Fox News Pundit Goes Nuclear After Netherlands Queen Seems To Mock 'Daddy Trump'
Fox News contributor Raymond Arroyo joked that President Donald Trump might send a 'personalized' bomb to Queen Máxima of the Netherlands after a video showed the Dutch royal appearing to mock the president's mouth movements.
Friday's episode of 'The Ingraham Angle' addressed the now-viral footage from this week's NATO summit in the Netherlands. The clip shows Trump posing for a photo with Queen Máxima and her husband, King Willem-Alexander. After Trump says, 'Thank you very much,' Máxima turns away and makes some movements with her lips and tongue. It's unclear exactly what she was doing, but many people interpreted it as her making fun of Trump.
Neither Máxima nor Trump have commented publicly on the video, but Arroyo jumped in with his take on Friday.
'She's clearly making fun of his mouth... You know, doing the Trump lip thing,' the pundit said.
Then he quipped that the Dutch queen should watch out — or else.
'She better be careful, you know. She could get a personalized bunker buster from Daddy Trump if she's not really careful,' he said, referencing the bombs the U.S. used to strike Iran's nuclear sites earlier this month.
Arroyo: She's clearly making fun of his mouth.. But she better be careful. She could get a personalized bunker buster from Daddy Trump if she is not really careful pic.twitter.com/wCvS87oVpZ
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 27, 2025
In a slightly more serious tone, Arroyo added that the royal's reputation could take a hit.
'She's going to go from Queen Máxima from Queen Minima if she's not standing on protocol in the future,' he said. 'This is a bad look for a royal, or anybody.'
Arroyo's remarks also nodded to NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte referring to Trump as 'Daddy' during the summit. Trump, sticking to a familiar theme, was comparing Russia and Ukraine to 'two kids at a schoolyard' fighting. Rutte then chimed in, 'And then Daddy has to sometimes use strong language.'
NATO Chief Drops 'Daddy' Remark During Trump Chat On Iran-Israel
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
UK considers envoy for Britons held abroad
Britain is preparing to emulate the United States by appointing an envoy tasked with freeing citizens arbitrarily detained abroad, as it faces calls to do more to bring them home. High-profile cases like jailed Egyptian-British activist Alaa Abdel Fattah and imprisoned Hong Kong media mogul Jimmy Lai have spotlighted the plight of Britons held in jails overseas. The UK foreign ministry insists it continues to press such cases with governments, but relatives of detainees and human rights organisations complain of a lack of urgency and transparency. "The government is committed to strengthening support for British nationals, including through the appointment of a new envoy," a Foreign Office spokesperson told AFP. Middle East Minister Hamish Falconer has said an "Envoy for Complex Consular Detentions" is expected to be appointed "before the summer". The government has not specified the terms of the role but it could be similar to America's Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs, a position created in 2015. Unlike the United States though, Britain does not take part in prisoner exchanges. Professor Carla Ferstman, an expert on arbitrary detentions at the Human Rights Centre at Essex Law School, said appointing someone would be the "clearest thing that the UK can do that it hasn't done yet". "When you have someone at the highest level they command a certain level of respect," she told AFP. Abdel Fattah was arrested in September 2019 and sentenced to five years in prison on charges of "spreading false news" after sharing a Facebook post about police brutality. He is still imprisoned despite a hunger strike by his mother and Britain's foreign ministry saying it is pushing for his release "at the highest levels of the Egyptian government". His sister Sanaa Seif said an envoy would mean "a proper continued focus on" freeing detainees. - 'Clear strategy' - "It's also important to have a focal point that can help coordinate between different government bodies so that they all work in synchronisation," she told AFP. Seif believes the government should consider revising travel advice to Egypt too, a call also made by lawmakers who have suggested the government should sanction Egyptian officials as well. "Is it not clear that words are no longer sufficient?" Conservative peer Guy Black asked in parliament's House of Lords recently. Ferstman said tightening travel guidance can be a powerful tool. "It's a big deal because all of a sudden tourists can't get insurance and it's harder for business travel to happen. There's all kinds of implications," she explained. Amnesty International recently called for the government to develop a "clear strategy" to support arbitrarily detained Britons, including by demanding that UK officials attend trials. The Labour government pledged in its general election-winning manifesto last year that it would introduce "a new right to consular assistance in cases of human rights violations". Amnesty also wants the government to call for a person's "immediate release", including publicly when it is requested by the family. It said London took three years to publicly call for Lai to be freed, something his son Sebastian said "sends the wrong message" to "autocratic states". "The quicker we have the government speak out post-arrest, that's the window of opportunity to have people released," Eilidh Macpherson, Amnesty's campaigns manager for individuals at risk told AFP. UK officials say the government can be wary of