israel has enough problems without kidnapping Greta Thunberg." ?President Donald Trump asked about Thunberg. pic.twitter.com/tGx6cE0JUt— Liberty Nation (@libertynation) June 9, 2025 The Israeli Foreign Ministry shared photos of Thunberg aboard an airplane early Tuesday morning, writing on X, “Greta Thunberg just departed Israel on a flight to Sweden (via France).”  Thunberg is a Swedish citizen better known for her work as a climate change activist, but has also become outspoken in her pro-Palestine views.  Greta Thunberg just departed Israel on a flight to Sweden (via France). pic.twitter.com/kWrI9KVoqX— Israel Foreign Ministry (@IsraelMFA) June 10, 2025 Thunberg was one of several passengers on the intercepted boat to be deported, while some refused deportation and “will be brought before a judicial authority, in accordance with Israeli law, to authorize their deportation,” the Foreign Ministry said.   Thunberg spoke with the press when she arrived in Paris and clapped back at Trump’s comments about her being “angry.”   “Well, I think the world needs a lot of more young, angry women, to be honest, especially with everything going on right now,” she said.   WATCH: Greta Thunberg landed in Paris and clapped back at President Trump's comment that the young activist needs to “go to an anger management class.”Thunberg: “Well, I think the world needs a lot of more young angry women, to be honest, especially with everything going on… pic.twitter.com/eMLBBJRupB— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) June 10, 2025 The youthful activist’s voyage to Gaza was an initiative of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, a pro-Palestine group that aims to “break Israel’s more than 17-year illegal and inhumane blockade of the Gaza Strip,” according to its website.   “We respect everyone’s human rights, regardless of race, gender, tribe, religion, ethnicity, nationality, citizenship, disability, sexual orientation, or language,” according to the group. “Because we respect everyone’s human rights, we stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people in their quest for freedom, equality, and human rights.”  The post Greta Thunberg Should ‘Go to an Anger-Management Class,’ Trump Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The House version of the reconciliation package in Congress, passed on May 22, marks a long-overdue step toward fiscal responsibility in higher education. The policies in H.R. 1, also known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, should encourage students and taxpayers. These include eliminating the inflationary Grad PLUS loan program, placing borrowing caps on Parent PLUS loans, instituting skin-in-the-game requirements for colleges and universities, and rolling back several burdensome and costly Biden-era regulations. However, the bill leaves key reforms to be adopted. Lawmakers in the Senate have a critical opportunity to refine the policies in H.R. 1 and close the gaps that leave taxpayers on the hook for debt cancellation, runaway tuition, and unchecked borrowing. Here’s what the Senate can focus on. Increased Caps on Student Loans An unfortunate, unintended consequence of subsidizing college tuition is that colleges raise tuition even higher. The House bill proposes $50,000 annual and $200,000 lifetime caps on federal student loans. This policy could be improved by lowering the lending cap to $30,000 for undergraduates and $40,000 for graduate students, with an annual lending cap of $7,500 for both populations. Streamlining federal loan programs into a single option with more responsible annual and lifetime borrowing limits will tend to initiate more lending from the private market, reduce overall student debt, and put pressure on colleges and universities to take responsibility for controlling rising costs. Repayment Plan Reform The House version creates a “Repayment Assistance Plan” to replace current income-driven repayment plans. However, this plan still allows for loan cancellation after 360 payments, waives unpaid interest, and allows some non-payments to count as payments. But debt doesn’t disappear; it just shifts to taxpayers. The better policy is to raise borrower payments to 15% of income above 100% of the poverty line and eliminate debt cancellation altogether. Allowing borrowers to enroll in an income-driven repayment plan will enable them to better manage their debt load in a responsible manner, but cancellation should not be a default feature of the system. Only a court-approved bankruptcy should cancel debt. Expand Pell to Match the Modern Economy Expanding Pell Grants to short-term, high-quality, workforce-aligned programs is a welcome improvement. But tying eligibility to programs approved by the state workforce board under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act duplicates the existing Individual Training Accounts program and risks excluding other high-quality options. Instead, Congress could expand Pell grant eligibility to align with policies similar to the Professional Pell Education Learning (PROPEL) Act, which