More stories

  • in

    Should Merrick Garland Reveal More About the Mar-a-Lago Search?

    More from our inbox:Democrats’ TacticsThe Robot TherapistFamily PlanningFormer President Donald J. Trump could oppose the motion to release the warrant and inventory of items taken from his home, and some of his aides were said to be leaning toward doing so.Emil Lippe for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Attorney General Stays Quiet, as Critics Raise the Volume” (news article, Aug. 10):The Justice Department really needs to explain to the American people why the F.B.I. searched former President Donald Trump’s home, given the precedent-shattering nature of what happened. It should do so for three reasons.First, given that such an act has never occurred before in American history, the public deserves to know why a former president was sufficiently suspect that the F.B.I. felt it had no choice but to conduct a search of his living quarters.Second, the silence will be interpreted and misinterpreted on the basis of partisan biases. Already right-wing leaders have deemed this an act of war, while liberals perceive it as justified, given the president’s predilection to illegally hold onto classified materials. To correct misperceptions, the D.O.J. needs to explain its rationale.Third, there is precedent for this. In 2016, James Comey, then the F.B.I. director, sent a letter to Congress to explain why the bureau was investigating Anthony Weiner’s email messages, which bore on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.If a Justice Department official went public in a case like that, surely it should offer an explanation for a case this precedent-breaking and important.Richard M. PerloffClevelandThe writer is a professor of communication and political science at Cleveland State University.To the Editor:Like many other Americans, I’m curious to know more about the Justice Department’s investigation of Donald Trump. But I think Attorney General Merrick Garland is right to keep silent about the details at this point. Mr. Khardori cites “exceptions” to the prosecutorial rule about not commenting on ongoing investigations, but none of them apply particularly well here.We already know what it’s appropriate for us to know at this point, such as that the search of Mar-a-Lago had to have happened only after a federal judge agreed that evidence of a serious crime was likely to be found there.In due time, I suspect, we’ll know a lot more. For now, let’s be patient and let the Justice Department do its job. The list of reasons for it to avoid public comment at this stage is longer than the list of reasons for it to do the opposite.Jeff BurgerRidgewood, N.J.To the Editor:“He Wielded a Sword. Now He Claims a Shield” (news analysis, front page, Aug. 11) certainly gets it right when it notes that the current outrage of the former president and his supporters over the F.B.I.’s execution of a search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago estate brings up echoes of his past behavior.After all, for Donald Trump, if he loses an election, someone else rigged it.If the U.S. Capitol is attacked, someone else incited it.Taking the Fifth Amendment is bad, as long as someone else does it.And, now, if the F.B.I. finds incriminating evidence at Mar-a-Lago, someone else planted it.So, as Donald Trump sees it, life is simply never, ever having to say you’re sorry.Chuck CutoloWestbury, N.Y.To the Editor:Representative Kevin McCarthy has said that should the Republicans take over the House in January, the Democrats should be prepared for a slew of investigations of just about everything and everyone including Hunter Biden (does anyone care?), Attorney General Merrick Garland and, most recently, the F.B.I.Such a threat is understandable, and Mr. Garland and the Democrats should be prepared to, quoting Mr. McCarthy, “preserve your documents and clear your calendar.”They should also be prepared to ignore invitations to testify, ignore subpoenas, claim victimhood, scream harassment, and overall thank the current cohort of Republicans for having created the template for avoidance, misdirection and dishonesty that have made a travesty of justice.David I. SommersKensington, Md.To the Editor:Donald Trump himself could not have better timed the raid on Mar-a-Lago. The Senate just passed a historic bill to save the environment, reduce inflation and get the wealthy to pay their fair share of taxes. And all we hear about is … Donald Trump.Let’s hear about the good that the Biden administration is doing. That is the news the country needs to focus on. Let’s stop giving Donald Trump the spotlight.Laurel DurstChilmark, Mass.Democrats’ Tactics Ben KotheTo the Editor:Re “Why Are Democrats Helping the Far Right?,” by Brian Beutler (Sunday Opinion, July 24):I am not as sanguine as Mr. Beutler that all will be well if Democrats fight “from the high grounds of truth, ethics and fair play.” As the old saw says, “All politics is local.”Many issues facing voters such as inflation, Covid policies, abortion and gun control are largely out of direct control of the president, but false or misdirected blame will resonate locally when tagged to the Democrats or President Biden.Sadly, I don’t trust the electorate in general to recognize abstract ideas about threats to democracy and mortal dangers to our nation, when a costly gallon of gas is made out to be the Democrats’ fault. I hope I’m wrong.Gene ResnickNew YorkThe Robot TherapistDesdemona, a robot who performs in a band (but is probably not aware of that fact).Ian Allen for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “A.I. Does Not Have Thoughts, No Matter What You Think” (Sunday Business, Aug. 7):In the mid-1980s, my daughters and I loved talking with the therapy chatbot Eliza on our Commodore 64. She often seemed to respond with understanding and compassion, and at times she got it hilariously wrong.We knew that Eliza was not a therapist, or even a human, but I see now that “she” was programmed to do something many humans have not mastered: to actively listen and reflect on what she heard so that the human in the conversation could dig deep and find his or her own answers. In the healing circles I’ve facilitated for women, we call that holding space.We would all do well to learn Eliza’s simple skills.This blackout poem that I created from the accompanying article, “A Conversation With Eliza,” encapsulates the process of digging deep, whether with a chatbot or a human:“Eliza”I thinkI am depressed.I needmy mother.Mary SchanuelWentzville, Mo.Family Planning Lauren DeCicca for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Promoting Condom Use in Thailand With Spectacle and Humor” (The Saturday Profile, Aug. 6):Many thanks for your piece about Mechai Viravaidya, Thailand’s “Captain Condom.” Mr. Mechai saw that there was an urgent population growth problem in Thailand, causing suffering for people and harm to the environment, and set about to solve it with humor, creativity and persistence.His vision of voluntary, free family planning as a powerful tool to advance gender equity, protect the environment and improve human well-being is one that we at Population Balance wish more world leaders would embrace. We hope that his story will inspire others to make family planning accessible and affordable to all, and to embrace condoms as a ticket to love with responsibility, freedom and joy.Kirsten StadeSilver Spring, Md.The writer is communications manager for Population Balance. More