accusations it is interfering in another country's judicial system. "Sometimes it may need to be quiet about what it's doing, but this shouldn't come at the expense of transparency," said Ferstman. Jagtar Singh Johal, a Sikh blogger from Scotland, was arrested in India in November 2017 while there for his wedding on accusations of being part of a terror plot against right-wing Hindu leaders. He has not been convicted of a crime and in March was cleared in one of the nine charges against him. The foreign ministry spokesperson said Foreign Secretary David Lammy "continues to raise concerns" about the detention with India's government "at every appropriate opportunity". But his brother, Gurpreet Singh Johal complains of being kept in the dark. "We don't know what's actually being said," he told AFP. Gurpreet said an envoy would be a "good thing" but until the position is in place, "We won't know exactly what it means." pdh/jwp/ach
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Europe Wants Green Steel but Can't Afford It
The European Union has pledged billions in rearmament spending. It also just pledged billions in higher NATO spending. Steel is a crucial part of the rearmament drive. Without it, you can't build tanks and make weapons. But Europe does not just want any steel—it wants it green. And green steel is so expensive, companies are walking away from green steel projects in droves. This week saw one of the world's largest steelmakers, ArcelorMittal, ditch its plans for the conversion of two plants in Germany to green hydrogen as an energy source because the costs were exorbitant. Importantly, the German government had promised the steelmaker $1.5 billion in subsidies for the conversion projects. Still, they turned out to be too expensive. Germany's ThyssenKrupp, meanwhile, is sticking with its green steel plans, although it noted the 'crisis' in the industry. At the same time, ThyssenKrupp is laying off 40% of its workforce and slashing production capacity by a quarter, the Financial Times reported at the end of 2024. 'The first electric arc forges are being built in countries that can offer competitive and predictable electricity provision,' ArcelorMittal said, as quoted by Reuters. 'Electricity prices in Germany are high both by international standards and compared to neighbouring countries.' There are two ways to decarbonize steelmaking, which is an important point on the EU's net-zero agenda. One way is hydrogen, and more specifically, green hydrogen, produced through electrolysis, enabled by wind and solar power. The other way is swapping blast furnaces fueled by coal to electric arc furnaces, fueled by, once again, wind and solar. Those electric arc forges that ArcelorMittal was referring to are being built in nuclear-heavy France. Because nuclear is cheap and reliable. Wind and solar appear to be the opposite of green hydrogen is several times costlier than any other variety. The reason is that electrolysis is, somewhat ironically, an energy-intensive process that uses electricity generated by wind or solar installations to split water molecules. Despite its net-zero desirability, the process cannot violate the fundamental laws of physics, meaning that the end product, in terms of energy, is considerably smaller in volume than the amount of energy expended on producing it—which is why green hydrogen's cost is unlikely to come down anytime soon. It is that cost that is sapping industrial appetite for making the switch from hydrocarbons to green hydrogen. 'The business case for green steel is not there in Europe,' the head of Eurofer, the EU's steel industry association, told the Financial Times. Some still had hopes for the future, Alex Eggert noted, but others had given up with 'I don't have time for this.' Europe itself does not really have time for this. Europe has stated quite clearly it plans to build a lot of things that require steel to replenish its depleted reserves after sending most of its inventory to Ukraine. And it needs to do that fast, based on its own claim that Russia is about to invade. But at the same time, Europe wants to do its rearmament in a green way—which is at odds with the need for speed. The problem becomes even bigger in the context of broader steel production. Steel is not only essential for weapons production. It is essential in construction, too, and a myriad other industries that feature the construction of something or other, up to and including wind turbine installation. Europe, then, needs a lot of steel—and it wants to reduce its import dependence by producing more of it locally, but also cheaply. Once again, the EU is trying to do two mutually exclusive things at the same time. The cost of electricity in the countries with the highest portion of wind and solar in their energy mix should proof enough that the transition is anything but cheap, and yet this fact continues to be overlooked in favor of ever more subsidy commitments and claims that ultimately this low-carbon energy will become cheap. The steel industry clearly does not have time to wait for this to happen. The steel industry is prioritizing energy affordability over emission footprints. Because the steel industry has realized that there is no other way to survive, especially with cheap, emission-heavy imports from China flooding the market. The EU introduced the carbon border adjustment mechanism to stem that flood. In fact, it introduced the carbon border adjustment mechanism to stem the flood of all sorts of cheap imports that undermine the competitiveness of European products—because of high energy costs. The EU is using CBAM to treat a symptom, and not the root cause of the energy cost disease. That root cause is the urgent transition. 'In the end, we will also have to discuss how quickly the transformation can take place, because the speed largely determines the cost,' RWE's Markus Krebber said this week, as quoted by the FT. It was this speed that prompted the conversion of 40% of Europe's steelmaking capacity to electric arc furnaces. It was this speed, and the lack of any desire for long-term planning that prompted talk about green hydrogen as replacement for coal. Now, the jig is up. Europe must decide between rearming and net zero. By Irina Slav for More Top Reads From this article on
