FBI and law enforcement respond to ‘terror attack' in Colorado
Many people were injured, and some may have been set on fire at a mall in Boulder, Colorado.
The FBI described it as a 'targeted attack,' with police taking a man into custody.
>>> STREAM ACTION NEWS JAX LIVE <<<
Multiple blocks of the mall area were evacuated by police. Police officers patrolled the streets accompanied by a police dog, searching for potential threats.
[DOWNLOAD: Free Action News Jax app for alerts as news breaks]
'Our agents and local law enforcement are on the scene already, and we will share updates as more information becomes available,' FBI Director Kash Pate posted on social media.
[SIGN UP: Action News Jax Daily Headlines Newsletter]
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis said he was 'closely monitoring' the situation.
Click here to download the free Action News Jax news and weather apps, click here to download the Action News Jax Now app for your smart TV and click here to stream Action News Jax live.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
17 minutes ago
- Forbes
No Pipeline, No Progress: Meeting The Demand For Advanced Degrees
As demand for master's and doctoral degrees surges, too few programs exist to support the students most often excluded—despite their potential. The United States stands at a crossroads. While innovation, competitiveness, and global leadership increasingly depend on highly educated workers, access to graduate education remains deeply unequal and underfunded. Over 60% of business and government leaders hold graduate degrees—with more than half in business and nearly a third in law. A 2020 report by Brint and colleagues found that 61% of top media figures and 78% of think tank and foundation leaders also held advanced degrees. In many leadership roles, graduate education is no longer a competitive advantage—it's a requirement. Demand is rising. A 2024 report from Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce projects that nearly 1 in 5 jobs will soon require an advanced degree. Among 'good jobs'—those offering middle-class wages of $43,000 or more—1 in 4 will demand graduate credentials. Yet access to graduate education remains deeply inequitable. Madeline Brighouse Glueck finds that parental education still shapes graduate enrollment, especially in high-investment, high-return programs like law, medicine, and PhDs. In medicine alone, over 75% of students come from the top two income quintiles. Even academically qualified first-generation and low-income students are often left behind. While families with financial and social capital can navigate elite admissions and cover soaring costs, others are shut out. The only federally funded graduate pipeline program is the McNair Scholars Program, which supports first-generation, low-income, and underrepresented undergraduates seeking PhDs. This program—and others like Upward Bound—are now at risk of being defunded. As the federal government grows increasingly hostile toward identity-based programs in higher education, the burden of promoting equitable access is falling to the private sector and nonprofit organizations. Yet only a handful of national nonprofits directly focus on this issue: These organizations are doing powerful work—but their combined reach can only serve a fraction of the students who deserve access. To meet the moment, coordinated investments are needed—not just in graduate preparation, but also in affordability, mentorship, and long-term support: Graduate education is not a luxury—it is a national imperative. If we want to lead in science, health, law, and business—and if we believe in opportunity—we must invest in the people who will lead those fields. Let's ensure that talent, not zip code or family background, determines who has a seat at the table. Change can't wait. The time to invest is now. —--------- Help us widen the pipeline. Support Leadership Brainery in creating equitable pathways to graduate education. Donate today!
