More stories

  • in

    Fact-Checking the Biden-Trump ‘Suckers and Losers’ Quote

    — President BidenThis needs context.The quotes “losers” and “suckers” originate from an article published in The Atlantic in 2020 about former President Donald J. Trump’s relationship to the military. He continues to dispute the reports.The article relied on anonymous sources, but many of the accounts have been corroborated by news outlets, including The New York Times, and by John F. Kelly, a retired four-star Marine general who was Mr. Trump’s White House chief of staff. Mr. Trump has emphatically denied making the remarks since the Atlantic article was published.Here is a breakdown of the quotations. More

  • in

    Biden Campaign Takes Aim at Project 2025, a Set of Conservative Proposals

    Hours before the presidential debate on Thursday, President Biden’s campaign launched a website targeting Project 2025, a policy and staffing playbook assembled by allies of former President Donald J. Trump that proposes an overhaul of the government under a new Republican administration.The Biden campaign’s website associates Project 2025 — a transition agenda compiled by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, and dozens of similarly aligned groups — with Mr. Trump, saying it would enable him to “gut democratic checks and balances, and consolidate power in the Oval Office.”Project 2025 is not Mr. Trump’s official platform; his campaign instead points to Agenda47, which focuses on substantially curtailing immigration and encouraging economic growth. But Project 2025 has nonetheless raised Democratic fears about what a second Trump term would look like.Conservative policy groups in 2016 were largely unprepared for Mr. Trump’s win. Since its announcement in 2022, these groups prepared Project 2025, a 920-page document outlining a radical transformation of the executive branch. The platform proposes replacing many federal civil servant jobs with political appointees who would be loyal to the president. The plan also proposes a cracking down on abortion rights, criminalizing pornography, cutting climate research funding and eliminating the Commerce Department.Detailed policy proposals rarely attract much attention, but Project 2025 has resonated in liberal social media circles. John Oliver released a “Last Week Tonight” segment on Project 2025 last week, which has more than five million views on YouTube. Charlamagne tha God, a podcaster, has told his fans that the platform would enshrine an “authoritarian state” in America. Excerpts from Project 2025 have also gone viral on TikTok.Sarafina Chitika, a spokesperson for the Biden-Harris campaign, said that Project 2025 underscored the stakes of the 2024 election.“The American people are tuning in to just how extreme and unpopular Donald Trump’s second-term playbook is — and they’re ready to stop him this November,” Ms. Chitika said in a statement.It remains to be seen if Mr. Biden will make Project 2025 a focus of his comments at the debate tonight. More

  • in

    Hillary Clinton: He debatido con Trump y con Biden. Esto es lo que creo que veremos

    Debatir con el expresidente es como hacer malabarismo con disparates, divagaciones y fanfarroneríasLa semana pasada la pasé increíble en los premios Tony cuando presenté una canción de Suffs, el musical de Broadway que coproduje sobre las sufragistas que lograron que las mujeres tuviéramos derecho a votar. Me sentí emocionada cuando nuestra obra ganó los premios a la mejor partitura original y al mejor libreto.Desde Suffs hasta Hamilton, el teatro político me fascina. Pero no al revés. Con demasiada frecuencia analizamos momentos clave como el debate de esta semana entre el presidente Biden y Donald Trump como si fuéramos críticos de teatro. Pero elegiremos a un presidente; no al mejor actor.Yo soy la única persona que ha debatido con ambos (con Trump en 2016; con Biden en las primarias presidenciales demócratas de 2008). Conozco la insoportable presión que supone subir a ese escenario, y sé que, con Trump en la ecuación, es casi imposible centrarse en lo importante. En nuestros tres debates de 2016, dio rienda suelta a un torbellino de interrupciones, insultos y mentiras que abrumó a los moderadores y perjudicó a los millones de votantes que querían conocer nuestras visiones para el país (tan solo nuestro primer debate tuvo la cifra récord de 84 millones de espectadores).Tratar de refutar los argumentos de Trump como si se tratara de un debate normal es una pérdida de tiempo. Incluso descifrar sus argumentos es casi imposible. Comienza por decir disparates; luego divaga. Esto no ha hecho sino empeorar en los años que han pasado desde que debatimos. No me sorprendió enterarme de que, tras una reunión reciente, varios directores ejecutivos comentaran que Trump, en palabras de uno de los periodistas, “no podía seguir el hilo de la conversación” y “hablaba de todo y de nada”. Por otro lado, las expectativas puestas en él son tan bajas que si el jueves por la noche no se prende fuego –literalmente– habrá quienes digan que estuvo muy presidencial.Puede que Trump despotrique en parte para evitar dar respuestas directas sobre sus posturas impopulares, como las restricciones al aborto, las exenciones fiscales a los multimillonarios y la venta de nuestro planeta a las grandes petroleras a cambio de donaciones de campaña. Interrumpe y acosa (en cierto momento incluso me persiguió por el escenario) porque quiere parecer dominante y desequilibrar a su oponente.Estas estratagemas fracasarán si Biden es tan directo y contundente como lo fue cuando enfrentó a los republicanos que lo abuchearon durante su discurso sobre el Estado de la Unión en marzo. El presidente, además, tiene los hechos y la verdad de su parte. Él encabezó la recuperación de Estados Unidos tras una crisis sanitaria y económica histórica, con más de 15 millones de empleos creados hasta la fecha, aumentó los ingresos de las familias trabajadoras, frenó la inflación y elevó las inversiones en energías limpias y fabricación avanzada. Si logra transmitir todo eso, él ganará.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? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    President Biden and Donald Trump, Some Tough Questions for Each of You

