More stories

  • in

    New York City Can’t Just Gentrify Its Way Back to Normal

    Outdoor cafes and to-go cocktails are scenes from a privileged lockdown. What is the plan for neighborhoods that were struggling before Covid?On the rare occasions I have left the city over the past few months, I have been asked the same question repeatedly: “How is New York?” People want to know whether they should visit and what it will be like when they do, and I tell them that they should come immediately because they will find a place newly awakened to pleasure — to biking everywhere, to dining sheds covered in peonies, to jazz bands turning up in Prospect Park on random weekdays, to Little Island and drinking orange wine at lunch.In the city’s most prosperous quarters, people are still at home — much of the professional class is not expected to return to the office until September — and the pursuit of the good life, aided by vaccination, has now resumed unimpeded. On a recent Friday afternoon, I walked the length of Court Street in Brooklyn, to find an outdoor dining scene with the vibe of a late night in Madrid. New stores had already taken up residence in vacant spaces. March in Cobble Hill saw the arrival of Tavola Italian Market, for example, a purveyor of truffle cashews, truffle pecorino cream, truffle Gruyere and many other things that most of us were surely unaware could serve as repositories for mushroom-adjacent flavoring.The late-stage pandemic lifestyle is hardly a reality for most New Yorkers. To the contrary, a recent survey of 700 workers in Astoria, Queens, conducted by the New School’s Center for New York City Affairs, found that of the third laid off during the past year, only 38 percent have returned to work. And yet from certain angles, a city once driven by ambition now seems to run on a vaporous languor. I suspect that this particular consequence of the pandemic, more than any other, explains the ocean of apathy surrounding the mayoral race, the most important election New Yorkers have faced in more than half a century. The pervasive sense of detachment has not changed even with the election a little more than two weeks away. Eight years ago, when Bill de Blasio was first campaigning to run the city, you could spot signs for his candidacy in apartment windows all over Brooklyn. Now you can walk your pandemic rescue dog around for hours and see posters for virtually no one.Embedded in the sort of neighborhood that is thriving, the high-information voter is distracted by the groove. The kind of Democrat already anxious about Abigail Spanberger’s prospects for re-election in Virginia’s crucial Seventh Congressional District next year is struggling to find evidence of a city at the brink of existential undoing. Without a reason to go to Midtown, she has little sense of how desolate it can feel. No longer in a consistent relationship with the public transit system, she might read about rising crime on the subway, but she isn’t feeling it. Whatever her worries, they are easily eclipsed by the realities of a robust housing market and the seeming permeance of the takeout margarita.What is at stake is what is always at stake — the fate of struggling communities that have only been further devastated by the pandemic, wrecked by lost lives, lost jobs, lost housing. Mayor de Blasio famously ran on a platform of mending an economically divided city, but he is leaving behind a place where the gaps between rich and poor have become only more obvious and horrific. The Covid death rate in Brownsville, Brooklyn, historically one of the poorest neighborhoods in the city, was more than twice as high as it was on the Upper East Side. Gun violence has been a problem in the city, but in Brownsville, the number of shooting victims has more than doubled since January, compared with the same period last year; over a two-year time frame there has been a 300 percent increase.During the height of the pandemic, Rodney Frazer and his organization, Collective Fare, made hundreds of thousands of meals for people in the neighborhood out of the Brooklyn Community Culinary Center on Belmont Avenue. I met him in front of the center recently, where the crack trade resurfaced last summer as people in the area desperate to make some cash found an eager market among drivers passing through Central Brooklyn looking to buy drugs. What was different about Belmont Avenue all of a sudden, Lucas Denton, who runs a related organization, the Melting Pot Foundation, told me, was the parade of out-of-state license plates.I asked both of these men and others deeply invested in Brownsville what a new mayor could do to make a big difference and their answers were consistently simple and specific in a way that made it painfully clear how little the city’s ruling political class has really listened to people with deep roots in the community. Mr. Frazer wanted to know why the native tech talent of so many teenagers has not been harnessed and deployed to serve a food industry now ever more dependent on app-enabled delivery and digital marketing. “I mean you have a problem with your phone and can’t figure something out and you hand it to your kid, right?”.css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Daniel Goodine, a longtime activist in Brownsville, who lost one son to gun violence 17 years ago and another to prison, continues to be astounded by the fact that there is no trade school in Brownsville, something that would have a huge and immediate impact on the lives of teenagers who might otherwise be drawn to gang life.“Why don’t I have a trade school, like the one on 96th Street, when I can take a pistol out of a kid’s hand and give him a nail gun?” he asked. Mr. Goodine was very involved in getting food to the hungry during the pandemic, and what struck him was how this effort was nearly thwarted almost from the beginning by inadequate storage capacity. A lack of warehouse space in the neighborhood meant that the emergency operation had to rely on trucking, which complicated a process already full of logistical difficulties.That same effort revealed again the extent to which poor neighborhoods are regarded as dumping grounds for a broad range of economic problems. During the height of the Covid crisis, dairy farmers were in a panic; schools and restaurants were now closed to them. As a result, a lot of surplus milk ended up in Brownsville. “There was all of this infusion of dairy, and there was no infrastructure to receive it,” Rae Gomes, the executive director of the Brownsville Community Culinary Center, told me. “People didn’t necessarily want it. Because what do we know about Black and brown people? A lot of us are lactose intolerant.”Wednesday night’s mayoral debate focused on crime and public safety with not nearly enough discussion of the economic conditions that are intricately linked to their rise and fall. Eric Adams, who has strong support in Brownsville, did make the connection. But no candidate really has a comprehensive plan to eradicate deep poverty in neighborhoods where rates have remained virtually unchanged since the 1970s. No one really knows what to do with a neighborhood that cannot gentrify its way to glory. Brownsville isn’t struggling with the question of whether or not to keep outdoor dining sheds. It doesn’t have any. More