  • in

    Rishi Sunak Has a Sterling Résumé. It’s Not Helping Him Replace Boris Johnson.

    Mr. Sunak is viewed by many in his party as too distant from ordinary Britons, and is being blamed by some for setting off the rebellion that toppled Prime Minister Boris Johnson.CARDIFF, Wales — Just a few weeks ago Rishi Sunak, the former chancellor of the Exchequer, seemed well-placed to become Britain’s next prime minister, topping the short list of two contenders selected by Conservative Party lawmakers to replace the departing Boris Johnson.With an impeccable résumé, a reputation for competence and a reservoir of good will from having guided Britain’s economy through the pandemic, Mr. Sunak was regarded as perhaps the country’s brainiest, most polished and most successful frontline politician.But some of those same qualities now seem to be working against him. That resistance has hindered his pursuit of 10 Downing Street, according to opinion polls that show him trailing the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, in the race to succeed Mr. Johnson, with the winner to be announced on Sept. 5.Mr. Sunak’s diminished fortunes have added urgency to his campaign as he faces off with Ms. Truss in a series of debates across Britain. At an event in Cardiff, he bounded onto the stage with a broad smile and pleaded for votes from hundreds of activists in his party who will be among those who decide the outcome of the contest.“I will give you my everything, my heart and my soul — everything I’ve got,” he said, turning to face different parts of the hall and promising to make his audience “feel enormously proud of the Conservative government that I will be privileged to lead.”Mr. Sunak’s diminished fortunes have added urgency to his campaign as he faces off with Foreign Secretary Liz Truss in a series of debates across Britain.Henry Nicholls/Agence France-Presse, via Pool/AFP, via Getty ImagesMr. Sunak, 42, received warm applause, and outside the hall, Paul Fisher, an accountant from Blackwood, said he was likely to vote for the former chancellor because “economically, he seems like the safer pair of hands.” But even he added that Mr. Sunak “does come across as a bit too polished.”Mr. Johnson’s departure from Downing Street after a series of scandals has left the ultimate decision on his successor in the hands of around 160,000 Conservative Party members, a small “selectorate” that, by definition, is more right-wing than the general population but also whiter, older and more male.Many remain loyal to Mr. Johnson, and that has also created a problem for Mr. Sunak: He has been accused of treachery by some Conservative Party members because his cabinet resignation last month helped set off the rebellion against the prime minister.A politician unaccustomed to failure, Mr. Sunak, was until recently the undisputed rising star of British politics after a meteoric ascent that took him from newbie lawmaker to chancellor of the Exchequer in less than five years.Mr. Sunak, center, is being hurt by the sense that he helped set off the rebellion against Boris Johnson, which some Conservatives view as a betrayal. Toby Melville/Press Association, via Associated PressHe is also a walking success story of multiracial Britain, having been born in Southampton, on the south coast, to parents of Indian heritage who settled in the country six decades ago. If he wins the election, Mr. Sunak would become Britain’s first prime minister of color.Mr. Sunak’s father was a family doctor, his mother ran a pharmacy, and they saved money to send him to Winchester College, one of Britain’s most elite and academically rigorous fee-paying schools.He graduated with a top degree from Oxford University and then attended Stanford University, where he met his future wife, Akshata Murty, the daughter of an Indian technology billionaire.Mr. Sunak made his own fortune in finance, including a spell at Goldman Sachs, and entered Parliament in 2015, becoming chancellor of the Exchequer in 2020 at age 39. His popularity surged during the pandemic when the Treasury dispensed billions to save jobs and support struggling Britons.But setbacks followed with revelations early this year that Ms. Murty had limited her tax exposure in Britain; after the furor, and days of negative headlines, she volunteered to pay the extra tax. Mr. Sunak was also criticized when it emerged that he had retained a U.S. green card, which would allow him to live permanently in the United States. He gave it up before making his first visit to the country as chancellor last October.And while his top-notch résumé might be a dream for recruiters, it seems less popular with Conservative Party members drawn from provincial Britain.With homes in London, in his parliamentary constituency in Yorkshire and in Santa Monica, Calif., Mr. Sunak looks like a prosperous international jet-setter, because that’s what he is.“He is, in the end, perhaps just too shiny for the party membership,” said Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London. He added that with inflation soaring, interest rates rising and recession looming, Conservatives may think it is hard for someone of such affluence to appreciate the problems confronting ordinary Britons.Mr. Sunak’s enemies leaped on reports that he had worn a suit that cost 3,500 pounds and that he had worn a pair of £490 Prada loafers on a visit to a construction site.Lee Smith/Reuters“They do live in the real world,” Professor Bale said of party members, “and I think, in some ways, there was always a degree of suspicion that Rishi Sunak simply doesn’t.”Earlier this year, a photo opportunity went awry when Mr. Sunak seemed unsure how to pay at a gas station. More recently, Mr. Sunak’s enemies leaped on reports that he had worn a suit that cost 3,500 pounds, or about $4,300, and that he had worn a pair of £490 Prada loafers on a visit to a construction site. Even his slogan, Ready for Rishi, to some sounds a little entitled.Asked whether he is too prosperous to understand the predicament of ordinary Britons, Mr. Sunak said on Tuesday that he was fortunate to be in his current situation but that he hadn’t been “born like this.” He added: “I think in our country, we judge people not by their bank account; we judge them by their character and their actions.”Speculation that Mr. Sunak’s campaign might have suffered from racism has surfaced, but only rarely. Professor Bale, an expert on the Conservative Party leadership, said that “if it had been a very close race, we would have had to ask whether racism played a part, but given the gap” between Mr. Sunak and Ms. Truss, “it strikes me that it probably hasn’t.”Much more blame has been pointed at a campaign that has not been sure-footed. It began presenting him as the grown-up politician, stressing his fiscal conservatism and his determination to tackle inflation before cutting taxes.But with Ms. Truss’s promises to make quick reductions in taxes, Mr. Sunak has retreated, pledging that he would temporarily suspend the value-added tax, a sales tax, on energy bills — something that he not long ago rejected.“What she’s done, incredibly successfully, is drag him onto her turf,” said Jill Rutter, a former civil servant and a senior fellow at the Institute for Government, a London-based research group, referring to the debate on taxation.Mr. Sunak with his wife, Akshata Murty, second from right, and their daughters. He graduated with a top degree from Oxford University and then attended Stanford University.Peter Nicholls/ReutersAs the contest between the two candidates has become increasingly bitter, Mr. Sunak told the BBC on Wednesday that he would rather lose than “win on a false promise” and would tell people what “they needed to hear” rather than what was easy and expedient.Then there is the role Mr. Sunak played in the ouster of Mr. Johnson by resigning from the cabinet. In fact, all of Mr. Johnson’s would-be successors had positioned themselves for potential bids for months, including Ms. Truss, who wooed fellow lawmakers with drink invitations nicknamed “fizz with Liz.”But she remained in the cabinet to the bitter end, stayed publicly loyal and is benefiting now from a sense among some that Mr. Johnson was betrayed and that Mr. Sunak led the way.“There’s perhaps a feeling of guilt about the defenestration of Boris Johnson which, in some ways, she helps to assuage,” Professor Bale said.In Cardiff, Patricia Johnson, a retired market researcher from Caerphilly, Wales, said she was one of those who think that Mr. Sunak “is not as trustworthy as I would like” and added, “I don’t like the idea that Boris was hoisted from the position that the country put him in.”As for Mr. Sunak’s ability to tackle the problems confronting ordinary Britons, Ms. Johnson was less than convinced. Things, she said, probably look a little different “if you don’t have to worry where the next £3 million is coming from.” More