would allow students to use these funds for enrollment in vocational or technical training, flight training, apprenticeship, or other on-the-job training programs. Programs would no longer have to be accredited, and taxpayer dollars would be aligned with educational opportunities that meet workforce needs. Wind Down the PSLF Program The House version rightly ends Public Service Loan Forgiveness eligibility for medical and dental residents, who can expect high earnings and already benefit from other state and federal partnership programs that provide loan repayment for clinicians working in rural or underserved areas. But the Senate shouldn’t stop there. It’s time to wind down the program entirely. At the least, Public Service Loan Forgiveness should have a cap on the amount of the debt that could be canceled. The Congressional Budget Office has predicted that capping the loan forgiveness debt cancellation at $57,000 (this is the most an undergraduate can borrow in direct unsubsidized loans) would produce savings of up to $12.5 billion over 10 years. Eliminating the program altogether would be even better. Privileging some workers over others, regardless of income, is unjust. Besides, borrowers already have access to income-driven repayment plans that are affordable by definition and that currently include loan cancellation. Today, more than 42 million borrowers owe the federal government more than $1.6 trillion in student debt. Just 38% of them are making payments. Meanwhile, public trust in higher education is collapsing. The House reconciliation bill takes many valuable steps toward reforming American higher education, but in the area of student debt, the Senate now has a chance to build on that progress and deliver even more accountability while helping students borrow, spend, and repay reasonable amounts. If the bill caps excessive borrowing, simplifies repayment, prioritizes workforce-ready education, and ends open-ended loan forgiveness, this part of the bill will truly be beautiful. Colleges must be held accountable for the prices they charge and the value they provide. The post Student Loan Reform Is Underway – Now the Senate Can Strengthen It appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—The state of Arkansas received approval Tuesday from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to ban the purchase of both soft drinks and candy with food stamps. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has signed a waiver enabling Arkansas Gov. Sarah Sanders to ban the unhealthy foods from Arkansas’ Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the formal name for food stamps. Arkansas joins Nebraska in getting a waiver from the Trump administration to combat America’s health crisis that way. “This approval sends a clear message: President Trump and his administration are tackling America’s chronic disease epidemic, and Arkansas stands with him in that fight,” Sanders said of the move.  “I am incredibly grateful for Secretary Rollins’ quick approval of our waiver. Arkansas leads the nation in getting unhealthy, ultra-processed foods off food stamps and helping our most vulnerable citizens lead healthier lives,” said the Republican governor.  About 23% of the cost of food stamps, which cost the federal government more than $100 billion per year, goes to cover soft drinks, candy, unhealthy snacks, and desserts. That translates to billions of dollars in taxpayer money that ends up paying for those foods.  That the U.S. suffers from an epidemic of chronic disease is no exaggeration. One-third of the residents of Arkansas have diabetes or prediabetes. Sanders’ decision is also backed by health data. One Stanford University study found that even simply banning sugary drinks from being covered under food stamps could save 141,000 children from obesity and 240,000 adults from Type 2 diabetes. Sanders’ decision is aimed at combating the trend of Americans who become hooked on unhealthy foods as children and subsequently struggle to combat the addictive nature of the chemicals in those foods.  In recent months, the Arkansas governor has positioned her state to lead in making America healthy again. She signed into law in February bipartisan legislation that enables every Arkansas child to get free breakfast before the school day even if they do not qualify for free or reduced meals under federal law. The new law directs medical marijuana tax revenue to fund school breakfasts and lunches in the future. Sanders has also been a strong supporter of providing food assistance for families with children who qualify for the National School Lunch Program during the summer months as well, through the Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer program. Sanders took office as governor of Arkansas in January 2023. She previously served as White House press secretary during the first Trump administration. Her father, Mike Huckabee, was also governor of Arkansas, from 1996 to 2007. The post EXCLUSIVE: SNAP Judgment by Arkansas Bans Junk Food Purchases With Food Stamps appeared first on The Daily Signal.