  • in

    State Election Officials Are Under Attack. We Will Defend Them.

    Tucked into many of the election laws Republicans are pushing or enacting in states around the country are pernicious provisions threatening punishment of elections officials and workers for just doing their jobs.Laws like those already passed in Republican-controlled states like Georgia and Iowa, no matter their stated intent, will be used as a weapon of intimidation aimed at the people, many of them volunteers, charged with running fair elections at the local and state levels. By subjecting them to invasive, politically motivated control by a state legislative majority, these provisions shift the last word in elections from the pros to the pols. This is a serious attack on the crucial norm that our elections should be run on a professional, nonpartisan basis — and it is deeply wrong.It is so wrong that having once worked together across the partisan divide as co-chairs of the 2013-14 Presidential Commission on Election Administration, we have decided to come together again to mobilize the defense of election officials who may come under siege from these new laws.Bear in mind that this is happening after the 2020 election, run in the midst of a once-in-a-century pandemic, went off much better than expected. Voter turnout was the highest since 1900. A senior official in the Trump administration pronounced it the “most secure election in American history,” with “no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised.” Multiple recounts, contests and court cases brought by former President Donald Trump and his allies failed to persuade any courts or state officials to overturn the results of any election.The new laws establish civil penalties for technical infractions and subject officials to threats of suspension and even criminal prosecution. Iowa state election officials are now subject to fines of $10,000 and suspension for any actions that “hinder or disregard the object of the law.” They are also subject to criminal penalties when seeking to address disruptive conduct by partisan poll watchers. In Georgia, an election official threatened with suspension may appeal, but the law restricts state-financed support for the individual’s legal defense. The Georgia secretary of state, the chief election official, has been removed from the chairmanship of the State Elections Board, demoted to nonvoting ex officio status.Other states are considering laws containing similar threats to the impartial administration of elections. It can be no surprise that officials around the country are also experiencing threats and harassment ranging from physical confrontation to social media postings of personal information from their Facebook pages. And this dangerous behavior is spreading throughout the electoral process. Last month, election officials in Anchorage, Alaska, issued a report describing the “unprecedented harassment of election officials” during the conduct of a mayoral runoff election.The partisan efforts to control election outcomes will result in the corruption of our system of government, which is rooted in fair, free elections. We say this as longtime election lawyers from opposing political parties. In jointly leading the presidential commission, we worked with numerous local and state elections officials. We saw firsthand the dedication and professionalism they brought to their jobs. They work hard with inadequate resources and are rarely praised for what goes well and are quickly blamed for what goes wrong.In 2020, after the pandemic struck, these officials performed the near-impossible task of locating replacements for thousands of poll workers, reconfiguring polling places to offer safe voting spaces for voters and poll workers and ramping up effective mail voting where allowed under state law.Now their nonpartisan performance of their duties is under attack — even to the point of being criminalized. So we are committed to providing these officials a defense against these attacks and threats by recruiting lawyers around the country, Democrats and Republicans, to establish a network that would provide free legal support to election officials who face threats, fines or suspensions for doing their jobs. This national network will monitor new threats as they develop and publicly report on what it learns.The defense of the electoral process is not a partisan cause, even where there may be reasonable disagreements between the parties about specific voting rules and procedures. The presidential commission we led concluded that “election administration is public administration” and that whenever possible, “the responsible department or agency in every state should have on staff individuals who are chosen and serve solely on the basis of their experience and expertise.” To serve voters, those officials would require independence from partisan political pressures, threats and retaliatory attacks.These state laws, and the blind rage against our election officials that they encourage or reinforce, will corrode our electoral systems and democracy. They will add to the recent lamentable trend of experienced officials’ retiring from their active and vitally needed service — clearing the way for others less qualified and more easily managed by partisans. Early surveys show that in our nation’s larger jurisdictions, up to a quarter of experienced election officials are planning to leave their jobs. A primary reason they cite: “the political environment.”No requirement of our electoral process — of our democracy — is more critical than the commitment to nonpartisanship in the administration of our system for casting and counting of ballots now being degraded by these state laws. This challenge must be strongly and forcefully met in every possible way by Democrats and Republicans alike.Bob Bauer, a former senior adviser to the Biden campaign, is a professor at New York University School of Law and a co-author of “After Trump: Reconstructing the Presidency.” Ben Ginsberg practiced election law for 38 years representing Republican candidates and parties.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, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin’s Nihilistic Bipartisanship