  • in

    Rethinking Joe Manchin

    Now that Joe Manchin has saved the Democratic agenda, how should liberals think about him?Joe Manchin has spent much of the past year as the villain of liberal America, receiving the kind of criticism that’s usually reserved for Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell or a conservative Supreme Court justice.Activists aggressively protested against Manchin, some in kayaks outside his houseboat in Washington, others surrounding his car and chanting a vulgarity at him. One Democratic House member called him “anti-Black, anti-child, anti-woman and anti-immigrant,” while others called him untrustworthy. Bernie Sanders accused Manchin of “intentionally sabotaging the president’s agenda” and suggested that Manchin’s wealthy donors were the reason. Other critics called him a shill for the energy industry, noting that he personally owns a coal company.And then Manchin made it possible for the Senate to pass the most aggressive climate bill in American history.That bill seems likely to accomplish almost as much greenhouse-gas reduction as President Biden’s original proposal would have. As Paul Krugman, the Times columnist, has written, “Actual experts on energy and the environment are giddy over what has been accomplished.” Tomorrow, the House is expected to pass the same bill — which will also reduce inequities in health care access — and Biden plans to sign it soon afterward.In today’s newsletter, I want to reconsider Manchin’s place in American politics given his ultimate support for the Senate bill. What were his critics right about? What were they wrong about? And what are the larger political lessons?M.V.D.The simplest fact about Manchin is that he is the most electorally successful member of Congress: Nobody else has won a seat as difficult as his.Trump won West Virginia by 39 percentage points in 2020, more than any in other state except Wyoming. Yet Manchin has repeatedly won statewide elections in West Virginia as a Democrat. This chart highlights Manchin’s uniqueness:Senator Party Affiliations More

  • in

    In Kenya’s Elections, Young Voters Aren’t Turning Out, and Who Can Blame Them?

