NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump said Thursday that he was weighing a taxpayer-funded takeover of Spirit Airlines with the intent of reselling the struggling budget carrier after oil prices drop.

The president confirmed his continued interest in offering Spirit a financial lifeline after a lawyer told a U.S. Bankruptcy Court that the airline was in advanced talks with the U.S. government on a financing deal that would allow Spirit to emerge from Chapter 11 protection.

“They have some good aircraft and good assets, and when the prices of oil goes down, we’ll sell it for a profit,” Trump said, speaking at an unrelated Oval Office event. “I’d love to be able to save those jobs. I’d love to be able to save an airline.”

Trump stoked speculation of a deal to save Spirit on Tuesday when he encouraged a buyer to rescue the airline and suggested the federal government could help keep it afloat.

The White House has attempted to blame Spirit’s predicament on the Biden administration, which in 2023 sued to stop JetBlue Airways from buying Spirit for $3.8 billion. A little more than a year before Trump replaced Joe Biden as president, a federal judge in Dallas blocked a proposed Spirit-JetBlue merger, saying it would drive up airfares for passengers.

Trump said he had “a smart person” in mind who could potentially run Spirit and that he believed the airline could get back on solid financial footing.

“And they have some very good slots too, which are pretty valuable,” the president added, referring to scheduled times allocated for airlines to take off or land at airports when demand exceeds available capacity.

Spirit has struggled with losses for years. The airline filed for Chapter 11 protection in November 2024 and again in August 2025. With the Iran war driving up jet fuel costs for all airlines, creditors earlier this month expressed doubts about Spirit’s ongoing viability, raising the possibility the airline recognized for its bright yellow planes would be forced to sell its assets and cease operating.

Before Trump’s comments about the government buying the airline outright, Marshall Huebner, a lawyer with Davis Polk who is representing Spirit, said during a U.S. Bankruptcy Court hearing in New York that government financing would make a reorganization possible and help Spirit be more competitive.

Details of a potential deal were shared with all three of the company’s primary creditor groups, Huebner said.

It was not immediately clear how a federal acquisition would differ from the terms that were under discussion. The size and terms of the financing aid were not shared publicly. The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg, citing unnamed sources, both reported an amount of $500 million that would give the government an option to acquire a sizable stake in the airline, which has its headquarters in Florida.

Earlier this week, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy voiced skepticism about the government stepping in to keep Spirit alive. In a CBS interview that aired Tuesday night, Duffy questioned whether a deal would set a broader precedent.

“Then who else comes to my door?” he said, referring to other airlines potentially requesting government aid. “The question will be, can we do anything to save Spirit and make it viable, or would we be putting good money into a company that inevitably is going to be liquidated?”

Several lawmakers, both Republican and Democrats, also balked at the idea of a bailout. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas wrote on X on Wednesday that a deal for Spirit would be a “terrible idea.”

“If Spirit’s creditors or other potential investors don’t think they can run it profitably coming out of its second bankruptcy in under two years, I doubt the US Government can either,” Tom Cotton, a senator from Arkansas, posted on X. “Not the best use of taxpayer dollars.”

The union that represents the airline’s pilots, on the other hand, voiced “strong support” for a rescue deal.

“Spirit is the reason so many Americans can afford to visit family, travel for work, or take a vacation,” said Capt. Ryan P. Muller, chair of the Spirit Airlines ALPA Master Executive Council. “When Spirit enters a market, fares go down.”

Spirit’s relatively young fleet has made it an attractive acquisition target. But previous buyout attempts from budget rivals like JetBlue and Frontier were unsuccessful both before and during Spirit’s first bankruptcy.

__

Madhani reported from Washington. AP writers Josh Boak in Washington and Rio Yamat in Las Vegas contributed to this report.

Kofi Offeh, leader of the so-called Kingdom of Kubala, has been deported to Ghana.

A self-styled African tribe leader who set up camp in the Scottish Borders has been deported. Ghanaian Kofi Offeh, who claimed to be King Atehene, was filmed by local media returning to Ghana earlier this week.

Offeh had established a camp in a wooded area near Jedburgh last year along with two women. Multiple attempts were made to evict the so-called Kingdom of Kubala from the site by Scottish Borders Council, who owned the land, before they were finally evicted in October.