    We are in the eye of the storm of American democratic collapse. There is, outwardly, a feeling of calm. The Biden administration is competent and placid. The coronavirus emergency is receding nationally, if not internationally. Donald Trump, once the most powerful man on earth and the emperor of the news cycle, is now a failed blogger under criminal investigation. More

  • in

    Giuliani and Prosecutors Agree on Former Judge to Review Seized Materials

    Barbara S. Jones conducted a similar screening during the investigation into Michael D. Cohen.Federal prosecutors and lawyers for Rudolph W. Giuliani have recommended that Barbara S. Jones, a former judge in Manhattan, be appointed to review materials seized by the F.B.I. during recent searches of Mr. Giuliani’s home and office, according to a government court filing late Thursday.The proposal, which still must be approved by a federal judge, would require Ms. Jones to determine what seized materials might be covered by attorney-client privilege and should be kept from the authorities who are investigating Mr. Giuliani.Ms. Jones, who is now in private practice, filled a similar role three years ago when she was appointed to oversee a review of materials seized by the authorities during the investigation of Michael D. Cohen, former President Donald J. Trump’s onetime personal lawyer and fixer.Mr. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City who also once served as Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, has been under investigation over his dealings in Ukraine before the 2020 presidential election, The New York Times has reported.Federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the F.B.I. have been examining whether Mr. Giuliani lobbied the Trump administration on behalf of Ukrainian officials who were assisting him in his efforts to unearth damaging information about President Biden, who was then a leading Democratic candidate. Federal law prohibits lobbying the U.S. government on behalf of foreign officials without registering with the Justice Department, and Mr. Giuliani never registered.Mr. Giuliani has not been accused of any wrongdoing, and he has said he never lobbied on behalf of the Ukrainians. He has denounced the F.B.I. searches as a “corrupt double standard” by the Justice Department, which he said had ignored “blatant crimes” by Mr. Biden and other Democrats.On April 28, the F.B.I. seized 18 electronic devices, including cellphones and computers, in searches of Mr. Giuliani’s Madison Avenue apartment and his Park Avenue office in Manhattan, according to court filings.Federal prosecutors in Manhattan, citing what they called “unusually sensitive privilege issues” raised by searches of a lawyer whose clients included a former president, had asked for the appointment of a “special master” — a neutral authority who would determine whether any of the seized materials were protected by attorney-client privilege and should be kept from investigators.Mr. Giuliani is under investigation over his dealings in Ukraine before the 2020 election.Jeff Kowalsky/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe recommendation of Ms. Jones was agreed upon by federal prosecutors and lawyers for Mr. Giuliani, the office of Audrey Strauss, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, said in a letter to Judge J. Paul Oetken of Federal District Court, who has been overseeing the Giuliani matter.Ms. Jones, a partner at the law firm Bracewell, had served for 17 years on the Federal District Court in Manhattan — the same court where Judge Oetken sits — after she was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton in 1995.From 1977 to 1987, she worked as a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, the office that is investigating Mr. Giuliani. (During several of the years Ms. Jones was in the office, it was led by Mr. Giuliani, who was the U.S. attorney for the Southern District from 1983 to 1989.) She later served as a senior aide to Robert M. Morgenthau, the late Manhattan district attorney.Though Mr. Giuliani was once a partner at the firm where Ms. Jones now works, formerly known as Bracewell & Giuliani, he left before Ms. Jones arrived.“None of the parties believe that Mr. Giuliani’s prior affiliation with Bracewell & Giuliani presents a conflict that would disqualify Judge Jones from being appointed as the special master or her firm assisting in her review,” Ms. Strauss’s office said in the letter to Judge Oetken.While in private practice, Ms. Jones has served as a special master, a monitor or a compliance officer in a variety of court cases and other disputes, according to her website. In Mr. Cohen’s case, her review found that only a fraction of the seized materials were privileged and should be kept from investigators. Mr. Cohen eventually pleaded guilty to campaign finance and financial crimes.Ms. Strauss’s office, in the letter to Judge Oetken, said that in the Cohen matter, Judge Kimba M. Wood, who had appointed Ms. Jones, said she had “performed her review with extraordinary efficiency and speed, while giving the parties a full opportunity to be heard.” More