    NAIROBI, Kenya — It was a sight to behold. Scores of young people, excited and expectant, gathered in Nairobi, chanting slogans and waving banners. But it was no entertainment: They were there for a campaign rally. In the months leading up to Kenya’s elections on Tuesday, the scene was repeated across the country. Here, it seemed, were the future custodians of the country taking a lively interest in the political process.But appearances can be deceptive. Some, it turned out, attended only on the promise of payment; others were paid to gather crowds from nearby. The actual enthusiasm of the country’s young, in contrast to the contrived air of engagement, is rather cooler. While those age 18 to 35 make up 75 percent of the population, only about 40 percent of people from that cohort have registered to vote.For some, this lackluster showing was evidence of worrisome apathy among the country’s youth. And sure enough, the early signs from Tuesday’s vote, where turnout across the board was low, at around 60 percent, suggest that the young stayed home in large numbers. But the charge of apathy misses the point. For many young Kenyans, refusing to vote is not a result of disinterest or indifference or even ignorance. It is instead — as Mumbi Kanyago, a 26-year-old communications consultant, told me — a “political choice.”You can see why. The two leading candidates in Kenya’s election, William Ruto and Raila Odinga, who are neck and neck in the early count, are both established members of the political class. They sit at the apex of a system that has failed to counter endemic youth unemployment, skyrocketing debt and a rising cost of living. In the eyes of many young people, expecting change from such stalwarts of the status quo is a fool’s errand. If the choice is a false one, they reason, better to refuse it altogether than collude in a fiction.On the surface, the two candidates seem pretty different. Mr. Ruto has branded himself a “hustler,” sharing stories about how he sold chicken by the roadside before his rise through the ranks to businessman and political leader — a back story that has earned him support from members of the working class, despite allegations of corruption. Mr. Odinga, by contrast, is political royalty. This is his fifth attempt to win the presidency, and his years of experience and exposure have earned him a kind of star power few can match.But the differences obscure the underlying similarities. Mr. Ruto, the newer candidate, has been deputy president for nearly a decade. Mr. Odinga is not only the country’s most famous opposition leader but has also been backed by the current president. Both candidates profess — often when animatedly addressing crowds — to care deeply about the electorate and its troubles. Yet in the eyes of many young voters, both belong to the same flawed system. They have no faith that either could seriously change things for the better.With good reason. In the dozens of conversations I had with young Kenyans, one refrain kept coming up: Politicians are out for themselves, not the country. In their view, self-interest and financial advancement are why politicians seek office. There’s something to it, certainly. The country regularly ranks poorly in corruption scores, and the two leading parties have members accused of graft and corruption in their ranks. The candidates like to talk about tackling corruption: Mr. Ruto has said he would deal with the problem “firmly and decisively,” and Mr. Odinga has branded corruption one of the “four enemies” of the country. But given their tolerance of dubious behavior, these promises fall flat.Kenya can ill afford such self-serving leadership. Parts of the country are experiencing what the United Nations has described as “the worst drought in 40 years” in the Horn of Africa, with some 4.1 million people in Kenya suffering from severe food insecurity. The cost of food and fuel, thanks to the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, has risen sharply. If that were not bad enough, the country — in part because of the government’s borrowing spree over the past decade — is heavily laden with debt, and inflation is at a five-year high. But in response to this troubling situation, the candidates have offered little more than bickering and bragging.In the absence of substantial policy, there could at least be symbolic representation of the young. But there too things are lacking. In 2017, Kenyans age 18 to 34 made up roughly 24 percent of all candidates. Less than a tenth of them won office, under 3 percent of the total. With such a tiny number of young people making the cut in electoral politics, who could blame the young, without representation or recourse to a more responsive state, for turning away?Still, young people in the country have found other ways to engage in political work — in community projects, mutual aid programs and social centers. One example is the Mathare Social Justice Center in Nairobi, which aims to promote social justice for the community living in Mathare, an area historically subject to police brutality, extrajudicial killings and land grabs.In this way, Kenyans are in step with other developments on the continent, where young people have sought alternative means to make their voices heard. For instance, young Sudanese have been bravely organizing and leading protests since October last year, demanding a return to civilian rule. In Nigeria, the young are at the forefront of a movement against police brutality that erupted with the enormous #EndSARS protests in 2020. And young people in Guinea played a huge part in the 2019-20 mass protests against the president’s attempt to run for a third term.Of course, the right to vote and participate in elections is a hard-won privilege, which many around the world are denied. But demanding that people vote, no matter how limited the candidates, is akin to exhorting people to joyously crown their oppressors. Citizens, after all, have the right to choose. And democracy does not begin and end at the ballot box.Samira Sawlani (@samirasawlani) is a freelance journalist and a columnist at The Continent.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: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Kenyans Await Results as Votes Are Counted in Presidential Race

