Your First Look at Today's Top Stories

Having trouble viewing this email? View the web version.

Tuesday, June 3, 2025

Iran Poised to Reject Latest Proposal From U.S.

Are they calling Trump’s bluff? Times of Israel: Iran is poised to reject a US proposal to end a decades-old nuclear dispute, an Iranian diplomat said on Monday, dismissing it as a “non-starter” that fails to address Tehran’s interests or soften Washington’s stance on uranium enrichment. “Iran is drafting a negative response to the US proposal, which could be interpreted as a rejection of the US offer,” the senior diplomat, who is close to Iran’s negotiating team, told Reuters (Times of Israel). Ed Morrissey: … it doesn’t matter if Trump is bluffing, because Benjamin Netanyahu most certainly isn’t bluffing. Netanyahu would have already hit the Iranian nuclear facilities by now if Trump hadn’t pressured him to stand down in favor of the talks currently underway. Trump can’t let the Iranians continue to enrich uranium because Netanyahu will strike Iran even with that deal in place and let those chips fall where they may. This is an existential question for Israel, which cannot allow Iran to achieve nuclear-weapons status and just wait for the day the mullahs decide to take out Tel Aviv. The smartest outcome would be for the US to refuse the deal, keep holding Israel off for a while, and apply the “maximum pressure” sanctions that will cut off income to the IRGC and raise the stakes with Iran’s restive population, especially the democracy-oriented middle class of Tehran. It might not take much to tip this regime over in an economic crisis, especially one in which the IRGC finds its access to wealth and income cut off. Rather than talk about accommodation with the radical Islamists of the IRGC and mullahs, we should start orienting policy toward the people of Iran to encourage them as much as possible to make this their moment, rather than ours or Israel’s. The only way to secure this region from extremist nuclear blackmail is to rid it of the terrorist regime holding Iranians in their grip (Hot Air). Update, quoting Trump: “The AUTOPEN should have stopped Iran a long time ago from “enriching.” Under our potential Agreement — WE WILL NOT ALLOW ANY ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM!,” he writes on his Truth Social platform (Times of Israel).

Suspect in Colorado Terror Attack was Here Illegally; This Is What “Globalize the Intifada” Looks Like

Times UK: An Egyptian who was living in the US illegally after overstaying his visa has been arrested over a fire-bomb attack on a crowd gathered in Boulder, Colorado, to remember Israeli hostages held by Hamas (Times UK). Charles Fain Lehman: Soliman’s assault is the third high-profile anti-Israel and anti-Semitic terror attack in the U.S. in recent months. It follows the double murder outside of the Washington, D.C. Jewish Museum less than ten days ago and the attempted firebombing of Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro’s home in April. The increasing tempo of violence makes the pattern hard to ignore: the American anti-Israel movement has radicalized. It is also hard not to draw a connection between the rhetoric used by radical protesters over the past two years and the recent wave of violence. “There is only one solution,” students and marchers have chanted, “Intifada! Revolution!” This—lighting humans on fire to advance your political goals—is what an Intifada looks like. And until we treat it as such, and respond with the full force of the law, it will continue to endanger lives (City Journal). Ed Morrissey: These murders and attempted murders are a direct consequence of the progressive establishment coddling the agitators and attempting to pander to them ever since the October 7 terror attacks in Israel. This kind of appeasement only ever results in escalating violence, especially when agitators start openly calling for violence with slogans like “globalize the intifada” and succeed in conducting intimidation campaigns in progressive spaces. The progressive establishment granted these agitators-cum-terrorists the sense of impunity, and these are its results. We need a robust, immediate, and substantial set of consequences for these terrorists and those who seek to follow in their path. The only way to stamp this out is to start setting some examples in ways that will get the message across in uncertain terms that “globalizing the intifada” will cost them at least a substantial part of their lives, if not forfeiting them altogether. And now the question is: why would anyone trust that kind of policy to Democrats after the last 20 months? And why would anyone trust Warren and her ilk with any other policies that will force terrorists and agitators to pay heavy prices for their intifadas? (Hot Air).

California Public Schools Forced to Choose: Comply With Equal Protection Clause or Face Legal Consequences

The administration’s move comes after a male competed as a female in California’s recent CIF finals—winning triple jump and high jump (Los Angeles Times). Jennifer Van Laar: In the past, there have been no consequences to CIF or its member schools for violating federal law, but it’s a new day at the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon sent a letter Monday not to CIF, but to the state’s public school districts. (She cc’d CIF officials, though.) More than simply a strongly-worded letter (which we’re all sick of), this letter has some teeth. In it, Dhillon informed the districts that by complying with CIF Bylaw 300.D they’re in violation of federal law, and that they have until 5 PM on June 9, 2025, to certify in writing that they will not implement that bylaw – or they will face legal liability. Dhillon wrote: Scientific evidence shows that upsetting the historical status quo and forcing girls to compete against males would deprive them of athletic opportunities and benefits because of their sex. Therefore, you cannot implement a policy allowing males to compete alongside girls, because such a policy would deprive girls of athletic opportunities and benefits based solely on their biological sex, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. As a political subdivision, you have an obligation to comply with the Equal Protection Clause. To ensure compliance and avoid legal liability, you must certify in writing by 5:00 p.m. ET on .June 9, 2025, that you will not implement CIF Bylaw 300.D. (Red State).

