More stories

  • in

    Taking a Cue From the Squirrels in My Birdhouse

    Just before 2023 gave way to 2024, my husband and I drove down a mountain, talking about how to manage election-year anxiety. Specifically, my election-year anxiety. We had just spent a few days in a cottage in the woods, and we were jazzed on silence and stillness and the obligation to do nothing but walk together among the trees. To listen to the wind in the trees.We weren’t making New Year’s resolutions, exactly. We were feeling for ways to carry those days of calm into a troubling new year. I was proposing things like eating by candlelight every night or reading only poems after 5 p.m. My husband was proposing things like hiding my phone.For most of 2023 I managed to avoid poll-related panic by reminding myself that the election was still more than a year away. There were plenty of other calamities to worry about in the meantime — climate, biodiversity, war, gun violence, racism, health care access and the persecution of my L.G.B.T.Q. neighbors, just for starters. But lurking beneath it all was an understanding of how very much worse such troubles would get if autocrats took control of the American presidency in 2024.My husband is not very worried about the election. He trusts that American voters aren’t fools. He is able to check the news at night and only a moment later fall into the sleep of winter bears. I, on the other hand, will lie awake if I so much as glance at the headlines after dark.I found I didn’t worry so much while I was out on book tour last fall. There is really nothing like spending time in libraries and bookstores to give a person faith in humanity. I am profoundly direction-impaired, and solo travel can be disorienting for me, every street bewildering in the dark. But inside those little lighted spaces, people were nodding and smiling. People were reaching out for my hands.They would go home with a book, or sometimes a whole stack of books, and I was reminded yet again of how this commonplace miracle of connection — between writers and readers, between readers and one another — persists across distances. Every time I left a bookshop or a library last fall, I was filled with love for the sweetness in people.But it’s January now, and there is nothing to distract me from a looming election during which a shocking number of Americans hope to see an aspiring dictator reinstalled in the White House.My husband and I saw the New Year in as we always do, with our closest friends, and the next morning I woke up smiling. But when I went to the bedroom window to look for my first bird of the year, there were no birds to be seen. A squirrel peered at me from our largest birdhouse but quickly ducked back into the shelter of the leafy nest she’d built inside the box. She raised a litter of babies there last summer, and I’m pretty sure at least one of those youngsters, now grown, was inside with her on that cold New Year’s morning.When I stepped outside my own house, all was silence. No towhee scratching in the leaf litter. No winter-drab goldfinch picking through seedcrowns in the pollinator garden. No thirsty bluebird at the heated birdbath. No robin harvesting the last of the pokeberries. Not even any crows stalking across the churned soil where our late neighbor’s house so recently stood.According to birding tradition, the first bird you see on New Year’s Day sets a theme for your year. A robin can be a sign of renewal. A starling suggests adaptability. A crow might mean a year of wit and problem-solving and maybe even a little mischief. What did it mean for the new year to dawn entirely bereft of birds?I know that songbirds are quiet in cold weather, conserving their energy for warmth. I know they take shelter on gray days when hawks are on the wing, hunting while they can fly without casting a warning shadow. But my first thought on that silent New Year’s morning was not a realistic recognition of the cold or the drear. My first thought was an atavistic, apocalyptic fear: This what it will be like when all the birds are gone.After an hour of scanning the trees, I finally heard a blue jay, and then the returning call of another, and a moment later the first bird of 2024 appeared. Its colors were muted on that gray day — in birds, the color blue is created not by pigment but by the interaction of light and feather — but the blue jay’s impossible beauty was as clear to me in that instant as it has ever been in all my life of loving blue jays.The birds weren’t gone, of course. Like the squirrel in the nest box outside our bedroom window and the opossum tucked between the floor joists under our family room, they were only keeping still in the dense protection of pine and cedar, or roosting in the boxes they nested in last spring. In bad weather they always shelter together, sharing warmth — bluebirds in the nest box in our front yard, chickadees in the box under the climbing rose, Carolina wrens in the clothespin bag by the back door.The natural world does not exist to teach us how to live, much less to match our purposes, and the first-bird game is only a bit of whimsy. But in that moment of whooshing relief, after a blue jay finally flew from a pine, I found my lesson for the coming year. And it had nothing to do with where I keep the phone or how often I check for news, and very little to do with silence or candlelight or even poetry.To make it through the gathering disquiet, I will need embodied connection. As my wild neighbors did in the uncheery newness of an inhospitable morning, as I did myself in all the lovely places I visited on book tour, and in the company of dear friends on New Year’s Eve, I will need to seek comfort in the warmth of others this year. Whenever the cold creeps in, wherever the dark night pools, I will need to look for others. I will need not pixels but voices. Not distances but reaching hands.Margaret Renkl, a contributing Opinion writer, is the author of the books “The Comfort of Crows: A Backyard Year,” “Graceland, at Last” and “Late Migrations.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected] the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X and Threads. More

  • in

    Stefanik? Noem? Haley?! The Trump V.P. Chatter Has Begun.