According to the BBC, Home Office officials have confirmed that Offeh has been deported. Jedburgh and District councillor Scott Hamilton said that it was a “huge relief” that the group were now gone.

He said: “When we reflect on what actually happened last year in Jedburgh, I don’t think we can ever make sense of it.

“They were a group who were filled with so much hatred, they caused so much aggravation in the community, thank goodness we have finally got rid of them.”

“I didn’t want this to represent the people of Jedburgh because they are a welcoming community, a really tolerant community and they just pushed the boundaries, this group,” he added.

Offeh was filmed arriving at Accra International Airport in Ghana, earlier this week.

During their time in the Borders, the self-proclaimed kingdom claimed that they they were reclaiming land stolen from their ancestors 400 years ago. The group refused to recognise the powers of the courts to evict them before their eviction was streamed live on TikTok.

Advertisement

“Handmaiden” Kaura Taylor, from Texas, was handcuffed alongside Offeh by immigration officers. Both were arrested on suspicion of immigration offences but Taylor was later released.

The other woman, Jean Gasho, 43, from Zimbabwe, left with her head covered, lying low in the back of a pick-up truck. Gasho had called herself Queen Nandi.

Initially the trio had set up on a site owned by David and Mary Palmer who successfully applied for the tribe to be evicted in September.

After they failed to comply with the court order, they were moved on by sheriff officers but set up a new camp a few metres away on land owned by Scottish Borders Council.

Following further legal action, the council were able to finally evict the trio the following month.

Get more Daily Record exclusives by signing up for free to Google’s preferred sources. Click HERE.

US President Donald Trump says he took part in what he called “historic” negotiations

Advertisement

Donald Trump has announced the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon has been extended by three weeks following what he described as “historic” negotiations.

The US president said the decision came after a meeting between US, Israeli and Lebanese officials in the Oval Office today, adding that the US will be working with Lebanon to “help it protect itself from Hezbollah”. The negotiations, also attended by Vice-President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, went “very well,” according to Trump.

He also told his social media followers that he plans to have a meeting with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, reports the Mirror.

Taking to Truth Social, Trump stated: “The United States is going to work with Lebanon in order to help it protect itself from Hezbollah. The Ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon will be extended by THREE WEEKS.

“I look forward in the near future to hosting the Prime Minister of Israel, Bibi Netanyahu, and the President of Lebanon, Joseph Aoun. It was a Great Honor to be a participant at this very Historic Meeting! President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

Ensure our latest stories always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

The Plough Inn, in Sleights near Whitby, and offers an opportunity to re-establish a traditional hospitality business in a scenic setting, according to property agent Christie & Co.

The characterful property features a bar, lounge, and dining area, as well as three en-suite B&B rooms and three-bedroom owner or manager accommodation.

Its traditional décor includes historical elements such as coped gables and shaped kneelers.

Marslie McGregor, senior business agent at Christie & Co, said: “The sale of The Plough presents an exciting opportunity for an operator to re-establish a valued village pub and develop a sustainable hospitality business rooted in its historic character.”

The pub includes a beer garden with views across Esk Valley and is positioned on a main route through Sleights, on the edge of the North York Moors National Park.

Ms McGregor said: “The building’s layout and beer garden with Esk Valley views offer practical spaces for food, drink, and events, while the presence of letting rooms with en suite facilities provides potential for additional revenue through accommodation.

“We encourage interested parties to get in touch for more information.”

The pub is a popular stopping point for visitors heading to Whitby and nearby attractions, including Whitby Abbey, Robin Hood’s Bay Beach, North Riding Forest Park, and Rosedale Abbey.

For more information visit the Christie & Co website.

Asked for his response to the President’s remarks during a visit to Kenton United Synagogue in Harrow, north-west London on Thursday, the Prime Minister said: “Well look, I’m the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and I make my decisions based on what’s in the British national interest, and not what other people say or do.

The Bolton-born DJ, 51, will take over the slot in the summer, following the sacking of Scott Mills.

She started her broadcasting career on TV in 1996, presenting The Girlie Show on Channel 4, and later had stints on Channel 5 entertainment show Exclusive and Channel 4’s Born Sloppy.