    The stakes in this year’s presidential election are the greatest in my lifetime. So as a way to frame the choice before voters, I offer these foreign policy questions for President Biden and Donald Trump in the debate on Thursday:President Biden, for months you called on Israel to refrain from invading Rafah and to allow more food into Gaza. Yet Israel did invade Rafah, and half a million Gazans are reported starving. Haven’t you been ignored? And isn’t that because of your tendency to overestimate how much you can charm people — Senate Republicans, Xi Jinping, Benjamin Netanyahu — to cooperate with you? When will you move beyond charm and use serious leverage to try to achieve peace in the Middle East?Mr. Trump, the Abraham Accords you achieved among Israel and several Arab countries were a legitimate foreign policy success, but you largely bypassed Palestinians. Perhaps as a result, those accords may have been a reason Hamas undertook its terror attack on Israel on Oct. 7, to prevent Saudi Arabia from joining and recognizing Israel. So did the Abraham Accords bring peace or sow the seeds of war? Isn’t it a mistake to ignore Palestinians and to give Israel what it wants, such as moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, without getting anything in return?President Biden, you have been pushing a plan for Gaza that involves a cease-fire and a three-way deal with Saudi Arabia, America and Israel ending in a path to Palestinian statehood. Maybe it’ll come together, but if not, what’s your Plan B? If this war drags on, or expands to include Lebanon and perhaps Iran, how do you propose to deal with the Middle East more effectively than you’ve dealt with it so far?Mr. Trump, you’ve suggested that Israel is taking too long to finish the war in Gaza. So what precisely are you advocating? Are you saying that Israel should use more 2,000-pound bombs to level even more of Gaza and kill many more civilians? Or are you saying that Israel should cut a deal that leaves Hamas in place and then pull out?President Biden, Iran has enriched uranium to close to bomb-grade levels. In days or weeks, it could probably produce enough fuel for three nuclear weapons (though mastering a delivery system would take longer). Can we live with an Iran that is a quasi-nuclear power? What is the alternative?Mr. Trump, the reason Iran is so close to having nuclear weapons is that you pulled out of the international nuclear deal in 2018, leading Iran to greatly accelerate its nuclear program. Since you created this dangerous situation, how do you suggest we get out of it? If you are president again, do you contemplate solving this problem through a war with Iran — one that might now involve nuclear weapons? Or will you accept a nuclear Iran as the consequence of your historic mistake?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? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Here’s the Biden-Trump Debate We Want on Thursday

    I asked what you want moderators to ask Biden and Trump at the debate. You had many thoughts.Tomorrow night, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash of CNN have a big job: asking two unpopular men who have been president what they would do with a second term.The stakes could not be higher. President Biden and former President Donald Trump have starkly different visions for the presidency and the future of the country. This will be their first meeting since 2020, and they don’t have another planned until September.I don’t know if we’ll get the debate we want, or just the debate we deserve, but I do know that the questions Tapper and Bash choose to ask really matter. So we at On Politics would humbly and helpfully like to offer some ideas. Your ideas.Last week, I asked readers to tell me the questions you hope to hear at the debate, and I received hundreds of insightful and occasionally trollish responses. It’s clear you are hungry for a debate about issues that aren’t getting a lot of attention on the campaign trail. You’re also looking for Biden and Trump to convince you why, in their second go-round, you should get excited about them. And you want both of them to address their own ages, and not just each other’s.Below, I’ve laid out some of the questions that stood out to me most, with some small edits for clarity and style. Hope you’re reading, Jake and Dana. No need to thank us!Pressing two presidentsThe 2024 election is a contest between two men who have a cold, hard record of being president, which many of you hope the moderators will dig into. James Hall, an independent voter from Colorado, offered a question I liked for its directness.What have you done that makes you think you deserve to be the president of the United States again?Anne McKelvey, a lifelong Pennsylvanian, wants to know about both men’s regrets.What do you feel was your biggest mistake during your presidency?Trump and the future of democracyMany of you want the stakes for democracy to be clearly spelled out onstage — especially when it comes to Trump’s plans for a second term. You want him to be asked directly about his promise to be a “dictator” on Day 1, and about my colleagues’ reporting that he plans to use the government to seek revenge on his political opponents.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? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    What Happens to Biden’s Student Loan Repayment Plan After Court Rulings?