    With presidential primaries, it ain’t over till it’s over. Still, given the Republicans’ enduring devotion to their MAGA king, it’s best to mentally prepare oneself for the likelihood that the guy who has long been the prohibitive front-runner will, in fact, win the nomination. And a particularly juicy part of that preparation is obsessing over who Donald Trump will pick as his new pain sponge — erm, running mate — and what that choice could tell us about his strategy and state of mind this time around.Will Mr. Trump go with a white man who has displayed MAGA fealty? That would be the easiest, most comfortable fit for a guy who favors unchallenging mini-mes. Many people think he should go bolder, picking a Latino or Black man — paging Tim Scott! — in an effort to deepen the inroads he has already made with these demographics.And then there is the woman option, which is the one that most intrigues me.The Trump years have not helped the G.O.P.’s longstanding lady troubles. Many suburban soccer moms and other moderate Republican women aren’t so crazy about the former president’s ultratoxic politics. And the Trump-stacked Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022 did little to improve the situation. Could a woman on the ticket help Mr. Trump win back some of these defectors, who may have soured on President Biden? Even if some women could not bring themselves to go full Trump, might they at least feel less driven to turn out to oppose him? Also, how pro-MAGA could a female V.P. pick be and still serve as a bridge to non-MAGA women? How non-MAGA could she be and still satisfy Mr. Trump?I am not the only one noodling over such matters. Steve Bannon, part of Mr. Trump’s original political brain trust, in an appearance last month on “The Sean Spicer Show,” said he thinks Mr. Trump will choose a female running mate this time and ticked through multiple boldfaced names he considered promising options: Kristi Noem, Elise Stefanik, Kari Lake, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Nancy Mace and Marsha Blackburn. He also declared Nikki Haley a nonstarter, warning that she would be “a viper” in the administration and vowing that any attempt to “force” her onto the ticket would lead to a big fight.A serpent in the Trump garden! How delicious. How biblically twisted.While obviously not the only women in the possible selection pool — in fact, I feel compelled to toss in Marjorie Taylor Greene — several of these are among the most discussed. Each brings with her a unique mix of pros and cons, in terms both of the more traditional measures by which running mates are often chosen and of the Trumpian particulars. So many factors to consider. So much to process. Here is a handy tip sheet, with an eye toward what each possible veep candidate says about Mr. Trump himself.Kari Lake. The former TV news anchor, former nominee for governor of Arizona and current Senate candidate clearly has the right stuff when it comes to MAGA zeal. It’s hard to find a Republican player with more passion or flair for promoting election-fraud claims. She is super media savvy, which Mr. Trump considers important, not to mention easy on the eyes — which we could all pretend doesn’t matter to him, but why bother? (Slamming a woman’s looks is a go-to Trump move.) She clearly knows how to throw a political punch, which is a quality generically valued in running mates and certainly one Mr. Trump fancies. She also hails from a crucial swing state, which once upon a time was considered a plus, though these days, who can say?She has no experience in public office, though, and little credibility with major donors or other establishment players. She is unlikely to hold much appeal for non-MAGA voters. And as weird as it sounds, she may be a smidge too flamboyantly Trumpy. Because the one thing you never want in a No. 2 — and which Mr. Trump in particular cannot abide — is someone who threatens to upstage the No. 1.Elise Stefanik. The chair of the House Republican conference is in no danger of ever outshining Mr. Trump. Her past as a more moderate, business-friendly Republican might offer comfort to some non-MAGA voters. Her leadership post has given her a national profile, and over the years she has worked aggressively to improve the party’s standing with female voters and to advance female candidates. She has solid relationships with the party elite, including big donors.While those establishment ties and history might raise some eyebrows in certain corners of Trump world, the congresswoman has undergone a total MAGA makeover in recent years. And there is little Mr. Trump loves more than having a former apostate grovel before him. As a bonus: Her assault on the heads of three elite universities during a December hearing on campus antisemitism, which played a role in the subsequent resignation of two of them, has given her a bit of conservative sparkle, at least for now. Mr. Trump appreciates someone who knows how to work the TV cameras.Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Mr. Trump surely considers the White House press secretary turned governor of Arkansas to be his political creation, which is one of his favorite kinds of people, as long as they don’t step out of line. (Just ask Meatball Ron DeSantis.) Ms. Sanders knows how to swim with the national media sharks. She hails from a traditional Republican (mini) dynasty and enjoys ties to the party establishment. She has proved herself willing to say pretty much whatever nonsense Mr. Trump wants, and there is zero chance she would outshine him.There is always a slight chance Ms. Sanders could have a problem with #PodiumGate, the kerfuffle over the $19,029.25 in taxpayer money she spent on … something — ostensibly a fancy lectern — that the Arkansas G.O.P. promptly reimbursed the state for after a journalist noted the purchase. But in Mr. Trump’s protective aura, she could probably just brush it off as witch hunting.Marsha Blackburn. An early, fervid Trump supporter, the Tennessee senator was buzzed about as a possible V.P. in 2016, back when she was just a lowly House member. She has decades of experience in Congress and knows how to navigate the party establishment and Washington’s corridors of power. She is plenty feisty and media savvy yet unlikely to overshadow Mr. Trump.That said, as a rock-ribbed conservative from a solidly red Southern state and (at least) a generation older than the other prime V.P. possibilities, she wouldn’t bring much in the way of balance to the table. Does Mr. Trump care anything about balance these days?Kristi Noem. The South Dakota governor has political experience both inside and outside Washington, where she served four terms in the House. She has impressive media skills and undoubtedly meets Mr. Trump’s attractiveness standards. She was one of his early endorsers this cycle, which speaks to his loyalty obsession, a move that raised her standing in the veepstakes guessing game. During the pandemic, she aggressively toed the it’s-no-big-deal, we’re-keeping-this-state-open line favored by conservative governors. And she obviously knows how to stroke the MAGA king’s ego, as so deftly captured by her gift to him of a $1,100 replica of Mount Rushmore with his face added. (I swear. That man is so basic.)Her tenure as governor has had its bumps, including a nepotism controversy. She also seems to really want the job, which isn’t always helpful to an aspiring veep. Last week she suggested Mr. Trump’s pick should be willing to tell him the truth — and that she filled the bill. Terrific! Except Mr. Trump might see this more as a bug than a feature. More generally, does he find it admirable or distasteful that she has long been seen as lobbying for the job and has even begun publicly issuing advice on the matter? She, like Mr. Bannon, recently smacked down the idea of Mr. Trump going with Ms. Haley.Nancy Mace. This may feel like a counterintuitive pick. The South Carolina congresswoman’s politics aren’t reliably MAGA, she has waffled on the loyalty thing, and she digs the limelight a little too much. Mr. Bannon nonetheless praised her “Trumpian attitude,” her “brashness,” her “set of titanium balls.”Marjorie Taylor Greene. The bomb-throwing congresswoman from Georgia is in many ways the female embodiment of Trumpism. She knows how to grab the media spotlight, and her belligerent, anti-elite, anti-expertise, anti-everything ’tude thrills the party base. Her attack-dog credentials are unimpeachable. She even voted against certifying the 2020 presidential election results. So MAGA.She may, in fact, be a smidge too in your face. She doesn’t play well with the traditional wing of the party and, more recently, even managed to alienate fellow extremists in the House. Getting herself booted from the Freedom Caucus took some doing! And talk about a woman unlikely to win over voters beyond Mr. Trump’s existing fan base. Geesh.Which brings us to Nikki Haley.Let us first tackle the potential disqualifiers. The former governor of South Carolina may have served as Mr. Trump’s U.N. ambassador, but she does not rate well on his loyalty meter. Running against him? Criticizing his presidency? Suggesting competency tests for older pols? People have been put on his enemy’s list for less. Worse still, she could very well outshine him, at least in terms of basic intellect and verbal coherence.Still, refer to Mr. Trump’s love of humiliating and subjugating his critics: Having her serve as his No. 2 could tickle the Trump id. She has leadership experience and fits in with the establishment — though without being saddled with a congressional record, with all those pesky votes that can be weaponized by opponents. As an Indian American born to immigrant parents, she could help dilute the G.O.P’s image as the party of angry white racists. She’s attractive and media savvy and has foreign policy experience.Beyond that, a Trump-Haley ticket would signal that the former president is at least vaguely interested in soothing skittish, non-MAGA women. Ms. Haley is not looking to blow up the system. She is selling a more pragmatic, coalition-minded political approach and a more old-school Republicanism than what today’s base wants. Her selection would be a clear sign that Mr. Trump isn’t worried about making his MAGA base any happier. And why should he be? He is their adored, infallible leader.Still, it’s hard to see how Mr. Trump gets past that whole disloyalty thing with her. Especially after Mike Pence turned out to be such a disappointment to him in the end. And perhaps nothing would be a greater sign of Mr. Trump’s confidence in himself and his chances in November than if he went with his heart (like a Noem) rather than with a more calculated, conventional choice (like a Haley). The MAGA king isn’t one to let too much strategic thinking spoil his fun.Source photographs by Kevin Dietsch, Anna Moneymaker, Scott Olson and Christian Monterrosa/Agence France-Presse, via Getty Images, Will Newton and Alex Brandon/Associated Press.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected] the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X and Threads. More