    Conflicting estimates of which candidate was ahead suggested a very tight race. Official results are expected to take several days.NAIROBI, Kenya — Kenyans waited anxiously on Wednesday for the results of their presidential election, the most closely fought in years, amid conflicting estimates of which candidate was ahead.Unofficial tallies by several Kenyan news outlets put William Ruto, the country’s vice president, who campaigned as the champion of Kenya’s “hustlers” — struggling young people — at least three percentage points ahead of his rival, Raila Odinga.But at least one major news organization put Mr. Odinga, a former political detainee who later became prime minister and is making his fifth run for the presidency, ahead by a similar margin in the balloting held on Tuesday.The conflicting estimates, based on preliminary counts of fewer than half of all votes, only confirmed that the race to lead Kenya, an East African powerhouse struggling through a grinding economic crisis, was too close to call.A campaign billboard for Raila Odinga and his running mate, Martha Karua, in Nairobi on Wednesday.Tony Karumba/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe period between voting and results is especially delicate in Kenya, where it has been a focus of vote-rigging accusations. The last three presidential elections ended in chaos after Mr. Odinga, the losing candidate in each of those contests, claimed to have been cheated. In 2007, that dispute triggered widespread violence in which over 1,200 people were killed.By Wednesday evening, 24 hours after polls closed, the national election commission reported that 99 percent of results from all polling stations had been electronically submitted — and were publicly available on the commission’s website.But those results came in the form of about 45,000 images, all handwritten tally sheets, which greatly slowed the task of determining the overall result. On top of that, electoral officials said it could take several days more to declare a winner because they must verify every electronic image against its paper original — a process that had not even begun on Wednesday evening.However, there is likely to be at least an unofficial result by Thursday, when news organizations are expected to have completed their private tallies of the entire vote.Ordinary Kenyans, meanwhile, waited with bated breath.A member of the electoral commission with a ballot box, on Wednesday in Kiambu County, Kenya.Fredrik Lerneryd/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIn small towns throughout the southern part of the Rift Valley, where ethnic violence broke out after the 2007 election, markets and bus stops were nearly empty in anticipation of fresh trouble, and many businesses and restaurants were closed. Some people who had stayed behind said they had sent their families away to keep them safe and had remained behind to watch out for their properties. In Nakuru, the biggest city in the Rift Valley, motorcycle taxi drivers argued about who had won. In nearby Molo, young men clustered around a newspaper stand to scrutinize headlines about the race.And at her home outside Eldoret, Grace Nyambura flipped through the TV news stations and incessantly scrolled through her smartphone, checking for the latest indications of a result. She had sent her three children to stay in the city of Eldoret, fearing an outbreak of violence. “We cannot sleep,” said Ms. Nyambura, 36, who left her work tending a plot of avocados and maize plants to follow the news. “These results have taken over our lives,” she added. “We need to know how things will end.”Not everyone was so engaged. The head of the election commission, Wafula Chebukati, said turnout would exceed 65 percent — higher than the commission’s estimate of 60 percent on Tuesday, but still considerably below the 80 percent figure of the last election.Soaring food prices combined with disillusionment at the choice of candidates seem to have persuaded some Kenyans to stay at home. Although their images are strikingly different, Mr. Ruto, 55, and Mr. Odinga, 77, are both products of Kenya’s calcified political elite, which is notorious for its shifting alliances and endemic corruption.“I just feel like there’s no change,” said Florence Wangari, 30, an event planner in Nakuru who opted to catch up with some work on Tuesday, a public holiday, instead of “wasting time in line” to vote.Like others, Ms. Wangari pointed to the high unemployment rate and the government’s failure to deliver decent education and health care. It feels as if “there’s nothing that my vote is going to change,” she said.Even so, Mr. Ruto appeared to have broken through in some areas with his appeal to frustrated “hustlers,” a novelty in a country where political choices are often shaped by ethnic loyalties.Early results showed him polling strongly in the coastal region, where Mr. Odinga hoped to shore up his base, and, crucially, in Mount Kenya, the crucible of Kenyan politics.Using a projector to follow the counting of votes, on Wednesday in Nairobi.Thomas Mukoya/ReutersIn recent years, President Uhuru Kenyatta, who was barred by term limits from running again this year, had a falling-out with Mr. Ruto, his running mate in the last two elections, and forged an alliance with Mr. Odinga, his adversary in those contests.Mr. Odinga had been counting on that realignment to boost his support in the central Mount Kenya region, primary home of the Kikuyu ethnic group that includes Mr. Kenyatta and has dominated Kenyan politics for decades.But initial results showed Mr. Odinga polling disappointingly in that area — a blow to his electoral fortunes but also an implicit rejection of Mr. Kenyatta, whose extensive business interests in the area have become a source of popular resentment.As the unofficial counts progressed, prominent supporters in both camps claimed their candidate was emerging victorious. But others appealed to members of the public to band together and crowdsource a tallying effort — and help to figure out who their next president will be.Declan Walsh More