She also worked at MTV before she joined The Big Breakfast as the “on the bed interviewer” talking to stars including Robbie Williams and Leonardo DiCaprio.

(Image: Ian West/PA Wire)

She joined the BBC in 1999, co-presenting a lunchtime Saturday show with Emma B before fronting the Radio 1 Breakfast show until 2003.

Over the course of her career Sara presented a range of shows for the network including the weekday afternoon show, weekday mornings and weekend afternoon show.

In 2011 Sara joined Radio 2 before launching her Sounds of the 80s programme in 2013.

In 2018 it was announced that Sara would succeed Simon Mayo in the teatime slot, where she promised listeners “plenty of giggles”.

The show features the popular Kids In The Car segment, where children send in messages while travelling in the car on the way home.

Sara Cox (Image: BBC)

Over the course of her career at the BBC she has participated in a number of challenges to help raise money for charity, including taking part in a non-stop 24-hour 80s Dance Challenge in 2017 for Comic Relief where she raised £1.2 million.

In November 2025, she completed Sara’s Great Northern Marathon Challenge, walking and running 135 miles in five days from Kielder Forest in Northumberland to Pudsey in West Yorkshire and raised £11.5 million for Children in Need.

Sara is married to marketing executive Ben Cyzer, with whom she shares two children. She also has a daughter with ex-husband Jon Carter.

Her memoir of growing up in 1980s Lancashire, Till the Cows Come Home: A Lancashire Childhood, was published in 2019 and she has also written two novels – Thrown and Way Back.

Line of Duty star Martin Compston has intervened in the Scottish election debate and urged Scots not to back “toxic“ Reform UK.

Martin Compston has urged Scots to back the SNP to keep Nigel Farage’s “toxic politics out of Scotland” as he accused Scottish Labour of wanting to do a deal with Reform.

The Line Of Duty Star has backed John Swinney as First Minister and called for people to “unite behind” his party.

The pair will campaign for the SNP in Inverclyde on Friday, the home of both Mr Compston and Malcom Offord, the leader of Reform UK Scotland.

Speaking ahead of his visit, Mr Compston accused Farage of seeking to shrink Scotland’s budget and its Parliament and said he would privatise the NHS “if he got half the chance”.

Along with the First Minister, the Scottish actor claimed Labour wants to work with Reform after the election.

Offord, along with other senior figures in Reform UK Scotland, have accused Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar of approaching them and offering to work with them to kick out the SNP after the election. Labour has denied this and accused Offord of lying.

Mr Compston, a vocal pro-independence supporter, is backing the SNP in the Scottish Parliament elections.

He said: “Nigel Farage isn’t interested in Scotland – he wants to cut our budget, shrink our Parliament and would privatise our NHS if he got half the chance. We should have none of it.

“And the fact that Labour are willing to work with him shows just how far they have fallen.

“On May 7, the way to keep Farage’s toxic politics out of Scotland is for people to unite behind the SNP – and the way to lock Farage out of Scotland for good is by becoming an independent country.”

In a joint call, Mr Swinney, who will visit Greenock Morton Football Club, said it was the SNP that offered Scots an alternative to Reform, which is currently battling Scottish Labour for second place in the polls.

The SNP leader said: “I am absolutely clear – I will have nothing to do with Nigel Farage, his man in Scotland Offord or Reform UK.

“Their politics are dangerous and the very idea that they could have power and influence in Parliament after the election will be really concerning to people across the country.

“We know what Reform would mean for Scotland and the fact that Labour are willing to work with them after the election shows just how desperate they have become.

“That is why we need an SNP majority at this election which will unlock the fresh start of independence and lock Nigel Farage out of power in Scotland.

“And I am asking people to unite behind the SNP for a government under my experienced, reliable leadership that is always on Scotland’s side.”

Scottish Labour said it was disappointed in the Sweet Sixteen actor.

A spokesperson for the party said: “The fact that the SNP are peddling the lies of Reform demonstrates just how far they have fallen.

“While he has made a career out of reading other people’s lines, it is certainty disappointing to see Martin Compston parroting the SNP’s absolute nonsense.