  • in

    How Hillsdale Got Mixed Up in the 2020 Election Plot

    A few days before Thanksgiving 2020, a half-dozen or so people gathered at the home of a Michigan lawyer named Robert E. Norton II.Listen to This ArticleOpen this article in the New York Times Audio app on iOS.Norton is the general counsel of Hillsdale College, a small, conservative Christian school in the southern part of the state. One of his guests was Ian Northon, a Hillsdale alumnus and private lawyer who did work for the college. Also in attendance were a couple of state lawmakers, Beth Griffin and Julie Alexander, who represented conservative districts north of Detroit.Northon would later describe the meeting to the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, storming of the U.S. Capitol. “Somebody at Hillsdale reached out to me, said they are going to have this little meeting,” he testified. “I went to it. There were a handful of reps there, and then Giuliani called in.” That, of course, was Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor turned personal lawyer to President Donald J. Trump.“We don’t think that the laws have been followed, but we don’t know,” Northon recalled Giuliani saying over the speakerphone, then instructing the group to let the campaign know about any signs of election fraud they discovered. “He was not on the call for very long, and I don’t know if he knew that he was speaking to a group of legislators and lawyers in Michigan,” Northon said. “I got the sense that he was making a lot of calls around that time.”Trump’s campaign to remain in power was already in full, if flailing, swing. Just hours after the final polls closed on election night, in a televised speech from the White House, the president declared the election “a fraud on the American public”; he and his allies proceeded to spread the lie of a rigged election on Fox News, on conservative talk radio and on Twitter. Giuliani had held his infamously unhinged news conference at Four Seasons Total Landscaping in Philadelphia, where he floated the idea that “ballots have been manufactured in advance” by Democrats. At a contentious Oval Office meeting several days later, Trump sidelined the campaign lawyers and instead made Giuliani the point man for the rush of ultimately futile lawsuits challenging the election. The key swing states had yet to certify the vote; for Trump and his allies, Michigan became a focus. On Nov. 17, according to The Detroit News, the president called two members of the Board of Canvassers of heavily Democratic Wayne County and pressed them not to certify. Three days later, he brought a delegation of the state’s Republican legislative leaders to the White House to hear out his fraud claims. It is unclear precisely how the Hillsdale contingent was brought into this widening conspiracy-seeking swirl. But the college was nothing if not well connected. Northon also did work for the Amistad Project, a self-described “election-integrity watchdog” that emerged as a primary partner in the Trump campaign’s election-fraud litigation. Before Norton came to Hillsdale, he was a vice president of the Bradley Foundation, a Milwaukee-based conservative philanthropy that has funded groups advancing voter-fraud conspiracy theories. And most prominent was Hillsdale’s president, Larry P. Arnn. Over two decades, Arnn had fashioned the college as an avatar of resistance to progressivism, all the while amassing relationships with many of the influencers and financiers who were transforming conservative politics in America. By the time Trump swept into the White House in 2017, Arnn had made Hillsdale an academic darling and supplier of philosophical gravitas to the new right. So prominent was Arnn that he was mentioned as a possible education secretary before losing out to Betsy DeVos, part of a wealthy Michigan family of major conservative donors and Hillsdale patrons. (Her brother, the private-security contractor Erik Prince, is an alumnus.) Hillsdale graduates became aides in the Trump administration and on Capitol Hill and clerks at the Supreme Court. (“We have hired many staff from Hillsdale,” says Marc Short, who served as chief of staff to Trump’s vice president and Arnn’s longtime friend, Mike Pence.) In the Covid years, the backlash against school closures, mask mandates and diversity programs made education perhaps the most important culture-wars battleground. Hillsdale was at the center, and nowhere more than in Florida, where Gov. Ron DeSantis frequently invoked Hillsdale as he sought to cleanse the state’s schools of liberal influence. “How many places other than Hillsdale are actually standing for truth?” he said at a 2022 Hillsdale-sponsored event in Naples, Fla. The 2020 election was not particularly close in Michigan — Joseph R. Biden Jr. carried the state by more than 150,000 votes. But the pre-Thanksgiving gathering at Norton’s house presaged broader efforts to thwart the will of Michigan voters, as well as the entanglement of Hillsdale’s administration in the events leading up to Jan. 6. Norton and Northon would become involved in a plan to deploy fake Trump electors in Michigan, as was done in other battleground states. Arnn would counsel Pence, as the vice president faced mounting pressure to block certification of the vote in the House of Representatives. Mike Pence after giving a lecture at Christ Chapel on the campus of Hillsdale College last March. He has called the college’s president, Larry Arnn, a mentor.David Guralnick/The Detroit News, via Associated PressLast July, the Michigan attorney general, Dana Nessel, a Democrat, brought felony charges against all 16 of the state’s bogus Trump electors; she has said that her investigation remains open, raising questions about whether more charges might be coming. And while the Michigan indictments were the first stemming from the Trump campaign’s effort to seize electoral votes, at least four other swing states are now pursuing criminal investigations. Hillsdale administrators declined to be interviewed for this article. But in response to written questions, the college said its officials had acted and spoken in a “personal capacity” regarding the 2020 election. Hillsdale also disputed aspects of testimony to the House Jan. 6 committee, saying among other things that Norton’s call with Giuliani and his meeting with legislators took place separately. “The scope of Mr. Norton’s efforts has been vastly overstated,” the college said, adding that the general counsel’s goal “was to establish clarity and truth, and not a pre-established election outcome.”Hillsdale’s part in the election story, while hardly a secret, has received little notice beyond the local press. Viewed in the context of the vast and tentacled campaign to overturn the election, it falls somewhere between sideshow and main event. Consider it a reflection of an angry, untethered era in which unlikely actors have come to have an outsize imprint on our politics. Last spring, seeking a fuller picture of the college and its role in the tumult, I planned a trip to Hillsdale. I was told I couldn’t visit campus and reminded, after I asked to interview Arnn and others, that Hillsdale was a private college — though I was eventually granted a tour after students had left for the summer. Even so, interviews with scores of people — students, alumni, current and former faculty and staff members, donors, Republican operatives and politicians, former White House officials and lawyers connected to the state elections case — offered some answers to the overarching question: How did a small college in Michigan, self-defined by the idea that the project of American democracy is the realization of millenniums of Western wisdom, get mixed up in a plot to subvert it? Larry Arnn often talks about Hillsdale as a last redoubt of the classical liberal arts, guided by a reverence for the highest, most enduring ideas. Students are required to complete a core curriculum rooted in the great books and Western tradition. Much of what is taught at Hillsdale, Arnn has said, “was written before there was a United States of America, much less a modern conservative movement.” There’s something assertively old-fashioned about the place. Alumni refer to a “Hillsdale bubble”: Dorms are single-sex and the college affords parents a degree of access to their children’s grades and instructors more commonly found in high school. Hillsdale students tend to be high academic achievers; not all are particularly political. “For the most part, students are pretty focused on their studies,” says Caleb Greene, a senior. “They’re less concerned with all the other current events that are in the news right now.” Today, many leading universities find themselves in crisis debating the limits of allowable speech, on both the left and the right. Hillsdale, many alumni say, remains largely unmuddled by ideological diversity. In a 2016 essay in the college paper, one student ventured a modest proposal: “While conservatives condemn policies that restrict the marketplace of ideas in other schools, our own school may be guilty of a similar offense,” she wrote. “It’s time Hillsdale invited a progressive to campus.”Yet if Hillsdale can seem to exist in a time before the modern culture wars, Arnn is quick to frame his college as the heroic opposition. “Most liberal colleges and universities today deny that such a thing as ‘truth’ exists and instead encourage young people to find what is true for themselves, carrying their politically correct ‘safe spaces’ wherever they go,” he said in an email to a college mailing list last year. Under Arnn’s stewardship — on Facebook, one alumnus referred to the college as “Arnn Arbor” — Hillsdale has become as much a political and ideological campaign as it is a pedagogical home for its 1,600 students. Arnn arrived at Hillsdale in 2000, after the longtime president, George C. Roche III, resigned amid revelations of an affair with his daughter-in-law, which came to light after her death by suicide. Arnn had been running the Claremont Institute, the prominent conservative think tank in California of which he was a founder. He had a reputation as a staunch ideologue in the mold of his onetime teacher, the political philosopher Harry Jaffa, author of Barry Goldwater’s lines that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice” and “moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Jaffa was the leader of a school of thought known as West Coast Straussianism, which holds that the Platonic ideal that is the original American republic has become corrupted by the unelected power of an ever-expanding administrative state and the corroding rot of progressivism. Arnn was an adherent. “Larry Arnn has the heart of a liberal,” a Claremont colleague once said. “He keeps it in a glass bottle on his desk.” In Arnn’s day, Claremont was a cloistered world; few foresaw it laying the theoretical groundwork for a radical transformation of the conservative movement. For Arnn, Hillsdale presented a chance to spread the gospel on a broader canvas, closer to the political ground. Founded in 1844 by Free Will Baptist abolitionists, the college had already turned rightward under Roche. But Arnn pivoted Hillsdale away from his predecessor’s libertarianism, then dominant in conservative politics, and put it on a more overtly religious and ideological path. While the college’s mission statement once invoked the “Judeo-Christian faith,” under Arnn the “Judeo” part was ditched and the school became more explicitly Christian. A new chapel patterned after London’s Church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields and financed by a $12.5 million donation from an Oklahoma sulfur magnate became an imposing architectural presence on campus. Arnn also honed a business model that has undergirded his political project. The college has rejected federal aid for decades, rather than be compelled to track admissions by race or comply with Title IX, the law that bars sex-based discrimination; Hillsdale has called the law “a serious assault on the school’s freedom.” As a result, more than half of its revenue comes from private grants, gifts or contracts, compared with 7 percent for a typical liberal-arts college, according to a report by the Institute of Education Sciences. Its fund-raising strategy is predicated on stoking outrage, with communiqués warning of “Marxist-inspired critical race theory” and an “emerging corporate-socialist totalitarianism.” Hillsdale has amplified its messaging by enlisting a digital fund-raising company called NextAfter, directing nearly $12 million to it in the college’s most recently reported fiscal year. Hillsdale’s revenue engine supports not just on-campus operations but also the many arms of its outreach — a newsletter called Imprimis (Latin for “above all”) that the school says reaches 6.4 million readers; a series of podcasts and online courses on subjects like “The American Left: From Liberalism to Despotism”; and a curriculum and training for a network of “classical” charter schools in more than a dozen states. All of this material is free, and all of it, in its ideological fervor, fuels the college’s fund-raising. “Hillsdale has adopted the strategy of radiating what occurs on its campus as far and wide, and to as many citizens, as possible,” according to words attributed to its chairman, the game-show host Pat Sajak, in a fund-raising pitch. (A longtime Arnn friend, Sajak is among Hollywood’s most outspoken conservatives.) The school has been lucrative for Arnn, whose total annual compensation exceeds $1 million, rare territory for the leader of a college of Hillsdale’s size. And there are other benefits. NextAfter