  • in

    Andrew Yang and Eric Adams Rivalry Takes Center Stage After Debate

    Both candidates, who are considered front-runners, have sharpened their tone, launching attacks on each other during and after Wednesday’s debate.During the 2020 presidential race and for much of the New York City mayor’s race, Andrew Yang has been known as a cheerful optimist.But voters saw a different side of Mr. Yang at the second major Democratic debate on Wednesday night as he fiercely criticized Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president and one of his main rivals.After Mr. Adams knocked him for leaving the city during the pandemic and not voting in city elections, Mr. Yang fought back, depicting Mr. Adams as a corrupt and unprincipled politician who would maintain the status quo. It was a strategic attack that could damage his opponent’s reputation, but the approach was far from Mr. Yang’s exuberant brand.“It was definitely noticeable,” Susan Kang, a professor of political science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said of his change in tone. “His biggest appeal has always been being the affable guy — he seemed so friendly and relaxed despite being attacked.”The tense exchange between Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams continued to make waves on Thursday as the eight leading candidates all tried to claim victory after their first major in-person debate.Mr. Adams continued to draw attention to Mr. Yang’s lack of experience at a virtual town hall for ethnic and community media.“You can examine my record because I have a record,” Mr. Adams said. “We can’t examine the records of those who decided to pop in the city all of a sudden. We can’t examine the records of those who have not been on the ground with us.”Evan Thies, a spokesman for Mr. Adams, doubled down on Mr. Adams’s demand Wednesday night for an apology from Mr. Yang over his accusations of corruption.“Yang is lying to voters about Eric because New Yorkers know the truth about Yang: he’s a fraud,” Mr. Thies said. “Yang should apologize to New Yorkers for spreading falsehoods, abandoning the city during Covid, and not taking this crucial election seriously.”Chris Coffey, one of Mr. Yang’s campaign managers, responded by reiterating Mr. Yang’s concerns that Mr. Adams was corrupt, and said voters were turning “towards the candidate who represents real change.”But Mr. Adams also appeared excited over his momentum going into the Democratic primary on June 22.“We are only 19 days away,” he said. “It almost gives me goose bumps when I think about it.”Kathryn Garcia, the city’s former sanitation commissioner, celebrated her debate performance with a specialty bagel in Brooklyn. Maya Wiley, a former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio, greeted voters at the Park Slope Food Co-op in Brooklyn and highlighted a new endorsement from the New York State Nurses Association. Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller whose campaign was damaged by an allegation of sexual misconduct, held a “Women for Stringer” event.Mr. Adams wasn’t the only one to attack Mr. Yang during the debate. Mr. Stringer said that Mr. Yang was worse than an “empty vessel” — a term used by one of Mr. Yang’s advisers — and that he was a Republican.On Thursday, Mr. Yang was back to his upbeat self on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” arguing that he had momentum in the final weeks of the campaign.