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Senate bill's Medicaid cuts draw some GOP angst
The Senate's deep cuts to Medicaid in the tax and spending megabill are setting off alarm bells among some Republicans, complicating leadership's effort to get the legislation passed by July 4. It seeks to clamp down on two tactics states use to boost Medicaid funding to hospitals: state-directed payments and Medicaid provider taxes. The restrictions are a major concern for rural hospitals, a key constituency for senators. Republicans have set an ambitious July 4 deadline to pass the bill and send it to President Trump to be signed into law. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who has been warning his colleagues about making cuts to Medicaid for weeks, said the changes took him by surprise. 'I had no idea that they were going to completely scrap the House framework with this. I mean, this totally caught me by surprise. And I've talked to other senators, and that's what I've heard consistently from everybody I've talked to, that no one was expecting this entirely new framework,' Hawley told reporters Tuesday. States impose taxes on providers to boost their federal Medicaid contributions, which they then direct back to hospitals in the form of higher reimbursements. Critics argue it's a scheme for states to get more federal funding without spending any of their own money. But provider taxes have become ingrained into states' Medicaid financing systems. States and provider groups say the taxes provide a steady source of financing for hospitals that operate on thin margins and would otherwise face closure. 'The draconian Medicaid cuts contained in the Senate bill would devastate health care access for millions of Americans and hollow out the vital role essential hospitals play in their communities,' said Bruce Siegel, president and CEO of America's Essential Hospitals, an organization that represents hospitals that serve low-income patients. The legislation would effectively cap provider taxes at 3.5 percent by 2031, down from the current 6 percent, but only for the states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The cap would be phased in by lowering it 0.5 percent annually, starting in 2027. Nonexpansion states would be prohibited from imposing new taxes, but as was true in the House-passed version, their rates would be frozen at current levels. The lower cap would not apply to nursing homes or intermediate care facilities. All states except for Alaska finance part of their share of Medicaid funding through health care provider taxes, and 38 states have at least one provider tax that exceeds 5.5 percent. When asked if his concerns were enough to make him vote against the bill if it were brought to the floor as written, Hawley hedged. 'It needs a lot of work, so I would say maybe we could, I guess, try to fix it on the floor, but it'd be better to do it beforehand,' he told reporters. Republicans can afford to lose only three votes in the Senate and still pass their bill if Democrats remain united in opposition. Sen. Jim Justice ( said he was also surprised by the Senate's change. If provider tax changes are on the table, he said he wants leadership to keep the House version. Justice wouldn't say how he would vote if the provision was left unchanged but expressed some unease about the July 4 deadline. 'I promise you, I won't rubber-stamp anything,' Justice said. 'I want this thing to come out and come out quickly, but when it really boils right down to it, you may have to hold your nose on some things that you just absolutely don't like because we can't like everything.' Similarly, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) indicated he would also prefer the House-passed freeze on provider taxes but was still analyzing the impact on his state. Louisiana expanded Medicaid in 2016. Senate Republican leaders huddled with members Tuesday during a closed-door caucus lunch to talk through the details of the bill. Speaking to reporters afterward, Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said leadership was listening to members' concerns, especially about provider taxes. 'We think [the changes] rebalance the program in a way that provides the right incentives to cover the people who are supposed to be covered,' Thune said. 'We continue to hear from members specifically on components or pieces of the bill they want to see modified or changed, and we are working through that.' Members were also briefed by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, who downplayed the impact of a lower provider tax cap. 'We do not believe that addressing the provider tax effort is going to influence the ability of hospitals to stay viable,' Oz told reporters. Without weighing in on the exact details, Oz said some changes to provider taxes and state-directed payments should be included. 'The framework of addressing the legalized money laundering with state-directed payments and provider taxes must be in this bill, it should be in this bill,' Oz said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