promoted Arnn’s 2015 book on Winston Churchill as part of an effort to grow the college’s email list. (Hillsdale said Arnn donated his royalties to the college.) Arnn’s daughter Kathleen O’Toole was installed in 2019 as assistant provost for the college’s charter-school efforts. (Another Hillsdale official said in a recent deposition, related to a court battle involving a Florida charter school, that nobody else had been interviewed for the job; the college said Arnn “was not involved” in the hiring.) Arnn remains Claremont’s vice chairman, and from the first, he embedded Hillsdale into the institute’s intellectual orbit. Any number of Hillsdale academics are Claremont-affiliated scholars as well. (West Coast Straussianism’s “citadels are Claremont and Hillsdale,” according to the political philosopher Paul Gottfried.) Arnn also signed on visiting scholars like Christopher Rufo, the activist most responsible for making the academic discipline of critical race theory a boogeyman of the right. Arnn’s own CV lists longstanding affiliations with a run of influential conservative organizations. He serves on the Heritage Foundation’s board and is a member of the Council for National Policy, a secretive coalition of conservative heavyweights. Like others in his intellectual camp, Arnn seemed to love Trumpism more than the man himself. (“There’s obviously a lot of things that are really great about that guy, but we don’t teach our students at Hillsdale College to act the way he does on all occasions,” he quipped during a 2017 speech.) But the inflection point, both for Hillsdale and for American conservatism, was the election and reign of Trump. Money poured in from prominent donors with names like Coors, Koch and Uihlein. S. Prestley Blake, a founder of Friendly’s restaurants, left the college a Connecticut replica of Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello that Hillsdale uses for various events. The college’s revenue more than doubled; its endowment is now nearly $1 billion. Hillsdale became a regular stopping point for leaders on the right, from the Federalist Society co-chairman Leonard Leo to the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, who received an honorary doctorate. Justice Clarence Thomas, who has called Arnn a “dear friend,” spoke at the new chapel’s dedication. (His wife, the conservative activist Virginia Thomas, had previously served on Hillsdale’s board and worked at the college’s Washington outpost.) As Hillsdale made headlines by resisting state pandemic restrictions, Arnn found a soul mate in DeSantis, whose rising national profile was powered by his own shunning of Covid strictures. In its drive to remake Florida schools, DeSantis’s administration tapped Hillsdale to help overhaul civics standards and used a Hillsdale staff member and an undergraduate as consultants to review math textbooks for perceived whiffs of leftist ideology. DeSantis has said he prefers hiring Hillsdale alumni to those of his own alma mater, Yale, and when he engineered a takeover of the quirky and traditionally liberal New College of Florida, he appointed a top Hillsdale official, Matthew Spalding, to its new board. The new New College, the governor said, would be a public, Sunshine State Hillsdale. Clarence Thomas delivering a commencement address to the 2016 Hillsdale College graduating class. He has called Arnn a “dear friend.”Todd McInturf/The Detroit News, via Associated PressAll of this is evidence of how well Arnn had succeeded in embedding his college in the ferment. “We’re in the world-conquest business,” he said in an online talk that Hillsdale posted in 2020, “and we have just one weapon — teaching.”Three days after the 2020 election, Arnn appeared on a Hillsdale podcast hosted by the conservative pundit Hugh Hewitt. Calling the electoral process “corrupt,” Arnn mused about Republican-dominated state legislatures’ bypassing the voters and taking direct control of their states’ electoral votes. “There’s a wild idea,” he said. A couple of weeks later, around the time of the Giuliani meeting, he was asked on a podcast hosted by a Michigan conservative commentator, Steve Gruber, whether he trusted the outcome of the election. “No, I don’t,” he said. By then, Ian Northon, the Hillsdale-affiliated lawyer, was publicly advancing fraud claims and moving to sue the state of Michigan on behalf of the Amistad Project.“It’s simply a matter of mathematics,” Northon said on a different episode of Gruber’s podcast, in late November. “We’ve got a Ph.D., Dr. Zhang, Jennie Zhang from Hillsdale College, who just did the math. And when you do the math, it shows not just a handful of improper votes, or a handful of illegal votes, but hundreds of thousands, well over 500,000 in the general election alone.” He was referring to Qianying Zhang, a finance and economics professor who goes by Jennie and was paid $5,000 as an expert witness by Amistad. Based on a survey by a firm run by a former Trump campaign aide, she estimated how many people had received absentee ballots they had not requested. (In an email, Zhang said that while Northon had offered a “plausible” account of her findings, calling the votes “improper” or “illegal” went “beyond the direct scope of my analysis.”) In early December, Northon took part in a conference call with an old friend of Arnn’s from Claremont circles, the lawyer John Eastman. Northon, in his testimony to the House Jan. 6 committee, said this meeting, like the first one, “was set up by some Hillsdale people.” He specifically mentioned Spalding, dean of the college’s Washington graduate school, something of a nexus in the capital for academics on the right. Northon’s lawyer, Chip Chamberlain, said in an email exchange that neither Arnn nor Spalding was on the Eastman call. Northon, he said, simply “reviewed Dr. Spalding’s research on elections and constitutionalism before various filings with the courts.” (Spalding, in a statement through Hillsdale, said he had never met Northon.) Northon told the Jan. 6 committee that the two Michigan lawmakers who attended the Giuliani meeting participated in this one too, along with a third, Daire Rendon. (Rendon was charged last year in a separate case involving voting-machine breaches orchestrated by Trump allies.) The lawmakers “were people who wanted their colleagues in the House to do more,” Northon testified, adding, “That was the impetus of the Eastman call.” Eastman was one of the legal architects of the strategy to deploy fake electors in states Trump lost, in order to press Pence to forgo certifying Biden on Jan. 6. (He was indicted last year on charges related to this effort in Georgia, where he has pleaded not guilty.) Now, on the conference call, he explained to the lawmakers that the State Legislature held the power to take action on elections. “If somebody’s going to do something about it, it’s them,” Northon recalled Eastman saying. Northon also prepared a draft resolution for the Legislature’s Republican leaders, hoping they would declare that they were investigating the election. As he composed the draft, he said, he showed it to Norton and Emily Davis, Hillsdale’s communications chief. When House investigators asked Northon about his running election-related documents by Hillsdale’s brass, he said: “Well, my — I represented Hillsdale and all this — although this wasn’t something I was doing for them, I thought they should be aware of it, that it was happening. I thought it was important for them.” Around the same time, Norton reached out to the state Republican chairwoman, Laura Cox. According to her testimony to the Jan. 6 committee, the Hillsdale general counsel explained that there was a plan afoot to swing the state toward Trump: A group of Republicans posing as electors would hide overnight in the State Capitol in Lansing and then cast votes on Dec. 14, the date the official electors were to cast Michigan’s vote. Cox was aghast. “I told him in no uncertain terms that that was insane and inappropriate,” she testified. She said she tried to impress upon him that this was a “harebrained” plan, that it “was a very, very bad idea and potentially illegal.” But Norton, she said, “didn’t care about my opinion. Just, we had words, and I believe I eventually hung up on him.”Norton had come to Hillsdale from an automotive background — his father ran auto-service shops in the Detroit area — and after spending years as a lawyer working his way through the industry. In 1997, he was reprimanded by Michigan’s Attorney Discipline Board after admitting that “while shopping at a retail store, he placed a different bar-code price tag on a package of colored pencils in order to lower the price.” That hiccup did not stall his career, and in 2002 he became assistant general counsel at Chrysler. Seven years later, he left to join the Bradley Foundation, the conservative philanthropy that has been active in election issues. “It was time to take the more mission-driven path,” he said on a college-sponsored podcast. Arnn hired him in 2014. (The next year, Arnn received one of the Bradley Foundation’s annual $250,000 prizes.) Hillsdale disputes Cox’s account of her conversation with its general counsel. “Mr. Norton spoke with Ms. Cox in the capacity of a civically engaged individual who was asking a friend” about “the election and perceived irregularities,” the college says, adding that Norton had been “an early supporter” of Cox’s husband, the former Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox. Norton, the college says, did not know where Cox “got the idea” of a “supposed plot” for an overnight in the State Capitol.But Cox held fast to her account at a pretrial hearing for the fake electors in December. And in an interview, she said, “We’re not friends, I want to make that really clear,” and pointed out that she could find no record of Norton personally donating to her husband’s campaigns. She also provided a copy of a text message from Norton that she said was sent on Dec. 13, 2020. “The electors should try to get into capital early, as we have planned,” it said, noting that she would be hearing from a lawyer for the Trump campaign.“He kept texting me all these things and trying to lobby me to do something,” she said, adding, “They think they are going to hide in the Capitol and nobody is going to see them?”After learning about the planned sleepover, Cox told the Jan. 6 committee, she called Mike Shirkey, the leader of the State Senate’s Republican majority. Shirkey had been hearing from Norton and Northon, too: For days, they had been urging him to recognize the slate of fake Trump electors. Shirkey had also heard from Phillip Kline, the former Kansas attorney general who heads the Amistad Project, which was working with Trump lawyers to bring election-fraud lawsuits across the country. Kline later spoke at a Hillsdale symposium where he called 2020 “the most lawless election in United States history.”Shirkey, who retired last year with warnings of the peril of “one-world governance, one-world religion, one-world health care, one-world currency and one-world control,” might have seemed an unlikely resister. But according to Cox, he also thought hiding electors in the Capitol was a terrible idea. “It was a pretty high-pressured process, having these gentlemen come to our offices or invite us into one of their homes,” Shirkey said of the trio in his House testimony, adding that they kept urging him to “do the right thing.”On Dec. 14, Northon joined the fake electors at the Capitol, where they were turned away by guards. Not all of the 16 designated Trump electors picked before Election Day agreed to take part in the scheme; one who bowed out, Terri Lynn Land, was a former Michigan secretary of state who has said she did not see a role to play given that the state’s vote had already been certified for Biden. The remaining electors and two replacements ended up in the basement of the state Republican headquarters, signing a document entitled “Certificate of Votes of the 2020 Electors From Michigan.” For Shirkey, the weeks since the election had been an unending ordeal. He was part of the Michigan contingent lobbied at the White House in mid-November. And Trump kept calling — four times through Dec. 14, once while Shirkey was up in a tree stand, hunting. “I was getting frustrated,” he testified. “All these allegations, all these claims, and all the damage, potential damage we’re doing to the country and confidence in elections. And I was tired of hollow claims with no action. And I just wanted to put a pin in it. I didn’t want any more calls.”Growing up in the small Arkansas city of Pocahontas, Arnn wasn’t obviously destined for a life of academe. He often describes the personally transformative effects of studying philosophy, which took hold in a political-theory course his senior year at Arkansas State.