“We feel very, very confident going into this homestretch,” he said.Mr. Yang faced another confrontation on Thursday when he tried to hold a news conference outside the Prospect Park YMCA in Brooklyn and was shouted down by protesters. He chose the gym — Mr. de Blasio’s favored workout spot before the pandemic — to make the argument that he is the “best candidate to turn the page on the de Blasio administration.”A group of progressive activists were there to meet him, holding signs that read “Yang = More Cops” and “Hedge Fund Mayor,” and shouting “Don’t rank Yang!” After trying to talk with them, Mr. Yang gave up and left.Mr. Yang’s campaign said in a statement that he did not want to “defund the N.Y.P.D. at a time of soaring gun violence” and blamed the disruption on Mr. Stringer’s camp, calling it “a desperate attempt to distract from his failing campaign.”The organizers of the protest, a progressive super PAC called Our City, denied that they were backing Mr. Stringer. The group has called for voters not to rank Mr. Yang or Mr. Adams and is being led by Gabe Tobias, a former senior adviser to Justice Democrats, which played a key role in helping Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez get elected to Congress in 2018.“Our city deserves so much better than Andrew Yang and Eric Adams,” Mr. Tobias said in a statement. “No Democratic primary voter should rank either Yang or Adams. These are corporate candidates supported by super PACs that are funded by right-wing billionaires.”.css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat in his second term, was not impressed by the debate or by Mr. Yang’s stunt outside his favorite gym.“That’s just a politician being a politician,” Mr. de Blasio told reporters. “I’d much rather people talk about what they’re going to do for New Yorkers and show they actually have some knowledge of this city and how it works.”Many of the candidates gave Mr. de Blasio poor to failing grades during the debate, and Mr. Yang was the only one who said he would accept the mayor’s endorsement.Mr. de Blasio said he had watched the debate and wanted more substance.“Sadly, I don’t think it was much of a debate,” he said. “I don’t think it shed a lot of light and New Yorkers need a lot more information about these candidates. They need a lot clearer vision from these candidates.”Ms. Wiley agreed. She went on the attack during the debate against both Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams. During the frenetic first hour of the debate, Ms. Wiley ignored calls from the moderators to stop talking and continued until she felt she had made her point.“One of the complaints about the debate was substance,” said Ms. Wiley, who explained her strategy after greeting voters outside of Yankee Stadium in the Bronx on Thursday. “Well, how do you get substantive in 30 to 45 seconds? You are basically doing sound bites.”During the debate, Ms. Wiley criticized Mr. Adams for what she believes are regressive views on policing and called out a nonprofit Mr. Yang founded for promising to create 100,000 jobs but only providing 150 in the cities that it targeted.“A two-minute answer is very different from a 45-second or 30-second answer,” she explained. “When I’m able to have a two-minute conversation — that’s all I need.”Both Mr. Adams and Mr. Yang showed a different side of themselves at the debate, said Mitchell L. Moss, a professor of urban policy and planning at New York University. Mr. Adams, who is known for making unscripted remarks, was prepared to respond calmly to Mr. Yang’s attacks.“He brushed it off very gracefully,” Mr. Moss said.Mr. Yang decided to go negative, but he also made good points about the city’s growing deficits in the coming years, said Mr. Moss, who advised Michael R. Bloomberg during his 2001 mayoral campaign and donated to Ms. Garcia this year.“Yang’s best message was that we are facing tough financial problems, and we should be discussing them,” Mr. Moss said. More