UK Government Labels 42% of its Country 'Terrorists'

On Monday, CBS Evening News Plus anchor John Dickerson dished out another pompous commentary to wrap the show. This time, he used the 71st anniversary of lawyer Joseph Welch’s infamous scolding of then-Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-WI) for having “no sense of decency” as a likely veiled smear on President Trump, his supporters, and their desire for toughness and law order the CBS host deemed “cruelty.” Dickerson waxed poetic about Welch’s remark as having altered American history or something: Some questions can stop a room and freeze time. 71 years ago today, Boston lawyer Joseph Welsh asked such a question. In 1954, Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin had been accusing Americans of communist ties with ruthless abandon. One target members of the U.S. Army, which contributed to the Army-McCarthy hearings, where, during an exchange, the senator targeting a young associate on Welch’s legal team. Welch, seeing the tactics which had ruined so many lives, aimed callously at one of his team, spoke out. After that famous quote, Dickerson huffed the line “didn’t cite rules or legal violations,” but “something deeper, cruelty, and a loss of basic human restraint.” This, Dickerson declared in a clear smear at the American right, has in modern times been “quoted to summon moral clarity, but the world it pierced in 1954 had scaffolding: norms of civility, shame, and mutual restraint.” “McCarthy could be shamed because cruelty was still disqualifying. Now, cruelty is often reframed as strength. Authenticity. Welch’s appeal to decency wasn’t a demand for censure or cancellation. It was a call to self-governance, a recognition that decency is the minimum standard, and its absence is a kind of self-inflicted disgrace. Not a quaint set of rules for elites, but a matter of simple self-respect,” declared the man who wrote during Obama presidency the 44th President should “go for the throat” of Republicans. Dickerson made a more direct call-out to the present by insisting the 1950s were a time when “public shaming had a scarcity value” and not “hundreds of viral clips a day.” “Welsh’s rebuke found its purchase in the daily beliefs and self-enforcement of his fellow Americans. It was the unwritten code that made a society self-governing in the smallest ways. How one debated, how one conceded, how one listened without humiliating themselves or another. How one treated another human being,” he swooned. These days? Dickerson fretted “cruelty...gets applause,” a problem “one for all of us to answer.” Yes, Dickerson cares so much about decency he referred to Republicans as “cats and dogs,” fawned over Hillary Clinton as “ruthless,” called an Obama speech in 2024 “nourishment,” and smeared Americans in the Tea Party as “clownish” and “overhyped.” Or how about seeing partisanship around every corner? There was the time recently when he used Pope Francis’s passing to attack Trump or when he deemed spring 2025 a dour time in America because Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Therein lies the mantra of liberal journalists who come off like arrogant historians in the mold of Michael Beschloss or Jon Meacham. Indecency toward one’s adversaries are not actually smears if, in their own minds, they’re simply telling the truth. To see the relevant CBS transcript from June 9, click “expand.” CBS Evening News Plus June 9, 2025 7:26 p.m. Eastern JOHN DICKERSON: Some questions can stop a room and freeze time. 71 years ago today, Boston lawyer Joseph Welsh asked such a question. In 1954, Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin had been accusing Americans of communist ties with ruthless abandon. One target members of the U.S. Army, which contributed to the Army-McCarthy hearings, where, during an exchange, the senator targeting a young associate on Welch’s legal team. Welch, seeing the tactics which had ruined so many lives, aimed callously at one of his team, spoke out. JOSEPH WELCH: Let us not assassinate this man further. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency? DICKERSON: The question didn’t cite rules or legal violations. It accused McCarthy of something deeper, cruelty, and a loss of basic human restraint. Today, Welch’s question about decency gets quoted to summon moral clarity, but the world it pierced in 1954 had scaffolding: norms of civility, shame, and mutual restraint. McCarthy could be shamed because cruelty was still disqualifying. Now, cruelty is often reframed as strength. Authenticity. Welch’s appeal to decency wasn’t a demand for censure or cancellation. It was a call to self-governance, a recognition that decency is the minimum standard, and its absence is a kind of self-inflicted disgrace. Not a quaint set of rules for elites, but a matter of simple self-respect, like wiping food from your face. Another difference in the 1950s, public shaming had a scarcity value. There weren’t hundreds of viral clips a day. Welsh’s rebuke found its purchase in the daily beliefs and self-enforcement of his fellow Americans. It was the unwritten code that made a society self-governing in the smallest ways. How one debated, how one conceded, how one listened without humiliating themselves or another. How one treated another human being. Back then, cruelty disqualified you. Today, it gets applause. The question that raises is one for all of us to answer.