  • in

    Policing Divide Hurt Rep. Ilhan Omar, Who Edged Out a Narrow Primary Win

    Two years ago, Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota easily survived her Democratic primary by beating back a fellow progressive. Even though she had become a national lightning rod for attacks from the right and faced staunch opposition from pro-Israel groups that spent millions of dollars in hopes of defeating her, she won her 2020 race by more than 35,000 votes.But on Tuesday, Ms. Omar edged out only a narrow primary victory against a centrist Democrat, coming within 2,500 votes of losing her seat. “Tonight’s victory is a testament to how much our district believes in the collective values we are fighting for and how much they’re willing to do to help us overcome defeat,” Ms. Omar posted on Twitter. To her supporters and her critics, the tight race was a sign that her strong support of a progressive push to overhaul the Minneapolis Police Department had cost her votes. That push, which took the shape of a ballot measure last year, followed the 2020 killing of George Floyd in police custody in Minneapolis, which set off protests and nationwide calls for racial justice and police reform. More than two years later, the issue of policing and accountability continues to deeply divide Democrats.“Most voters, when they call 9-11, they want the police to come right away,” said Michael Meehan, a Democratic strategist, adding that Ms. Omar’s narrow win showed the “punitive power” of the backlash against calls to “defund the police” across the country.For many in Minneapolis, the clashes over policing between Ms. Omar and her main Democratic rival in the primary, Don Samuels, a former Minneapolis city councilman and school board member, were a continuation of last year’s battle over the ballot measure to replace the Minneapolis Police Department with a new Department of Public Safety.Ms. Omar supported the measure, which grew out of the outrage over Mr. Floyd’s murder, when Minneapolis became the center of a push to defund or abolish the police. But moderate Democrats, including Mayor Jacob Frey, called for improving the current department, as an increase in homicides sparked concern.In the end, Minneapolis voters struck the amendment down. Mr. Samuels, who campaigned to defeat the ballot measure and who had the backing of Mr. Frey in the primary, had criticized Ms. Omar for her support of the “defund police” movement. After he conceded his race, Mr. Samuels contended that his opponent was beatable. “If this was the general election, no doubt that we would have won this race,” he said.This time, pro-Israel groups declined to get involved. The political action committee affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee did not respond to requests for comment. They and other groups have opposed Ms. Omar in the past after she made comments about the influence of pro-Israel donors on lawmakers. Her fierce and persistent criticism of Israel has exposed broader tensions between younger Democrats who accuse the Jewish state of human rights abuses and older Democrats who stand behind it.On Wednesday, Ms. Omar’s progressive supporters were feeling relieved, yet also dispirited. “I feel like it shouldn’t have been that close,” said D.A. Bullock, a filmmaker and Minneapolis community activist who supported her campaign. “It was almost like trying to bring her to heel rather than push for better policy.”Sabrina Mauritz, a field director with TakeAction Minnesota, said Ms. Omar won despite the broader backlash because she has been an effective local leader. “The constant fear mongering — it is meant to scare people,” Ms. Mauritz said, referring to the attacks on Ms. Omar and efforts at police reform. More