  • in

    Mike Pence says he and Trump ‘may never see eye-to-eye’ on Capitol attack

    Mike Pence has said he isn’t sure that he and Donald Trump will ever see “eye to eye” over what happened on 6 January, when a mob of the president’s supporters stormed the Capitol in an effort to overturn the election. Pence, speaking at a Republican dinner in the early voting state of New Hampshire, gave his most extensive comments to date on the deadly events, when rioters broke into the Capitol building, some chanting “Hang Mike Pence!” after the vice-president said he did not have the power to overturn Joe Biden’s victory.“As I said that day, Jan 6 was a dark day in history of the United States Capitol. But thanks to the swift action of the Capitol police and federal law enforcement, violence was quelled. The Capitol was secured,” Pence said.“And that same day, we reconvened the Congress and did our duty under the constitution and the laws of the United States,” Pence continued. “You know, President Trump and I have spoken many times since we left office. And I don’t know if we’ll ever see eye to eye on that day.”It was a rare departure for Pence, who spent four years standing loyally beside his boss amid controversy, investigation and impeachment. It comes as Pence considers his own potential 2024 White House run and as Republicans, some of whom were angry at Trump in the days after the insurrection, have largely coalesced back around the former president.Pence praised Trump several times during his nearly 35-minute speech at the Hillsborough county Republican committee’s annual Lincoln-Reagan awards dinner in Manchester. He also tried to turn the events of 6 January back around on Democrats, saying they wanted to keep the insurrection in the news to divert attention from Biden’s progressive agenda.Pence also hit upon several favorite themes of conservative Republicans, including pushing back against “critical race theory”, echoing a wider push on the right to limit how history and race are covered in America’s schools. His speech came as Georgia’s education board adopted a resolution insisting that students should be taught that racism and slavery are aberrations rather than the systemic norm.“America is not a racist country,” Pence said, prompting one of several standing ovations and cheers during his speech.“It is past time for America to discard the left-wing myth of systemic racism,” Pence said. “I commend state legislators and governors across the country for banning critical race theory from our schools.”His choice of states, including an April appearance in South Carolina, is aimed at increasing his visibility as he considers whether to run for the White House in 2024. His team said he plans more trips, including stops in Texas, California and Michigan. More

  • in

    Pence Calls Systemic Racism A ‘Left-Wing Myth'

    Former Vice President Mike Pence on Thursday described systemic racism as a “left-wing myth” during a speech hosted by a Republican group in New Hampshire, adopting the racial politics of his former boss, President Donald J. Trump.But Mr. Pence, a potential candidate for a 2024 presidential run, also distanced himself from the former president, describing the Jan. 6 attack as “a dark day in the history of the United States Capitol.”“President Trump and I’ve spoken many times since we left office,” Mr. Pence said. “I don’t know if we’ll ever see eye-to-eye on that day.”The speech illustrated the careful balance Mr. Pence is aiming to strike in squaring the rhetoric of the Republican Party under Mr. Trump while standing by his opposition to Mr. Trump’s attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.After focusing much of his speech on touting the achievements of the Trump administration, Mr. Pence took aim at “critical race theory,” a graduate school framework that has found its way into K-12 public education, asserting that young children are being taught “to be ashamed of their skin color.”“It is past time for America to discard the left-wing myth of systemic racism,” Mr. Pence said at the annual Lincoln Reagan Dinner hosted by the Hillsborough County Republicans in Manchester, N.H.“America is not a racist country,” Mr. Pence said to raucous applause, two days after President Biden commemorated the 100th anniversary of the Tulsa Race Massacre.Republicans have launched an energetic campaign in recent months aiming to dictate how historical and modern racism in America is taught in schools, and Mr. Pence indicated his support of efforts to ban critical race theory through legislation advanced in Republican-led states. Mr. Pence had previously targeted critical race theory in tweets and in his first speech in April after leaving office.Mr. Pence’s appeal to racial politics went beyond education. Discussing efforts to defund law enforcement agencies, the former vice president said “Black lives are not endangered by police, Black lives are saved by police,” co-opting the language of Black Lives Matter — a movement he had shunned in office. More

  • in

    Netanyahu Outfoxed His Rivals For Years. Here's What Changed.