FBI Used “Prohibited Access” Coding to Hide Trump/Russia Collision Material

Not just limiting access to it, but hiding the very fact that any such files even existed. Margot Cleveland: Now in question is whether the federal government complies with the constitutional mandate in criminal cases to provide defendants all material exculpatory and impeachment evidence as well as its discovery obligations in civil litigation; whether Special Counsel Durham’s office, the inspector general, and agents investigating the members of the Crossfire Hurricane team had access to all relevant information; whether the DOJ and FBI provided congressional oversight committees with requested (or subpoenaed) documents; and whether FOIA responses included all relevant documents to the press and public…. The existence of the “Prohibited Access” classification came as a surprise to several former career prosecutors and FBI agents. Jay Town, a former career prosecutor and the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama under Trump 1.0, told The Federalist he was not aware of the “Prohibited Access” classification and shared that many of his colleagues likewise had never heard of it. “This is a staggering revelation for nearly all of us,” Town said (Federalist).

Poland Has a New President: Pro-Trump, Pro-American; “a triumph over the international liberal elite”

And someone the opposition tried to stymie each and every step along the way. The winner—Karol Nawrocki: The victory is seen as a sign of the enduring appeal of right-wing populism and nationalist rhetoric in Europe. Nawrocki built his campaign on a patriotic message, espousing traditional Catholic values and vowing to defend Poland’s sovereignty from Germany and other larger European nations. “Poland remains a deeply divided country,” Jacek Kucharczyk, the president of the Polish Institute of Public Affairs, told The Associated Press (The Hill). Economist: when all the votes were counted it was Mr Nawrocki who had won, taking 50.9% of the vote to Mr Trzaskowski’s 49.1%. The final results, published early on June 2nd, put the margin of victory at some 300,000 votes…. The Polish presidency is not responsible for EU policy. Mr Tusk, not Mr Nawrocki, will continue to attend EU summits. Nonetheless, the president-elect can be expected to try to shift the country in a Eurosceptic direction. He was endorsed during the campaign by Viktor Orban, Hungary’s prime minister, and by others from the EU’s populist bloc. “We don’t want to be a European Union province,” he told supporters at a rally. Mr Nawrocki has also turned away from PiS’s traditionally firm support for Ukraine, pledging during the campaign to oppose the country’s admission to NATO, though this is currently unlikely to happen any time soon….For supporters of PiS, Mr Nawrocki’s win is a triumph over the international liberal elite (Economist). Wall Street Journal: In Poland, the president is able to veto legislation or recommend it to the Constitutional Court for review. Current President Andrzej Duda, who is also backed by Law and Justice, has done both, stymying the current ruling center-left coalition, which ousted the party in 2023 elections. That dynamic is expected to stay in place with the victory of Nawrocki, who will likely continue hampering Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s efforts to enact more reformist legislation meant to roll back some laws passed by Law and Justice in its eight years in power. Some of the most controversial laws restricted access to abortion and politicized the judiciary (Wall Street Journal).

Secretary of State Rubio Defending First Amendment Freedom

Via a visa restriction policy for those who censor Americans. The administration addresses the speech-restricting and speech-chilling moves around the world, perhaps—most immediately—the European Union. Rubio: I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign nationals who are responsible for censorship of protected expression in the United States. It is unacceptable for foreign officials to issue or threaten arrest warrants on U.S. citizens or U.S. residents for social media posts on American platforms while physically present on U.S. soil. It is similarly unacceptable for foreign officials to demand that American tech platforms adopt global content moderation policies or engage in censorship activity that reaches beyond their authority and into the United States (State). Rubio may well have had the EU in his sights because of recent threats to Elon Musk and X: In February, Brussels enacted the Digital Services Act (DSA), the most ambitious speech regulations in its history. It requires platforms to remove “illegal content,” including those now-ubiquitous modern offences: “disinformation” and “hate speech”. Both are defined, helpfully, by national authorities with varying sensibilities. Brussels has made clear it prefers those definitions to be broad, and enforcement to be swift…. To Trump’s allies, the asymmetry is obvious, and the State Department appears to agree. Though “billed to protect children from harmful online content,” Europe’s laws are, in its words, “used to silence dissident voices through Orwellian content moderation.” Orwellian is a word best used sparingly, but the DSA may be one of the rare exceptions. There is still no settled definition of disinformation or hate speech. European governments, many of them nervous about rising populism, are now positioned to define and punish speech just as their electorates become more volatile. That conflict of interest alone ought to raise eyebrows (Telegraph).