“We read Plato’s ‘Republic,’ and it was life-changing,” he once told The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. “I fell under its spell.”Alumni, with varying degrees of admiration and exasperation, describe Arnn, who is 71, as evincing a grandfatherly pop intellectualism. He keeps a longstanding routine of stopping by the cafeteria to ask students about the nature of “the good, the true and the beautiful.” Pence, who has called Arnn a mentor, began a 2018 commencement speech at Hillsdale by assuring the students that “unlike Dr. Arnn, I will not be asking you to define ‘the good.’” Arnn’s speaking style meanders — sometimes beyond the typically circumscribed utterances of college presidents. Hillsdale likes to talk about its abolitionist roots, but one thing it doesn’t talk about publicly is the racial makeup of its student body. (Students and alumni I spoke with say there is little racial diversity.) At a legislative hearing in 2013, Arnn recalled that the school had been admonished by the state because, as he put it, “we didn’t have enough dark ones.” Asked to clarify, according to press accounts, he explained that the state had sent people “with clipboards” to campus “to look at the colors of people’s faces and write down what they saw. We don’t keep records of that information. What were they looking for besides dark ones?”In 2022, a plan by Gov. Bill Lee of Tennessee to create 50 Hillsdale-affiliated charter schools faltered after the Nashville TV station WTVF obtained video of Arnn, in public comments at a Hillsdale reception with the governor, declaring that teachers “are trained in the dumbest parts of the dumbest colleges.” He later tried to explain in a Tennessean column that by “dumb” he didn’t “mean ‘unintelligent’” but “ ‘ill-conceived’ or ‘misdirected.’” Tom Griscom, who led the state’s charter-school commission, was sent the article by a colleague, and in an email uncovered by the TV station, he lamented, “That really helped, not.” In the aftermath of the 2020 election, Arnn was speaking in dire terms. “We are Americans, and have the dangerous privilege of living in a time when the whole direction of the country and the whole view of human nature it adopts is up for grabs,” he said in a Hillsdale podcast on Dec. 4 that focused on the Senate runoffs in Georgia. No evidence has emerged suggesting that Arnn was involved in the Michigan fake-electors scheme. But in a rambling speech at a Hillsdale-sponsored conference in Phoenix a month after Trump left office, he appeared to acknowledge knowing something about the activities of his general counsel. “I’ll tell you what happened in Michigan,” Arnn said. Speaking about the State Legislature and its role in the election, he said: “We know them. My general counsel has spent, his hair is gray, he’s been spending time with them. And he gives them advice for nothing.” Arnn added that he had thought all along that the Legislature should assert its power over the electors, once state leaders began altering voting rules amid the pandemic. “You’re changing it, we reserve the right to pick our own slate.”On Dec. 18, Arnn was in Washington, where he was named to lead Trump’s 1776 Commission, announced as a rejoinder to the George Floyd racial-justice upheavals, which the president called “the direct result of decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools.” (It was also framed as a response to “The 1619 Project,” published the previous year by The New York Times Magazine.) The commission, according to Trump’s executive order, was to prepare a report on “the core principles of the American founding and how these principles may be understood to further enjoyment of ‘the blessings of liberty.’” That report, released two days before Trump left office, was widely derided by historians as a politicized, soft-focus version of American history; it took particular aim at progressivism, which it lumped in with slavery, fascism, communism, racism and identity politics as one of the “challenges to America’s principles.” Arnn’s standing in Trumpworld, though, was complicated by the fact that he was far closer to Pence than to Trump. Indeed, even as Trump was imploring the vice president to block the election certification in the House, Arnn was counseling caution. When Arnn returned to the White House on Jan. 5 for the first meeting of the 1776 Commission, he also met briefly with the vice president, according to Pence’s aide, Marc Short. And two days after the Capitol riot, Arnn told Hugh Hewitt: “You know, the vice president asked me more than once, What should he do? And I said, ‘Well, there are some boundaries.’ I said: ‘The first thing is, you probably ought to say, this is not about me and Donald Trump anymore. This is about fair elections.’” Last year, introducing Pence at a Hillsdale function, Arnn went further, saying he had agreed with the former vice president’s ultimate decision. Which is not to say that Arnn didn’t harbor deep reservations about the election. During the podcast interview, he said he had “floated the crazy idea” that Trump should’ve said, “If I vindicate this election and prove that I won it, I’ll surrender to Mike Pence in 30 days because it’s questionable.” By February, Arnn was talking about the country sinking into despotism. “I’ve been warning about all this all my life, warning that they’re going to rig the electoral system so you can’t get them out,” he said in his remarks in Phoenix. “And now it’s happened, right? Probably.” He knew “how Michigan was stolen,” he said earlier in the speech, “because I have the misfortune sometimes to live there.” In Michigan, the fight over 2020 continues. In late October, Dana Nessel, the attorney general, dropped all charges against one of the fake electors in exchange for cooperation. During an interview with the office’s investigators, the elector was asked if he could identify photos of a handful of figures involved; among them was Norton, the Hillsdale general counsel. (The elector was unsure.) In the days that followed, her investigators questioned one of the architects of the multistate fake-elector scheme, Kenneth Chesebro, according to one of his lawyers. Both developments suggest the inquiry could widen. The attorney for Northon, the Hillsdale-affiliated private lawyer, said investigators had contacted him about interviewing his client, who had declined to participate. During the recent pretrial hearing, Nessel’s office described Northon as an “uncharged member of the conspiracy.”Pointing fingers upward will clearly be a defense strategy. John Freeman, a Michigan lawyer who represents a Trump elector, told me that his client “followed the directions of persons better versed and more knowledgeable in election law” and that “we intend to establish this in court.”Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida at an appearance with Larry Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, in April. DeSantis has said of the college, “How many places other than Hillsdale are actually standing for truth?”Chris duMond/Getty ImagesHeading into the coming presidential election, Arnn has hedged his bets. He has called DeSantis “one of the most important people living,” but remains neutral on the Republican field — “counselor to many and endorser of none,” as Hugh Hewitt put it in October. But with Trump, at least for now, lapping the field, the election could herald the moment for the ideas so long promoted by Arnn and his Hillsdale-Claremont comrades. In a second administration, Trump and his allies are determined to engineer a sweeping transformation of American government, including a further repudiation of America as a land of immigrants and a politicization of the Justice Department and other agencies of the executive branch. This gutting of the reviled administrative state would be enabled by a legion of lawyers with an Olympian view of presidential powers — at least while a Republican sits in the White House.Arnn’s college is at the leading edge of the planning. Two fellows at Hillsdale’s Washington campus — one current and one former — are associate directors of Project 2025, a clearinghouse created by the Heritage Foundation to staff and overhaul policy in a new conservative administration; it counts Hillsdale among 80 organizations on its advisory board. One of those fellows, Troup Hemenway, previously drafted a report examining how the Presidential Personnel Office can be harnessed more aggressively. Another recent Hillsdale fellow, Saurabh Sharma, co-founded a group called American Moment, which seeks to staff the next administration and congressional offices with MAGA adherents. James Sherk, a Hillsdale alumnus at a think tank called the America First Policy Institute, has crafted a plan central to Trump’s ambitions, removing civil-service protections from thousands of career government officials and replacing them with loyalists. Hillsdale’s student body is similarly evolving, at least in the reckoning of Avery Noel, a senior from Indiana who is president of the school’s small College Democrats chapter. Applications have climbed more than 50 percent over the last decade, the college has said, including a spike of interest after the school rebuffed pandemic lockdown requirements. “You’re getting people who are more drawn to the ideological setting of the school,” said Noel, who described himself as a lapsed conservative. In an email exchange, Nathan Schlueter, a philosophy professor, explained what seemed to be a prevailing view. “Progressives currently control virtually all the levers of financial and political power in this country,” he said, adding, “They have been aggressive not only in promoting causes about which Americans reasonably disagree, but in shaming and punishing dissenting voices. In this atmosphere, the College is extremely vulnerable.”To some, though, the college is the emergent bully. A number of Hillsdale graduate students have become active in local government. In 2022, Joshua Paladino, a doctoral candidate in politics who served on the city’s public library board, proposed that the library’s children’s section exclude books “tending to corrupt the morals of youth,” including those depicting “delinquency, child abuse, underage sexual activity,” as well as “graphic violence” and “profanity.” He suggested proscribing books with any reference to political content, including the L.G.B.T.Q. movement and Black Lives Matter. In an interview, Paladino said the library wasn’t “focusing on the books that were going to have long-term, lasting value.” Soon library board meetings became more crowded and angry, and the librarian, the children’s librarian and the library board president all departed. Soon after, one of the college’s librarians took over as the library board president. “There’s always been this rift, the college elites and us townies,” says Penny Swan, a Republican who was defeated by Paladino in the 2022 City Council election. “But it’s never been as bad as it’s been in the past couple years, and the college Ph.D. students seem to want to take over the town.” On campus, a legal challenge emerged in October, when two women filed class-action litigation claiming that Hillsdale officials including Norton had sought to hide sexual assaults rather than seriously investigate them. One plaintiff, Danielle Villarreal, who transferred to another school, said in an interview that Arnn was “too busy trying to kind of promote Hillsdale’s reputation for truth and liberty and ignoring the contradictions that are already within.” (The college said the suit was based on “serious mischaracterizations” of its processes, as well as its actions.) Contradictions were on the minds of the nearly two dozen students and alumni who sought me out after hearing about my reporting on social media or from friends. Almost all expressed gratitude for their liberal-arts education and said that, despite the hard-edged pitch to donors, Hillsdale had nurtured the critical-thinking skills that led them to reject Trumpism. But many felt revulsion at the public coziness between the college and the former president. “The undergraduate college has been used as a base for the intervention into American politics,” said Will Smiley, class of 2005. Arnn, he added, “was lending the institutional credibility of Hillsdale to Donald Trump.”Anna Meckel arrived at Hillsdale in 2014 as a star student celebrated in The Omaha World-Herald with the headline “Home-Schooled Nebraska Senior Tallies Perfect SAT, ACT Scores.” She came from a conservative family but had been drawn to Hillsdale by its focus on the classics, not its politics. Yet even as she thrived academically, she found her values unmoored from the emergent brand of conservatism espoused by Arnn and his administration. In an interview, she recalled her graduation, in May 2018. She was the valedictorian. Pence delivered the commencement address, declaring that the Trump administration was “advancing the very principles that you learned here in the halls at Hillsdale.”“I was sitting there in the audience in tears, in embarrassment and frustration,” Meckel told me. “This is supposed to be the culmination of the education that I received, and instead the school is making a mockery of itself.” She added: “I was literally crying. I’m going to sound like a snowflake, I guess, but whatever. It was a travesty. Another student heard me crying and reached out to me afterward and said, ‘This isn’t the send-off we deserved.’”Meckel sent me a link to a fund-raising pitch that cited one of the college’s free online courses, on Dante. It warned that “the Biden administration is trying to force critical race theory into K-12 curricula” and offered the poet as an antidote to “the Left’s assault on American education.”“It’s not about Dante or the ‘Iliad’ or the ‘Odyssey,’” she said. “It’s about getting clicks and views from people who want to own the libs and be enraged by the Biden administration or by cancel culture. And that’s nothing like what I was taught in the classroom when we went through great books. My professors didn’t say anything about reading Dante to own the libs.”Opening photo illustration: Source photographs by Leigh Vogel for The New York Times (Arnn); Chris duMond/Getty Images (school); Scott Olson/Getty Images (Trump); Ethan Miller/Getty Images (Pence).Joan Wong is a photocollagist and a book-cover designer who frequently collaborates with The Times, The New Yorker and The Atlantic. She previously worked for Penguin Random House. More