  • in

    Your Thursday Briefing: Trump Declines to Answer Questions

    Plus new details about explosions in Crimea and revelations about the victims of Seoul’s floods.Good morning. We’re covering Donald Trump’s decision not to answer questions in a civil inquiry and details about the victims of Seoul’s floods.Donald Trump left Trump Tower in New York City yesterday. Brittainy Newman for The New York TimesTrump sidesteps legal questionsDonald Trump declined to answer questions in a civil inquiry into his company’s business practices yesterday, invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.He made the surprising gamble in a high-stakes legal interview with the New York attorney general’s office. His strategy is likely to determine the course of the investigation.Trump’s office released a statement shortly after the questioning began yesterday, explaining that he “declined to answer the questions under the rights and privileges afforded to every citizen under the United States Constitution.” Here are live updates.Background: Since March 2019, the New York attorney general’s office has investigated whether Trump and his company improperly inflated the value of his hotels, golf clubs and other assets. Context: In his statement yesterday, Trump cast the inquiry as part of a grander conspiracy against him. He linked it to the F.B.I. search at Mar-a-Lago, his home and private club in Palm Beach, Fla., on Monday. Analysis: His sidestep could help him in a parallel criminal inquiry into whether he fraudulently inflated valuations of his properties.Smoke rose after explosions were heard near a Russian military air base in Crimea on Tuesday.ReutersDetails emerge about Crimea blastThe damage at a Russian air base in Crimea appears to be worse than the Kremlin initially claimed.After a series of explosions on Tuesday, Crimea’s leader declared a state of emergency and said that more than 250 people had to evacuate from their homes. Officials on the Russian-occupied peninsula said at least one person was killed and dozens more were wounded.Ukraine has not officially taken responsibility for the explosions. But a senior military official said Ukraine’s special forces and partisan resistance fighters were behind the blast. Here are live updates.Our Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine WarOn the Ground: After a summer of few conclusive battles, Ukraine and Russia are now facing a quandary over how to concentrate their forces, leaving commanders guessing about each other’s next moves.Nuclear Shelter: The Russian military is using а nuclear power station in southern Ukraine as a fortress, stymying Ukrainian forces and unnerving locals, faced with intensifying fighting and the threat of a radiation leak.Ukrainians Abroad: Italy already had the biggest Ukrainian community in Western Europe before the war, but Russia’s invasion put a spotlight on the diaspora and forged a stronger sense of national identity.Prison Camp Explosion: After a blast at a Russian detention camp killed at least 50 Ukrainian prisoners of war, Ukrainian officials said that they were building a case of a war crime committed by Russian forces.Analysis: The blasts could be important, because any Ukrainian attack on Russian forces in the Crimean Peninsula would be a significant expansion of Ukraine’s offensive efforts. Until now, Ukraine has focused on pushing Russians back from territories occupied after the invasion began.Nuclear plant: Russian missiles killed 13 people near a Russian-held nuclear plant in the south, a Ukrainian official said. Russia may try to divert its electricity to Crimea, which could intensify military competition for the plant and heighten the risk of an accident.Press: Russian investigators detained a former state television journalist yesterday, months after she staged a rare on-air protest against the war in Ukraine.Rescue officials pumped water out of this home in Seoul to find a family of three dead inside.Woohae Cho for The New York TimesSouth Korea mourns flood victimsHeavy rains caused flooding in the Seoul area, which killed at least nine people. A family of three, who lived in a semi-underground room, are among the dead: a 13-year-old girl, her mother, 47, and her aunt, 48.Their deaths highlight the predicament of South Korea’s urban poor, who often live in such homes, called banjiha. (“Parasite,” which won the Academy Award for Best Film ​in 2020, dramatically depicted their flood hazard.)South Korea faces a growing housing crisis and hundreds of thousands of people in the Seoul area live in similar damp, musty quarters. They fear floods each monsoon season, but stay to find jobs, save money and educate their children in hopes of overcoming South Korea’s growing inequality.Details: The family knew the low-lying district was prone to flooding. But it was cheap and close to a welfare center where the girl’s aunt, who had Down syndrome, could get help.Quotable: “When I returned home from work, I found my banjiha under water,” one resident wrote on the web portal Naver. “It felt as if heaven had crashed down on me.”THE LATEST NEWSAsia and the PacificA U.S. Navy ship conducting a routine operation in the Taiwan Strait.U.S. Pacific Command, via Associated PressThe U.S. said it would continue operating in the Taiwan Strait in response to Chinese military drills that U.S. officials say are evolving into long-term military pressure on the island.Fumio Kishida, Japan’s leader, reshuffled his cabinet yesterday, The Associated Press reported. The move, which happened a month after the assassination of Shinzo Abe, was an effort to distance his government from the controversial Unification Church.New polling showed that New Zealand’s right-leaning coalition could have enough support to form a government, The Guardian reported. Jacinda Ardern’s popularity has plummeted.The U.S. returned 30 looted cultural artifacts to Cambodia this week.U.S. NewsU.S. stocks jumped yesterday, following news that inflation slowed in July. Here are live updates.The Justice Department charged a member of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard with plotting to kill John Bolton, a Trump-era national security adviser.An Afghan immigrant was charged in the shooting deaths of two fellow Muslims in Albuquerque.President Biden signed legislation to expand benefits for veterans who were exposed to toxic burn pits.World NewsAntony Blinken visited Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of Congo.Pool photo by Andrew HarnikAntony Blinken, the U.S. secretary of state, pushed the Democratic Republic of Congo to reconsider its plans to auction parts of its rainforest to oil and gas companies. The countries agreed to jointly examine the proposed extractions.The U.S. and Iran are considering the E.U.’s “final” offer to restore the 2015 nuclear deal, before talks collapse for good.Britain faces another heat wave.An Emirati court overturned the sentence of an American rights lawyer who worked with Jamal Khashoggi. He is expected to be released.What Else Is HappeningIn several poor countries, a U.N. agency has joined with oil companies to protect drilling sites from residents’ objections.Roughly 100 days before the World Cup starts, FIFA is seeking a schedule change to let Qatar, the host nation, play in the first match.A stranded beluga whale died in France after a last-ditch mission to rescue it from the Seine river.Astronomers think they have found our galaxy’s youngest planet: It may be just 1.5 million years old, so young that its building blocks of gas and dust are still coming together.Canadians are flocking to see Serena Williams play after she announced her upcoming retirement from tennis.A Morning ReadImee Marcos, a sister of the president of the Philippines, is the film’s executive producer.Jam Sta Rosa/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesFerdinand Marcos Jr. was elected president of the Philippines this year. Now, a new film paints a sympathetic portrait of his family. Instead of focusing on the torture, excess and martial law that characterized his father’s dictatorship, the film portrays the elder Marcos and his wife Imelda as victims of a political vendetta.In so doing, historians and artists say, the movie opens up a new front in the battle against misinformation in the Philippines, bringing a popular myth that circulated online during the recent election into a new, more credible domain.ARTS AND IDEASIn China’s Shandong Province, 558 memorial tablets at a Taoist temple were inscribed with the names and hometowns of people who died from Covid.Tingshu Wang/ReutersMourning Covid-19’s victimsThere have always been monuments to commemorate the loss of life from calamitous events: wars, genocides, terrorist attacks.But Covid-19 poses a unique challenge. Millions of people have died, but not in a singular event or in a single location. Now, as the death toll continues to rise, communities are building new monuments and updating existing memorials, trying to keep up with their mounting grief.“These are kind of odd memorials in that names are being added,” said Erika Doss, who studies how Americans use memorials. “They are kind of fluid. They are timeless.”PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookBryan Gardner for The New York TimesDrizzle seasoned drippings from this grilled chicken dish onto corn, tomatoes and red onions.What to Watch“Easter Sunday,” from the standup Jo Koy, is a charming Filipino American family comedy.TechnologyChange these default settings to make your devices more enjoyable to use.Now Time to PlayPlay today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: Deep purple fruit (four letters).Here are today’s Wordle and today’s Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you next time. — AmeliaP.S. “I let them talk”: Rick Rojas, a Times national correspondent, on how he covered the devastation of Kentucky’s floods.The latest episode of “The Daily” is about the F.B.I. search of Mar-a-Lago.You can reach Amelia and the team at briefing@nytimes.com. More

  • in

    Are Democrats Bungling Their Outreach to Voters?