China’s New Trade Negotiator Ready to Play Hardball With Trump

Wall Street Journal: In its deepening face-off with the Trump administration, Beijing’s trade negotiator has given a preview of Xi Jinping’s chief objective for this trade war: It won’t be like last time. In Geneva in mid-May, Vice Premier He Lifeng extracted a 90-day trade truce from a Trump team that had until then declined to pause a tariff blitz on China the way it had for other countries. The deal calmed the nerves of investors and markets around the world. Now, after both sides have complained that the other wasn’t upholding the terms of the deal, that trade truce is teetering, once again jolting global investors and businesses. At the center of the storm is He, Xi’s economic gatekeeper, who has made clear China’s strategy in this trade war is nothing like the approach it had in Trump’s first term…. This time, Xi has given He, a firm believer in state control just like his boss, a clear mandate of not catering to America. Last month’s Geneva deal, which China saw as a win, showed Xi the value of sticking to his guns, according to people who consult with senior Chinese officials…. “China’s own bottom line has risen quite a lot since the first trade war,” said Arthur Kroeber, founding partner and head of research at Gavekal Dragonomics. “Any negotiation will require the U.S. to give China something that it wants, not just a list of demands” (Wall Street Journal).

California Democrat Labels ICE Agents “Terrorists”

Goading his constituents, saying they “should be fighting back.” The incitement comes from San Diego City Councilman Sean Elo-Rivera. Sarah Arnold: His comment underscores a disturbing trend among progressive leaders who demonize immigration officers tasked with protecting America’s national sovereignty while turning a blind eye to the consequences of illegal immigration. San Diego councilman Sean Elo-Rivera criticized ICE agents, calling them “terrorists” after agents carried out an operation. At the same time, several San Diego residents attempted to interfere with the multiple arrests conducted by ICE. “Look at this photo. This isn’t a war zone—it’s a neighborhood in our city,” Elo-Rivera wrote in an Instagram post. “In San Diego, they’ve targeted parents dropping off their kids at school, people following the law inside courthouses, and workers just doing their jobs at local restaurants. These are federal agents carrying out raids under the false pretense of ‘safety.’” Elo-Rivera claimed ICE agents didn’t carry out the operation for the sake of safety, but instead said it was “state-sponsored terrorism… And anyone who cares about freedom—and true safety—should be fighting back,” he continued…. White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller also responded to Elo-Rivera’s remarks, accusing him and others on the left of encouraging violence against law enforcement to facilitate the invasion of America. “We are living in the age of left-wing domestic terrorism. They are openly encouraging violence against law enforcement to aid and abet the invasion of America,” he wrote on X (Townhall).

Our Dangerous Period of World History

From Putin’s war in Ukraine to the imminent threat of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, we are actually already in a “War of Revision.” Walter Russell Mead argues that this war has already begun: A Chinese invasion of Taiwan “could be imminent,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth warned last week at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. “Every day you see it,” Mr. Hegseth said. “China’s military harasses Taiwan. These activities have been paired with China’s rapid military modernization and buildup—including huge investments in nuclear weapons, hypersonics and amphibious assault capabilities….” No serious person wants war, but decades of neglect have hollowed out Western defenses, and both the military foundations of American power and the political underpinnings of our alliance system are in poor condition. Between the steadily rising challenge from the revisionists and the uncertain responses of the defenders, peace grows more fragile as the challenges rise. A new era of great-power war isn’t inevitable, but it is getting harder to prevent. All democratic societies will ultimately have to reckon with this unwelcome global transition from a postwar to a prewar era in world history. Frontline states like Taiwan already live in this new reality…. (Wall Street Journal).

10.

New Study Confirms: “Coffee consumption is actually beneficial”

New York Times reports on a study of 47,000 females nurses over the course of several decades: … presented today at the annual meeting of the American Society for Nutrition, scientists have found that coffee may offer the much longer-term benefit of healthy aging…. After adjusting for other factors that could affect aging, such as their overall diet, how much they exercised and whether they smoked, those who consumed the most caffeine (equivalent to nearly seven eight-ounce cups of coffee per day) had odds of healthy aging that were 13 percent higher than those who consumed the least caffeine (equivalent to less than one cup per day). If you drink coffee regularly, consider the new findings and others like it as good news that it may benefit your health — so long as you don’t add too much cream or sugar, Dr. Zhang said (New York Times). From an earlier study: Higher coffee consumption was associated with lower all-cause mortality…. However, the mortality benefits were restricted to black coffee and coffee with low added sugar and saturated fat content….(Journal of Nutrition).

SUBSCRIPTION INFO: This newsletter is never sent unsolicited. It is only sent to people who signed up from one of the Salem Media Group network of websites. We respect and value your time and privacy.
Unsubscribe from The Daybreak Insider
6400 N. Belt Line Rd., Suite 200, Irving, TX 75063
Copyright © 2025 Salem Media Group and its Content Providers. All rights reserved.