  • in

    Donald Trump Is Connecting With a Different Type of Evangelical Voter

    They are not just the churchgoing, conservative activists who once dominated the G.O.P.Karen Johnson went to her Lutheran church so regularly as a child that she won a perfect attendance award. As an adult, she taught Sunday school. But these days, Ms. Johnson, a 67-year-old counter attendant at a slot-machine parlor, no longer goes to church.She still identifies as an evangelical Christian, but she doesn’t believe going to church is necessary to commune with God. “I have my own little thing with the Lord,” she says.Ms. Johnson’s thing includes frequent prayer, she said, as well as podcasts and YouTube channels that discuss politics and “what’s going on in the world” from a right-wing, and sometimes Christian, worldview. No one plays a more central role in her perspective than Donald J. Trump, the man she believes can defeat the Democrats who, she is certain, are destroying the country and bound for hell.“Trump is our David and our Goliath,” Ms. Johnson said recently as she waited outside a hotel in eastern Iowa to hear the former president speak.Karen Johnson went to church regularly as a child and taught Sunday school as an adult, but, despite identifying as an evangelical Christian, she does not attend church anymore.Jordan Gale for The New York TimesWhite evangelical Christian voters have lined up behind Republican candidates for decades, driving conservative cultural issues into the heart of the party’s politics and making nominees and presidents of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • in

    Liz Cheney Implores Republicans to Reject Trump

    She endorsed efforts to remove him from the ballot and said, “Tell the world who we are with your vote. Tell them that we are a good and a great nation.”In a flurry of appearances and commentary, former Representative Liz Cheney has stepped up her denunciations of former President Donald J. Trump in a last-ditch effort to persuade Republicans not to nominate him again.“Tell the world who we are with your vote. Tell them that we are a good and a great nation,” Ms. Cheney told primary voters in New Hampshire on Friday, in a speech at Dartmouth College’s Democracy Summit. “Show the world that we will defeat the plague of cowardice sweeping through the Republican Party.”A day later, she blasted Mr. Trump’s suggestion on the campaign trail that the Civil War could have been prevented if President Abraham Lincoln had “negotiated.”“Which part of the Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’? The slavery part? The secession part? Whether Lincoln should have preserved the Union?” she wrote on X. “Question for members of the G.O.P. — the party of Lincoln — who have endorsed Donald Trump: How can you possibly defend this?”And in an interview on Sunday on “Face the Nation” on CBS News, she denounced Mr. Trump’s attempts to end or delay his criminal trials by arguing that he had immunity against charges related to anything he did in office. She endorsed efforts to remove him from ballots under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.“I certainly believe that Donald Trump’s behavior rose to that level,” she said, referring to Section 3’s disqualification of people who engaged in insurrection against the Constitution after taking an oath to support it. (She made a similar comment at Dartmouth, saying, “There’s no question in my mind that his actions clearly constituted an offense that is within the language of the 14th Amendment.”)“I think that there’s no basis for an assertion that the president of the United States is completely immune from criminal prosecution for acts in office,” she added of Mr. Trump’s appeals on that front. “He’s trying to delay his trial because he doesn’t want people to see the witnesses who will testify against him,” she continued.Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Mr. Trump, said on Sunday: “Liz Cheney is a loser who is now lying in order to sell a book that either belongs in the discount bargain bin in the fiction section of the bookstore or should be repurposed as toilet paper.”Ms. Cheney turned against Mr. Trump in response to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. As a member of the House, she was one of 10 Republicans who voted to impeach him and one of two who served on the committee that investigated the attack. She lost her Republican primary overwhelmingly in 2022.Of all the states holding early primaries and caucuses, New Hampshire — where Ms. Cheney spoke on Friday — is the most fertile ground for Trump opponents, thanks to its voters’ moderate tendencies and the fact that independents can vote in the Republican race. Mr. Trump leads his nearest challenger there, Nikki Haley, by about 13 percentage points — a large margin, but substantially smaller than the roughly 30 points by which he leads Ron DeSantis in Iowa and Ms. Haley in South Carolina.Voting will begin in just one week, when Iowa Republicans hold their caucuses on Jan. 15. The New Hampshire primary comes next, on Jan. 23, followed by Nevada and South Carolina in February.Ms. Cheney told the audience at Dartmouth that her own plans depended on whether Republican voters heeded her call.As she has done on several occasions, she left open the possibility of running as a third-party candidate if they nominate Mr. Trump. But at the same time, she indicated a preference for President Biden over Mr. Trump, saying that while she disagreed with Mr. Biden on policy matters, “Our nation can survive and recover from policy mistakes. We cannot recover from a president willing to torch the Constitution.”“I’m going to do whatever the most effective thing is to ensure that Donald Trump is not elected,” she added. “I’ll make a decision about what that is in the coming months as we see what happens in the Republican primaries.”A spokesman for Ms. Cheney did not respond to a message asking whether she planned to make an endorsement in the primaries. More