    More than eight million borrowers are enrolled in the income-driven plan known as SAVE. The Education Department is assessing the rulings.President Biden’s new student loan repayment plan was hobbled on Monday after two federal judges in Kansas and Missouri issued separate rulings that temporarily blocked some of the plan’s benefits, leaving questions about its fate.The preliminary injunctions, which suspend parts of the program known as SAVE, leave millions of borrowers in limbo until lawsuits filed by two groups of Republican-led states challenging the legality of the plan are decided.That means the Biden administration cannot reduce borrowers’ monthly bills by as much as half starting July 1, as had been scheduled, and it must pause debt forgiveness to SAVE enrollees. The administration has canceled $5.5 billion in debt for more than 414,000 borrowers through the plan, which opened in August.If you’re among the eight million borrowers making payments through SAVE — the Saving on a Valuable Education plan — you probably have many questions. Here’s what we know so far, though the Education Department has yet to release its official guidance.Let’s back up for a minute. What does SAVE do?Like the income-driven repayment plans that came before it, the SAVE program ties borrowers’ monthly payments to their income and household size. After payments are made for a certain period of years, generally 20 or 25, any remaining debt is canceled. But the SAVE plan — which replaced the Revised Pay as You Earn program, or REPAYE — is more generous than its predecessor plans in several ways.Ask us your questions about the SAVE student loan repayment plan.

    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? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Cómo ver el debate presidencial Biden-Trump

    El debate será transmitido desde Atlanta a partir de las 9 p. m. hora del Este el jueves.El momento se ha estado gestando durante cuatro años: el presidente Joe Biden y el expresidente Donald Trump en el escenario de un debate, otro punto álgido de sus largas hostilidades.El debate, organizado por CNN en sus estudios de Atlanta a partir de las 9 p. m., hora del Este, se llevará a cabo sin público y antes de que Trump y Biden acepten formalmente las candidaturas de sus partidos este verano, en un cambio radical respecto al pasado.¿Dónde puedo verlo?The New York Times retransmitirá el debate con comentarios y análisis en tiempo real de los periodistas.CNN emitirá el debate en todas sus plataformas, incluido su principal canal por cable, así como CNN International, CNN en Español y CNN Max. La cadena también tiene previsto retransmitir el debate en CNN.com. No será necesario iniciar sesión ni estar suscrito para ver la transmisión.CNN también compartirá su señal con otras cadenas de televisión y de noticias por cable para que puedan emitir el debate simultáneamente. Eso significa que también podrás verlo en Fox News, ABC News y probablemente en otros sitios.¿Robert F. Kennedy Jr. estará en el escenario?No. No cumplió los requisitos de CNN, lo que significa que Ross Perot sigue siendo el último candidato independiente que se ha clasificado para un debate presidencial de elecciones generales, y eso fue en 1992. Para este debate, los participantes tenían que recibir al menos un 15 por ciento de apoyo en cuatro encuestas nacionales aprobadas y clasificarse para la votación en suficientes estados para tener la oportunidad de obtener los 270 votos electorales necesarios para ganar la presidencia.¿Quién moderará el debate?Los moderadores serán Jake Tapper y Dana Bash, quienes son presentadores fijos en la mesa de CNN y los anfitriones del programa dominical de entrevistas políticas de la cadena, State of the Union. Tapper es el corresponsal jefe de CNN en Washington y Bash es jefa de la corresponsalía política de la cadena.Neil Vigdor cubre temas políticos para el Times, y se enfoca en cuestiones relacionadas con el derecho al voto y la desinformación electoral. Más de Neil Vigdor More

  • in

    Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Biden Administration’s Contacts With Social Media Companies

    The case, one of several this term on how the First Amendment applies to technology platforms, was dismissed on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue.The Supreme Court handed the Biden administration a major practical victory on Wednesday, rejecting a challenge to its contacts with social media platforms to combat what administration officials said was misinformation.The court ruled that the states and users who had challenged the contacts had not suffered the sort of direct injury that gave them standing to sue.The decision, by a 6 to 3 vote, left fundamental legal questions for another day.“The plaintiffs, without any concrete link between their injuries and the defendants’ conduct, ask us to conduct a review of the yearslong communications between dozens of federal officials, across different agencies, with different social-media platforms, about different topics,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority. “This court’s standing doctrine prevents us from exercising such general legal oversight of the other branches of government.”Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch, dissented.“For months,” Justice Alito wrote, “high-ranking government officials placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to suppress Americans’ free speech. Because the court unjustifiably refuses to address this serious threat to the First Amendment, I respectfully dissent.”The case arose from a barrage of communications from administration officials urging platforms to take down posts on topics like the coronavirus vaccine and claims of election fraud. The attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, both Republicans, sued, saying that many of those contacts violated the First Amendment.Judge Terry A. Doughty of the Federal District Court for the Western District of Louisiana agreed, saying the lawsuit described what could be “the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history.”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? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More