“Perhaps if he takes a closer look at their dismal campaign of misinformation and smears, he will see how utterly desperate they have become and distance himself from the SNP.”

Scottish Labour deputy leader Jackie Baillie said it was “dishonest” for the First Minister to say he would have nothing to do with Reform “when the SNP are ploughing money behind a Lord Offord advert promoting his lies about Anas Sarwar”.

She said: “Reform launched racist attack ads against Anas Sarwar during the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, and have signalled they would be prepared to use them again.

“This is not a serious or credible party. Scottish Labour has been absolutely clear that there will be no pacts, no deals, and no coalitions – we are going flat out to win this election because Scotland needs change.

“John Swinney and the SNP should look themselves in the mirror and consider whether their desperate attempts to join forces with Reform to try and smear Anas Sarwar is morally the right thing to do.”

Reform UK Scotland has been approached for comment.

Get more Daily Record exclusives by signing up for free to Google’s preferred sources. Click HERE.

Martin Lewis shared advice for a listener who was thinking about paying to fill gaps in her National Insurance record to qualify for the full state pension

Martin Lewis has shared guidance on determining your state pension entitlement. He offered comprehensive advice following a query from a listener to his BBC podcast regarding National Insurance contributions.

He also discussed how state pension regulations might evolve in future, including the potential shift towards a means-tested arrangement. Generally, you require 35 years of National Insurance (NI) contributions to receive the full new state pension, which currently amounts to £241.30 per week, or £12,547.60 per year.

These figures increased by 4.8 per cent in April through the triple lock mechanism. The triple lock ensures yearly rises to the state pension matching whichever is greatest: 2.5 per cent, the rate of inflation, or average wage growth. A podcast listener submitted a query as she was contemplating paying to fill some gaps in her NI record.

You can voluntarily purchase contributions if your record contains any gaps from the past six tax years. The listener revealed she had two years of absent contributions as she had been studying and residing abroad.

He noted she is currently 36, and if she bought the two years of contributions, this would bring her total to 10 years. She enquired whether Mr Lewis considered it worthwhile purchasing those two years now, given she’ll probably contribute the 35 years needed for the full new state pension throughout her working career.

Based on current regulations, her state pension age will be 68, meaning if she continues making National Insurance payments until then, she would accumulate an additional 32 years, taking her total to 42 years of contributions should she pay for the two missing years. This would likely be more than adequate to qualify for the full new state pension under present arrangements, reports the Mirror.

In his response, Mr Lewis outlined the key regulations worth grasping. He stated that the “minimum number of years” needed is 10 years to receive any state pension when claiming the benefit.

He explained: “That is the minimum. If you have less than 10 years, nothing counts.” Mr Lewis then described why filling National Insurance gaps can be exceptionally advantageous for increasing your state pension.

He added: “An extra National Insurance years is worth around £360 a year of state pension for you. So if you’re going to retire on less than the full state pension and you can buy a year, even if it costs you £1,000, because it’s going to add £360 a year to your state pension, even if you live just a few years once you get your state pension, you make your money back.”

Buying a single National Insurance year typically increases your state pension entitlement by £6.89 weekly, equivalent to approximately £358 per year. The price of purchasing NI years differs according to which tax year the contributions relate to. For the previous two tax years, you’ll pay the original rate for that period, while for any earlier years, you’ll pay the current year’s rate.

These are the current rates you would have to pay:

• 2026/2027 tax year – £956.80 (£18.40 a week)
• 2025/2026 tax year – £923 (£17.75 a week)
• 2024/2025 tax year – £907.40 (£17.45 a week)
• 2023/2024 tax year – £956.80 (£18.40 a week)
• 2022/2023 tax year – £956.80 (£18.40 a week)
• 2021/2022 tax year – £956.80 (£18.40 a week)
• 2020/2021 tax year – £956.80 (£18.40 a week)

Mr Lewis also pointed out to listeners that, due to the triple lock boosting payments each year, maximising your state pension is frequently “completely unbeatable” in terms of potential returns. Nevertheless, he issued a note of caution to younger people that “the current system could change” before they reach pensionable age.

Turning to the woman’s particular circumstances regarding her two missing years, Mr Lewis advised her to first examine her state pension forecast. You can do this on the gov.uk website.