  • in

    Parenting: A ‘Wonderful and Challenging Adventure’

    More from our inbox:Aligning Election Calendars to Increase TurnoutNatural Gas ExportsEmbracing the Semicolon Illustration by Frank Augugliaro/The New York Times. Photographs by Getty Images/iStockphotoTo the Editor:I was moved by “I Wrote Jokes About How Parenting Stinks. Then I Had a Kid,” by Karen Kicak (Opinion guest essay, Dec. 25).I have marveled at my child and couldn’t bring myself to complain about night waking or tantrums. I stayed quiet at birthday parties when parents lamented missing out on adult time and said they wanted to get away from their children. I felt so proud of my daughter and wanted to be around her all the time, yet I learned to push that part down.Ms. Kicak is right that when we downplay our parenting skills and our child’s greatness we rob ourselves of joy.Our self-effacing language may be an attempt to cover up how proud we actually are of our kids. We may also be preemptively self-critical to avoid feeling judged by other parents.These insecurities are getting in the way of celebrating together, and Ms. Kicak reminds us what we need to hear, that we’re “doing great.” She calls us to nudge the pendulum back so we can balance the real challenges of parenting with its tender and fleeting glow.Maybe we could connect more deeply if we allowed ourselves to communicate the parts of ourselves that love being a parent, too. I hope we can, before our little ones grow up.Elaine EllisSan FranciscoThe writer is a school social worker.To the Editor:Many thanks to Karen Kicak for her essay about parenting and positivity. When I was in sleep-deprived chaos with two small children, my neighbor, a public school art teacher and artist, asked how I was doing. I replied, “Surviving,” and she replied, “Ah, well, I think you are thriving.” That kind comment made me look at all the good things going on and made a world of difference.I too make only positive comments to parents. Thank you again for reminding people that kind and reassuring words go a long way in helping parents feel confident and supported by their community.Angel D’AndreaCincinnatiTo the Editor:I appreciate Karen Kicak’s piece about our culture’s overemphasis on the negatives of being a parent. It goes along with the focus on children’s “bad behaviors,” as people define them, which parents use to shame and ridicule their kids, even though they are still developing into who they will become. As if children are bad people all the time.Life is good and bad, easy and hard. So is motherhood. Why not note the deepest joys of this remarkable, intimate relationship alongside recognition of how hard it can be? We owe that to mothers. Admiring the love and care and pleasures and new identities that motherhood offers does not have to negate how hard it can get at times.I tell parents, “Enjoy this wonderful and challenging adventure of parenthood.” It is both of those things.Tovah P. KleinNew YorkThe writer is the director of the Barnard College Center for Toddler Development and the author of “How Toddlers Thrive.”Aligning Election Calendars to Increase Turnout Carl Iwasaki/Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “A New Law Will Help Bolster Voting in New York,” by Mara Gay (Opinion, Dec. 27):For every one person who votes in the mayoral general election, two vote in the presidential election. That’s a statistic that should concern anyone who cares about our local democracy.Last month, New York took a big step toward addressing this when Gov. Kathy Hochul signed legislation moving some local elections to even-numbered years. Aligning local races with federal or statewide races that typically see higher voter turnout will increase voter participation, diversify our electorate and save taxpayer dollars.Los Angeles held its first election in an even-numbered year in November 2022 and saw voter turnout nearly double. Other cities that have made the move have seen similar turnout gains. Research shows that this reform helps narrow participation gaps, particularly among young voters and in communities of color.Unfortunately, the New York State Legislature cannot shift all elections on its own, but lawmakers have committed to passing more comprehensive legislation through a constitutional amendment that moves local elections to even years across the entire state. That would include municipal elections in New York City.Good government groups must continue to advocate this reform, which would create an elections calendar that better serves voters and strengthens our local democracy.Betsy GotbaumNew YorkThe writer is the executive director of Citizens Union and a former New York City public advocate.Natural Gas ExportsA Venture Global liquefied natural gas facility on the Calcasieu Ship Channel in Cameron, La. The company wants to build a new export terminal at the site.Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Decision on Natural Gas Project Will Test Biden’s Energy Policy” (front page, Dec. 27):The Biden administration has a choice to make on climate policy: achieve its policy goal or continue to rubber-stamp gas export terminals. Rarely in politics is a choice so straightforward. In this case, it is.It’s simple. The fossil fuel industry is marketing liquefied natural gas (L.N.G.) as “natural.” It’s a “transition fuel,” they say. It’s not. It’s mostly methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases. The gas may emit less smoke and particulate matter than coal, but exporting it causes more greenhouse gas emissions.One of the latest reports on U.S. gas exports by Jeremy Symons says that “current U.S. L.N.G. exports are sufficient to meet Europe’s L.N.G. needs.” So why approve more plants? In the same report, it’s also revealed that if the administration approves all of the industry’s proposed terminals, U.S.-sourced L.N.G. emissions would be larger than the greenhouse gas emissions from the European Union.How can we add another emitter of greenhouse gases — one that would be a bigger contributor than Europe! — and meet the administration’s climate goals? We can’t.It’s time to embrace science, stop listening to the industry’s marketers and say “no, thank you!” to more gas.Russel HonoréBaton Rouge, La.The writer is the founder and head of the Green Army, an organization dedicated to finding solutions to pollution.Embracing the Semicolon Ben WisemanTo the Editor:Re “Our Semicolons, Ourselves,” by Frank Bruni (Opinion, Dec. 25):I feel like Frank Bruni when he writes about how he prattles on “about dangling participles and the like.” My students must also “hear a sad evangelist for a silly religion.”In more than three decades as a writing professor, I require my students to read my seven-page mini-stylebook, “Candy Schulman’s Crash Course in Style.” My mentor used to chastise me in red capital letters in the margins of my essays. “Between You and I?” he’d write; finally, I metamorphosed from “I” to “me.”Notice the semicolon I just used? I love them, like Abraham Lincoln, who respected this “useful little chap.”Kurt Vonnegut, however, felt differently. “Do not use semicolons,” he said. They represent “absolutely nothing. All they do is show you’ve been to college.”Until the day I retire, I will continue to teach my students that proper writing is not texting — where capitalization, punctuation and attention to spelling are discouraged.As colleges de-emphasize the humanities, I’ll still be preaching from the whiteboard of my classroom, drawing colons and semicolons to differentiate them, optimistically conveying my joy for proper grammar. Between you and me, I’m keeping the faith.Candy SchulmanNew YorkThe writer is a part-time associate writing professor at The New School. More