    More from our inbox:Republican Outrage Over the Raid at Mar-a-Lago‘Willful Ignorance’ and the Alex Jones Case Seb AgrestiTo the Editor:Re “Fed Up With Democratic Emails? You’re Not the Only One,” by Lara Putnam and Micah L. Sifry (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, Aug. 1):The on-the-ground organizing the writers favor is admirable. But in deriding letters to voters, they are far off the mark. The science is clear: Large-scale randomized controlled trials over multiple election cycles have shown that Vote Forward’s partially handwritten letters significantly boost voter turnout.A peer-reviewed research study of our 2020 program “The Big Send” found that it was among the highest impact voter turnout programs ever measured in a presidential election. Vote Forward rigorously vets volunteers and encourages personal, heartfelt messages that reach beyond their bubbles — an authentic approach that works.Letter writing is a scalable, accessible activity doable year round from anywhere. It is an enjoyable entry point to electoral activism for many volunteers who later engage in deeper community organizing. And letters can be stockpiled to send at the optimal time, leaving space for other voter contact activities like canvassing and phone banking.Letters to voters are the kind of thoughtful, sustainable approach to volunteer engagement in elections that should be encouraged if we hope to build a strong civic fabric.Scott FormanOakland, Calif.The writer is the founder and executive director of Vote Forward, a nonprofit that encourages citizens to vote.To the Editor:Lara Putnam and Micah L. Sifry nailed it in their guest essay on the serious shortcomings of Democratic Party reliance on “churn and burn” email fund-raising with apocalyptic messaging. My inbox has been swamped this year with emails from Democratic PACs and candidates around the country desperately begging for money to salvage the party’s chances in the coming election. Nancy Pelosi was sending me more than an email a day, many of which had that dispiriting tone.On May 19, I finally unsubscribed to her Nancy Pelosi for Congress PAC, and sent her an email setting forth my reasons: Too much hyperbole (for example, “I critically need 3,372 gifts before midnight” was a constant refrain; there didn’t seem to be a midnight that went by that wasn’t a crucial financing deadline); too much emotion (she was shocked, disgusted, devastated); and, most troubling, too desperate.As I explained in my email, that sense of desperation “signals likely failure and has discouraged me from devoting my time and financial resources in the Democratic midterm election effort.”By contrast, the fund-raising emails I have received from President Biden have been more upbeat, and I have responded by making contributions to the Democratic National Committee. Democrats need to shift quickly from their current desperation-tinged tone to a more confident approach, with emphasis on the president’s and the party’s positive accomplishments.Allan HubbardEverett, Wash.To the Editor:The grass isn’t any greener on the other side of the aisle. My spam folder is full of similarly apocalyptic visions of what the “Biden/Pelosi/Schumer” troika will inflict on America should Republicans not sweep to congressional power in November. It’s easy enough to just hit “delete.”What is more concerning (for both red and blue voters) is that none of these desperate and destructive pleas are for anything other than money. No information on how to get more involved in the process. No links to more dispassionate discussions of the issues. Just unwarranted demonization of some of our fellow citizens via bolded adjectives and lots of exclamation marks. We can do better.Peter J. PittsNew YorkTo the Editor:Buried in the unfortunate tone of the guest essay are many points that we can agree on. Locally led conversations about elections are extremely powerful and strengthen our democracy. It is, however, a false dichotomy to say we must choose between these important local efforts and the participation of other activists in remote voter mobilization techniques. We can and must do both.Lara Putnam and Micah L. Sifry cherry-pick a study reporting a negative impact of sending postcards to voters. However, many more studies show a positive impact of between 0.4 and 2 percent. While these are small impacts, they are sufficient to make a difference in close elections.Campaigns generally do not have the capacity to knock on every door, especially in rural areas. Not all voters will be home when a canvasser shows up, and not all will answer a phone call. An all-of-the-above approach helps ensure that as many people as possible participate in our democracy.Ronnie CohenBerkeley, Calif.The writer is executive director of Activate America.Republican Outrage Over the Raid at Mar-a-LagoF.B.I. agents reportedly searched former President Donald J. Trump’s residence and office, as a well as a storage unit, at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla.Saul Martinez for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “A Simmering Feud Peaks in a Search of Trump’s Home” (front page, Aug. 10):Surely if former President Barack Obama had left the White House and taken with him government documents, some of which may have been classified and all of which should have been delivered to the National Archives, the Republicans would have raised holy hell. But, of course, when a Republican former president does the same they sing a different tune.As that former president often says, “so sad.”Samuel A. OppenheimFranklin, Mass.To the Editor:Republican politicians and Fox News are outraged over the Justice Department raid of Donald Trump’s home and are demanding that the department explain why it did this. What they fail to mention is that Mr. Trump received a copy of the search warrant and an inventory of what was taken. If this was an outrageous intrusion, Mr. Trump could disclose the purpose of the search warrant and what was taken.Mr. Trump has already turned over 15 boxes that were wrongfully removed from the White House, implicitly indicating that this was all he originally removed. If the dozen or so boxes that were seized on Monday should have been turned over earlier, this is a clear indication that Mr. Trump knowingly broke the law.Charles W. MurdockChicagoThe writer is a professor at Loyola University Chicago School of Law.‘Willful Ignorance’ and the Alex Jones Case Pool photo by Briana SanchezTo the Editor:As a longtime Newtown resident and the husband of a retired Sandy Hook Elementary School teacher, I followed the defamation suit against Alex Jones closely. I largely agree with the sentiments expressed in “Jones Got His Comeuppance, but Don’t Expect an End to the Lies” (front page, Aug. 7).Throughout history, groups have proved their allegiance to a political/cultural movement by adhering to bizarre and clearly false claims of their leaders. Blood libels. AIDS as a bioweapon. Pizzagate.Individuals adhering to the ideology of a political/cultural/fringe group will knowingly embrace outright falsehoods to further prove their allegiance. The wilder the conspiracy, the greater the sense of belonging. Willful ignorance: the team jersey of today.Steven TenenbaumNewtown, Conn. More