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel failed to win a majority in the past three elections — but still held onto power. The ground has shifted.JERUSALEM — Naftali Bennett, the leader of a hard-right political party, stood before television cameras and pledged never to share power with Yair Lapid, a centrist, and Mansour Abbas, an Islamist. It was March 22, the day before Israel’s fourth election in two years.Yet late Wednesday night, just 72 days later, there was Mr. Bennett, sitting down beside both Mr. Abbas and Mr. Lapid and signing a deal that, pending a confidence vote in Parliament later this month, would see all three unite in the first government since 2009 that won’t be led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.Through three consecutive elections between April 2019 and March 2020, Mr. Netanyahu had kept them all at bay. He may have failed to win an overall majority himself, but he clung to power by exacerbating divisions within Israel’s ideologically diffuse opposition, ensuring that they, too, would fail to build a majority coalition.The question of what changed since a fourth inconclusive election in March — and why — has several answers, both systemic and circumstantial.Mr. Lapid’s dexterity in constructing a somewhat gravity defying coalition has certainly been a factor. But Mr. Netanyahu himself played a crucial role, alienating former far-right allies and causing concern with his refusal to step down while facing trial on corruption charges. Yair Lapid, the centrist architect of the deal, in Tel Aviv last month.Oded Balilty/Associated PressThe reasons are also rooted in a combination of personal and political judgments by nationalist power brokers like Mr. Bennett. Even if Mr. Bennett had stuck by Mr. Netanyahu, his support would not have been enough to give Mr. Netanyahu a majority. That meant that Mr. Bennett was left with either joining the opposition or sending Israel to a fifth election in little more than two years — a vote that some analysts predict would deal a serious blow to his party.Hard-right parties have also been tempted by the prospect of senior positions within a new government; Mr. Bennett will be the prime minister, despite leading a party with only seven seats in the 120-seat Parliament.“There is a mix of national duty, and also political and sometimes personal considerations,” said Dani Dayan, a former Israeli ambassador who ran unsuccessfully in the election for New Hope, a hard-right party led by former allies of Mr. Netanyahu, that is part of the new coalition. “You know, politics is not always free of cynical considerations.”But right-wing leaders have also made patriotic arguments for finally replacing Mr. Netanyahu. In the face of sustained intimidation and anger from their base, they have said that they have a responsibility to work with their ideological opposites in order to wrest Israel from a cycle of endless elections and entropy. The country has suffered in a limbo that has left Israelis without a state budget for almost two years, and with several crucial civil service positions unfilled.Sitting in her office in Parliament this week, Idit Silman, a lawmaker from Mr. Bennett’s party, flicked through hundreds of recent text messages from unknown numbers.Some were laced with abusive language. Some warned she was going to hell. All of them demanded that her party abandon the coalition, accusing her of giving up her ideals by allying with leftists, centrists and Islamists to oust Mr. Netanyahu.And it has not just come by phone.When Ms. Silman turned up at her local synagogue recently, she found several professionally designed posters outside, each with her portrait overlaid with the slogan: “Idit Silman stitched together a government with terror supporters.”For days, protesters have also picketed her home, shouted abuse at her children and trailed her by car in a menacing fashion, she said.Right-wing protesters rallying in Tel Aviv on Thursday against the formation of a new government. A sign reads: “Don’t give your hand to a left-wing government.”Sebastian Scheiner/Associated PressOn a personal level, it would be easier to pull out of the coalition, Ms. Silman said. But she felt it was patriotic to remain within it.“I’m sure that we are doing something that is very important for our country,” she said.The level of aggression directed at Ms. Silman and her allies on the right highlighted how Mr. Netanyahu has very much not given up hope of remaining in office, and could still ward off this challenge to his leadership.Part of the anger is organic. But part of it has been encouraged by Mr. Netanyahu and members of the Likud party themselves. On Thursday, Likud tweeted the home address of Ayelet Shaked, a leading member of Mr. Bennett’s party, Yamina, and encouraged its supporters to protest outside.Likud members themselves acknowledge that the aim is to persuade enough members of the coalition to abandon it before the confidence vote in Parliament.