  • in

    Bangladesh Votes in Election Marred by Crackdown and Boycotts

    With the opposition in jail or off the ballots, the prime minister for the past 15 years is expected to maintain her grip on power in what appeared to be a low-turnout vote.Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of Bangladesh was nearly guaranteed a fourth consecutive term in office as voting ended on Sunday in a low-turnout election that has been marred by a widespread crackdown on the opposition.Security remained tight across the country of 170 million people as the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, the main opposition, which has boycotted the election as unfair, pushed for a nationwide strike. The situation had remained tense in the days leading up to the vote, with episodes of violence — including arson on a train in Dhaka that killed four people, and the torching of more than a dozen polling stations — reported from across the country.Ms. Hasina, 76, who cast her vote in Dhaka, the capital, soon after polls opened at 8 a.m. local time, urged people to come out in large numbers.On the campaign trail, she has called for political stability and continuity, often by mentioning the country’s violent history of coups and counter-coups, including one that killed her father, Bangladesh’s founding leader, in the 1970s. She has highlighted her efforts to champion economic development, and her secular party’s resistance to the rise of Islamist militancy, as reasons the voters should and will give her another term.“We have struggled a lot for this voting right: jail, oppression, grenades, bombs,” Ms. Hasina told reporters after casting her vote. “This election will be free and fair.”Police officers patrolling in Dhaka on Sunday, as security remained tight across the country.Monirul Alam/EPA, via ShutterstockBut with the results foretold, and the election largely a one-sided affair, there appeared to be little excitement on the streets about the vote.“I didn’t go to vote in my hometown because what difference would my vote make?” said Mominul Islam, a rickshaw puller in Dhaka.Visits to polling centers in Dhaka showed voting was slow. Members of the governing party, the Awami League, milled around outside the voting centers, but voters merely trickled in. Local news media reported instances of the governing party members lining up their supporters when cameras and foreign election observers reached a polling station, only for the people to disperse afterward.At 3 p.m. local time, voter turnout stood around 27 percent, Kazi Habibul Awal, Bangladesh’s chief election commissioner, told reporters. After the polls closed an hour later, Mr. Awal said at a news conference that “we can assure that at least 40 percent of the votes were cast” and that the exact turnout would be clearer after counting ended.With the main opposition boycotting, the competition — still tense, and in many constituencies marked by violence — is largely between members of Ms. Hasina’s own party.While Ms. Hasina’s officials tried to play down the Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s boycott of the vote, pointing to smaller parties still participating, her moves in the final stretch of the campaign made clear that she was worried about the vote’s legitimacy. She instructed her party to prop up what became known as dummy candidates — members of the Awami League contesting as independent candidates against their own party’s official candidates.It was an effort to not only create a semblance of a contest, but to also shore up voter turnout that could give the election some legitimacy, analysts said.But with power so centralized, and so much economic and political fortune at stake in a ticket to Parliament, the result has been bitter interparty fights in many of the constituencies, including violent clashes. In at least two constituencies, Awami League candidates have pointed fingers at opponents from their own party for deaths of their supporters.Voters at a polling center on Sunday in Dhaka.Monirul Alam/EPA, via Shutterstock“The ruling party had been trying for a long time to break up the main opposition party, the B.N.P., and bring some of their people to their side. This would have shown that there was some kind of participation from different parties, especially the B.N.P., in the election,” said Ali Riaz, a political scientist and professor at Illinois State University, using an abbreviation for the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. “When they were not very successful in this, they had to choose this path.”Mr. Riaz said the way that the election had played out made clear that Bangladesh was no longer “an effective multiparty system.”“I am saying effective because there may be offices with signboards, but there will be no effective opposition,” Mr. Riaz said. “Not on paper, but in practice Bangladesh will become a one-party state.”After winning a competitive election held under a neutral caretaker government in 2009, Ms. Hasina has set out to turn Bangladesh into a one-party state, analysts and critics say. She changed the Constitution to make illegal the practice of holding elections under neutral administration, and won two additional terms — in 2014 and 2018 — in votes marked by opposition boycotts and irregularities.Ms. Hasina first moved to crush the Jamaat-e-Islami, Bangladesh’s largest Islamist party, effectively banning its political work and prosecuting several of its senior leaders for violence and treason during Bangladesh’s war of independence in 1971. More recently, her efforts have focused on the B.N.P., the main opposition party, which has by now been so gutted that it retains little mobilizing capacity. Its leaders who are not already in jail are bogged down with endless court appointments.Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of Bangladesh on her way on Sunday to cast her vote in Dhaka. She is nearly guaranteed a fourth consecutive term in office.Altaf Qadri/Associated PressDuring much of the past 15 years, Ms. Hasina’s second time in power after a five-year term ending in 2001, an economic success story took attention away from her autocratic turn.On the back of investments in the garment industry, Bangladesh experienced such impressive growth that average income levels at one point surpassed India’s. The country also saw major improvements in education, health, female participation in the labor force and preparedness against climate disasters.She has also played a difficult balancing act in a tough neighborhood, where both China and India are vying for influence. Ms. Hasina has managed to keep India and China on her side.As Western pressures increased on her government over human rights abuses, including the crackdown on opposition and the enforced disappearances by Bangladesh’s elite security agencies, both Beijing and New Delhi have come to her defense. India, in particular, has been using its growing diplomatic weight to urge the United States and other Western nations to take it easy on Ms. Hasina, diplomats in New Delhi and Dhaka said.As Ms. Hasina prepared to seek a fourth consecutive term, the sheen was coming off the economic success story, with the population struggling with rising prices. While she might be able to control a decimated opposition through her control of security agencies and the judiciary, the task will become much more difficult if public anger continues over rising prices and she fails to check the economy’s downward spiral.Counting votes after the polls closed on Sunday in Munshiganj, outside Dhaka.Altaf Qadri/Associated PressThe successive blows of the coronavirus pandemic and the war in Ukraine, which pushed up fuel and food prices, have exposed Bangladesh’s overreliance on one industry. The country’s foreign reserves have been shrinking, forcing it to seek emergency loans from the International Monetary Fund.Opposition leaders tried to leverage public anger over the economy, holding their first major rallies in years, prompting Ms. Hasina to intensify the crackdown. The B.N.P. says more than 20,000 of its members have been arrested since its last major rally in October, which faced police batons and tear gas.“They are playing with the ambition of the country to be a democratic state,” Nazrul Islam Khan, a leader of the B.N.P., said on the eve of the vote. “We will continue the movement until the government falls.” More

  • in

    Trump avoids mention of US Capitol attack on 6 January anniversary

    Donald Trump largely ducked speaking about the January 6 attack on the US Capitol during a campaign speech Saturday, which he delivered on the third anniversary of the insurrection, reflecting the degree to which Republican voters have absolved the former president of responsibility for that day’s deadly consequences.Trump’s remarks came a day after Joe Biden appeared in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania, and spoke about how his presidential predecessor had urged his supporters to “fight like hell” shortly before they staged the Capitol attack.Trump brought up January 6 only once as he addressed hundreds of supporters in the town of Newton, Iowa, nine days before that state’s Republican caucuses are scheduled to kick off the 2024 presidential campaign. He repeated previous claims that the Democrat Biden, whom he is likely to face in a general election rematch in November, is the true threat to democracy.“You know this guy [Biden] goes around and says I’m a threat to democracy,” Trump said. “No, he’s a threat because he’s incompetent. He’s a threat to democracy.”“Nobody thought J6 was even a possibility,” Trump said later, without elaborating.Trump also attacked the former Republican representative Liz Cheney, who has been sharply critical of Trump since the January 6 attack, when a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol as legislators were certifying Biden’s 2020 election victory.On the other hand, Biden has repeatedly called Trump a threat to democracy on the trail, and that messaging has emerged as a central theme of his campaign so far.“We saw with our own eyes the violent mob storm the United States Capitol,” Biden said Friday. Referring to Trump, Biden continued: “He told the crowd to ‘fight like hell,’ and all hell was unleashed. He promised he would right them. Everything they did, he would be side by side with them. Then, as usual, he left the dirty work to others. He retreated to the White House.”Biden’s remarks were a clear attempt to balance out the approach at recent campaign events in Iowa by Trump’s – and those backing other Republican presidential hopefuls – who have downplayed the significance of January 6. Many of them have also embraced conspiracy theories regarding the events of that day.Trump himself has suggested during previous campaign stops that undercover FBI agents played a significant role in instigating the attack, an account not supported by official investigations.More than 1,200 people have been charged with taking part in the riot, and more than 900 have either pleaded guilty or been convicted following a trial.Nine deaths have been linked to the attack, including law enforcement suicides.Yet on Saturday, Hale Wilson, a Trump supporter from Des Moines who was at the Newton event, said of the attack: “It wasn’t really an insurrection. There were bad actors involved that got the crowd going.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump has been in Iowa to curry support before the state’s Republican caucus on 15 January, which is the first contest of the Republican presidential nominating contest. He currently leads all competitors by more than 30 percentage points in the state, according to most polls.Polls have also shown that a rematch with Biden later this year could be close and competitive despite 91 criminal charges pending against Trump, who was twice impeached during his time in the Oval Office.The criminal charges against Trump are for trying to subvert his defeat to Biden in the 2020 race, illegally retaining government secrets after he left the White House and giving hush-money payments to the adult film actor Stormy Daniels, who has reported having a sexual encounter with the former president during an earlier time in his marriage to Melania Trump.Trump additionally has grappled with civil litigation over his business practices and a rape allegation which a judge deemed to be “substantially true”.Biden on Friday said Trump’s January 6 denial betrayed an attempt “to steal history the same way he tried to steal the election”.“There’s no confusion about who Trump is or what he intends to do,” Biden remarked.
    Reuters and the Associated Press contributed reporting More