Time Magazine
20 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Where Things Stand With the Epstein Files Following Musk's Allegation Against Trump
The breakdown in relations between President Donald Trump and his one-time ally Elon Musk has played out over social media in spectacular fashion, with the two engaging in a tit-for-tat spat. The row initially started over politics. Musk expressed his vehement disapproval of Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' calling it a 'disgusting abomination' and encouraging people to 'kill the bill.' Meanwhile, Trump maintained that the fall-out was prompted by Musk being upset over the removal of electric vehicle subsidies —a provision that made Tesla vehicles more affordable. But the fight has since taken a far more personal turn, bolstered by Musk's allegation that Trump is listed in the files related to the late financier and alleged sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. 'That is the real reason they have not been made public,' Musk said in a post shared via his social media platform, X. He did not provide evidence pertaining to this. The accusation has spurred Democrats to chase the full unsealing of the Epstein files. California Rep. Robert Garcia and Massachusetts Rep. Stephen F. Lynch—Democratic members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform—sent a letter on June 5 to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Kash Patel. 'We write with profound alarm at allegations that files relating to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have not been declassified and released to the American public because they personally implicate President Trump,' read the letter titled 'Is Trump Suppressing The Epstein Files?' The White House responded, saying that the move by the Oversight Committee members was 'another baseless stunt that bears no weight in fact or reality.' Here's what to know about the Epstein files and the renewed push to declassify them following Musk's allegation. What do we know about the Epstein files so far? On Feb. 27, Bondi released more than 100 pages of declassified documents related to Epstein—as part of the Trump Administration's vow to be more transparent regarding the high-profile case. During the presidential election, Trump promised to appease the clamoring for the alleged 'client list' of Epstein's since his arrest and subsequent death by suicide in 2019. Though Bondi called this the 'first phase' of declassified files, people were underwhelmed by the published pages, as much of the text had been redacted. Bondi's release included Epstein's 'black book,' which had previously been published. It featured names like Trump and former President Bill Clinton, but as the New York Times reported, there were people in the book with whom Epstein had never even met, and thus listed names are not necessarily connected to Epstein's activities. One of the only never-before-seen documents included in the release was an 'Evidence List' of catalogued evidence obtained by investigators. Bondi blamed the FBI for the fact that the report was incomplete, suggesting in a published letter to Patel that the FBI had more information related to Epstein. Bondi ordered Patel to deliver the rest of the investigation documents and 'conduct an immediate investigation' to understand why she had only received parts of the files. There is much discussion as to whether a fully-fledged 'Epstein client list' even exists. Jacob Shamsian, Business Insider's legal correspondent who has covered the Epstein case for years, said via social media on Feb. 27: 'I should also point out that the 'Jeffrey Epstein client list' does not exist and makes no sense on multiple levels (you think he made a list???). But if Pam Bondi wants to prove me wrong, I welcome it.' Will the Musk allegations prompt the release of further Epstein files? Musks' allegations have brought the Epstein files back into the spotlight, but there were already calls for them to be published in full. In April, Trump was asked by a reporter about when the next phase of the files are due to be released, to which he responded: 'I don't know. I'll speak to the Attorney General about that. I really don't know.' Since then, Democrats have continued to push for more documents to be released. Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman of New York released a statement in May, 'demanding that [Bondi] promptly release the Jeffrey Epstein Files in full.' Spurred by Musk's allegation, Democrats including Garcia, Goldman, and Lynch are now renewing these calls for more transparency. But it remains to be seen whether or not the pressure will be enough for Bondi, Patel, or Trump to provide more answers. What do we know about Trump's relationship with Epstein? Trump's connection to Epstein dates back decades. In a 2002 interview with New York magazine, he famously said that Epstein was 'a lot of fun to be with.' 'It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,' Trump told the reporter. In July 2019, NBC News' TODAY released unearthed video footage believed to be from 1992, which showed Trump greeting Epstein at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The two men could be seen laughing as they engaged in conversation. After Epstein's 2019 arrest on federal sex trafficking charges, Trump made strides to distance himself. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office in 2019, Trump said: 'I had a falling out with him [Epstein]. I haven't spoken to him in 15 years. I was not a fan of his, that I can tell you.'
Wall Street Journal
23 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Proud Boys Leaders Sue U.S. Over Jan. 6 Prosecutions
Five members of the Proud Boys, once convicted of masterminding the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol, are accusing the federal government and FBI employees of violating their rights in connection with their prosecutions in a new lawsuit. Top leaders of the far-right group were either pardoned or had their sentences commuted by President Trump earlier this year. On Friday, they filed a lawsuit in a Florida federal court claiming that the FBI agents and prosecutors were motivated by personal animus against them and their beliefs. The suit seeks $100 million in punitive damages.