He suggested checking whether she’s set to receive the full state pension when she retires. Sharing his thoughts on her circumstances, Mr Lewis explained: “If you are, I think this is probably overkill, because it’s not like once you get to the full state pension, you earn more National Insurance years, you get an even bigger state pension. It doesn’t work like that.”

He said there is a widespread misunderstanding here: “Many older people complain saying, I’ve now got enough for my full state pension, why do I have to keep paying National Insurance? That’s because National Insurance is a tax in reality, it’s just a tax that happens to be demarked as your contributions towards getting your state pension when you are older.”

While Mr Lewis advised against purchasing the two years in the woman’s situation, he did highlight one exception, specifically “if you can buy these years really, really cheaply”. He elaborated: “If any of these are part years, where you’ve almost got all the contributions you need to get a year but you’re not quite there. It is binary.

“I know people who have been able to buy part years for £15. Normally a full year is going to cost you around £900, but if you could buy a part year for £15, £20 or maybe even £50. Even at your age, just in case something happens in future as you can only buy back a certain amount, you can only buy back six years, I would be tempted just to do it just on the off chance I might need it in the future.”

Nevertheless, Mr Lewis indicated that, given her age and the prospect of future changes to the state pension, it might not be worth paying to bridge the gap. He said: “You are so young at 36 for doing this.

“There are a lot of risks that you are just going to buying money, throwing it away. There are big risks for you that the state pension might become means tested once you’re older.

“We don’t know that. I don’t think that’s going to happen imminently, I don’t think it’s going to happen for people who are retiring now, but you’re talking about retiring in 30 to 35 years, and who knows what will be happening to state pensioners in the UK in 30 to 35 years. So there are a lot of risks in doing it now.”

Modifications to state pension eligibility are presently being introduced, with the qualifying age rising incrementally from 66 to 67 between April 2026 and April 2028. Legislation is also in place for an additional rise from 67 to 68 between April 2044 and 2046.

Another worry is whether the triple lock could be removed and substituted with a less favourable annual uplift mechanism. Labour has committed to maintaining the policy throughout this Parliament, meaning it will remain in effect for at least the next few years.

MasterChef series 22 viewers were left scratching their heads during Thursday night’s quarter-final

Advertisement

MasterChef viewers were left puzzled by Thursday evening’s quarter-final challenge.

The 22nd series features renowned chef Anna Haugh and restaurant critic Grace Dent replacing Gregg Wallace and John Torode as judges. The duo will put 48 of Britain’s finest amateur cooks through their paces with a series of demanding challenges.

During Thursday’s opening quarter-final of series 22, the initial task required the home cooks to prepare pancakes, making full use of the available fresh ingredients.

Yet it was the second challenge that confused audiences. Throughout the programme, distinguished food critic Jay Rayner appeared as a special guest to set a task for the contestants.

Jay, 59, said: “The challenge I’ve set you sounds very simple. I’ve asked you to make a salad. But we do not want a limp bowl of lettuce, we want structure, texture, we want a killer dressing… something that will rock us back on our feet.” The contestants were subsequently given 90 minutes to prepare their salads, reports the Mirror.

Advertisement

Nevertheless, audiences were perplexed by the salad challenge, taking to Twitter, now X, to express their views. One viewer posted: “#masterchef A salad …, a salad, are you for real” while another account responded: “Salad? Or a mix of things #MasterChef.”

Meanwhile, another fan made a reference to The Simpsons, joking: “#Masterchef You don’t win friends with salad, you don’t win friends with salad…” Another puzzled viewer simply wrote: “A salad?! #MasterChef” while a different fan joked: “No good story ever started with ‘I was having a salad and then’”.

After the task, Jhané and Sabina impressed Anna, Grace and Jay with their outstanding salads. Jhané created a Thai-influenced salad featuring grilled pork, pork skin, sugar snap peas, lettuce, mint, fennel and Thai basil. She accompanied it with deep-fried rice paper and a lime sesame dressing, which received praise for its ‘clever’ presentation.

Guest Jay was thrilled, saying: “This is exactly what I was hoping for when I set the salad challenge!”