“Behind the scenes,” said a senior Likud official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, “the Likud party is ramping up the pressure, particularly on the weakest links.”The pressure was already taking hold on Thursday, as an official from the Yamina party said that one of its seven lawmakers, Nir Orbach, had asked for his signature to be removed from the list of those seeking to replace the speaker of Parliament, a Likud member, with a member of the new coalition. That decision could allow the speaker, Yariv Levin, to remain in his position, which will allow Likud to control parliamentary proceedings throughout the crucial next week, and potentially delay the confidence vote on the new government until Monday, June 14.Once the opposition’s full agreements are disclosed publicly, Likud will also create another obstacle by subjecting them to legal scrutiny and potentially to legal challenge, said Miki Zohar, chairman of the Likud parliamentary faction.Yariv Levin, Israel’s parliament speaker, remains in office for now.Pool photo by Alex KolomoiskyFew in the hard-right might have countenanced working with leftist, centrist and Islamist lawmakers without the diplomacy of Mr. Lapid, the linchpin of the coalition negotiations.While Mr. Bennett will be the formal leader of the coalition, it could not have been formed without Mr. Lapid, who has spent months cajoling its various incompatible components toward an alliance..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}To secure Mr. Bennett’s involvement, Mr. Lapid even gave him first go at the premiership, even though Mr. Lapid’s party won 10 more seats than Mr. Bennett’s.“Lapid gets the most credit here out of everyone,” said Mitchell Barak, a political analyst and pollster. “He’s really pulling all the strings here, and he’s the one who’s compromised, personally, many times.”But for some, the real architect of Mr. Netanyahu’s potential downfall is Mr. Netanyahu himself.Three of the eight parties in the new coalition are led by hard-right lawmakers who were once key allies of the prime minister. Two of them — Mr. Bennett and Avigdor Liberman — were even chiefs of staff to Mr. Netanyahu.A third, Gideon Saar, is a former senior Likud member who left the party following prolonged disagreements with Mr. Netanyahu last year. Mr. Saar took with him a small but pivotal number of Likud voters — winning just six seats in the recent election, but enough to prevent Mr. Netanyahu’s bloc from winning a majority.Mr. Bennett and Mr. Liberman fell out with Mr. Netanyahu for personal reasons, but Mr. Saar left in protest at the prime minister’s refusal to step down despite standing trial on corruption charges.“If you look at Netanyahu’s greatest nemeses in this whole thing, they are people that worked for him,” one former aide said.Alex Wong/Getty Images“If you look at Netanyahu’s greatest nemeses in this whole thing, they are people that worked for him,” said Mr. Barak, himself a former aide to Mr. Netanyahu who parted ways in the 1990s. “It’s not just the public who are tired,” he said. “It’s people that worked for him who are tired.”And it was Mr. Netanyahu who made other political factions feel it was acceptable to work with Arab politicians like Mansour Abbas, the Islamist leader, without whom the coalition could not have been formed.For years, parties run by Palestinian citizens of Israel, and their constituents, were seen as unworthy and untrustworthy partners by the Jewish political establishment.In 2015, Mr. Netanyahu cited the threat of relatively high Arab turnout to scare his base into voting. And in 2020, he goaded a centrist rival, Benny Gantz, into refusing to form a government based on the support of Arab parties, painting them as extremists.But desperate for votes during the election campaign in March, Mr. Netanyahu changed course, vigorously campaigning in Arab towns.That has given hard-right politicians like Mr. Bennett, who never previously considered allying with Arab lawmakers, the political cover to join forces with them, said Ofer Zalzberg, director of the Middle East Program at the Herbert C. Kelman Institute, a Jerusalem-based research group.“A certain taboo is broken” that will have long-term consequences, Mr. Zalzberg said. “It will be very difficult to backpedal from that. And it opens the door for new scenarios of Israeli coalition building in the future.”Irit Pazner Garshowitz and Isabel Kershner contributed reporting. More