Sabina also wowed the judges with her ‘harmony salad’, comprising of spiced black pea falafel, gem lettuce, carrot, pomegranate, salted chicken skin, beetroot quail eggs, puffed rice and curry leaves. It came with a confit garlic and mustard oil dressing. Jay described the salad as “amazing”.

Once all the competitors had presented their dishes, Jay acknowledged: “It was a tough challenge asking them to make a salad, some of them embraced it brilliantly!”

At the programme’s conclusion, Jhané and Sabina were confirmed as progressing to the next stage, alongside fellow competitor Jim.

MasterChef season 22 is available to stream on BBC iPlayer

There has been much talk about the sex work storylines in the recent series of the show Euphoria. One of the main characters, Cassie Howard (played by Sydney Sweeney), starts an OnlyFans account to fund her upcoming wedding. In the last two episodes, viewers have watched her create videos for different “audiences”.

In one video, for instance, she dresses up as a dog in a bid to attract those interested in the kink sub genre known as “pup play”. This is a form of fetishistic animal play in which canine traits are adopted through apparel and dog-like behaviours.

In another video, she acts sexually provocative while dressed as a baby with a dummy and pigtails. When explaining why to another character, she says it’s related to a subculture of people who want to dress as babies. She explains people want to see her with “teething rings, bassinets, some people even want to see me wear a diaper”.

This has drawn concern from viewers over the portrayal and potential normalisation and glamorisation of adult sexual content styled to evoke infancy. As researchers of harmful sexual behaviours and online sexual cultures, we shared their concerns over the scene.

The writer of the show, Sam Levison, has stated that this storyline was intended as a dark satire of the nature of online sexual content. For Euphoria, this is simply part of a shock tactic, nothing more. However, the implications and cultural impact are far more harmful and far-reaching than that.

Warped logic

Cassie’s storyline does highlight a growing normalisation of sexual content that blurs the boundaries of damaging sexual interests and behaviours. However, how it handles this seems to imply that content like Cassie’s is acceptable and even legitimate.

It is important to note that OnlyFans’ acceptable use policy prohibits “illegal activity including actual, claimed, or role-played: exploitation, abuse, or harm of individuals under the age of 18.”

What Cassie is creating is content that sexualises children and young people; she is dressing up as a baby and acting provocatively. In our research, we see some people use warped logic to present their consumption of such content as legitimate. If the content features an adult role-playing as a child, they argue, then it is an acceptable way to indulge their sexual interest. It is not, according to their logic, reflective of harmful sexual interests in children, but a totally separate thing.

However, what researchers have found is that this sort of thinking, and the content that caters to it, confuses the boundary between adulthood and childhood. It also perpetuates, instead of stops, the sexualisation of childhood.

Shows such like Euphoria, especially ones aimed at young people, should have cultural accountability. We know that repeated exposure to these issues reshapes norms around sexuality, power and protection, particularly for young audiences navigating already complex digital environments. So such storylines in mainstream shows like Euphoria do really run the risk of aiding the normalisation and escalation of exploitative viewing practices.

One in 20 children in the UK experiences sexual abuse each year, and there is extensive work being done by charities on prevention, recovery and early intervention. Cultural portrayals that bear no relation to the profound pain, trauma and lifelong impact experienced by survivors run the risk of aestheticising, glamourising or trivialising sexual harm and risks undermining the work.

This storyline must also be understood within a wider socio-cultural context shaped by the exposure to prolonged and systemic sexual exploitation of children by powerful men, most notably through the Jeffrey Epstein case. Epstein’s abuse was enabled not only by individual actions, but by a cultural environment in which sexual access to young people was normalised, aestheticised and shielded by wealth, influence and networks of protection.

In the aftermath of these revelations, public sensitivity to the sexualisation of children and young people has markedly increased, alongside a growing recognition of how harmful sexual interests can be obscured through narratives of consent, glamour or alternative lifestyles. Against this backdrop, Euphoria’s depiction of sexualised infantilisation is especially troubling.

Rather than engaging critically with the conditions that allow exploitation to be disguised or legitimised, the series risks reproducing the very mechanisms of normalisation, desensitisation and commercialisation through which sexual abuse has historically flourished. In doing so, it reflects a failure to learn from recent, widely documented harm, reinforcing the need for greater ethical accountability in cultural production.