More stories

  • in

    In Fight Over San Francisco Building, Bitcoin Pioneer Is Rejected by Democratic Elite

    A Bitcoin pioneer’s apartment purchase was rejected by the building’s residents after he was in escrow. The sellers — including a powerful Democrat — say they don’t care about his politics.In San Francisco, it is informally called “Susie’s Building” in deference to the owner of the 12th-floor penthouse with wraparound views of the bay. Susie Tompkins Buell, a power broker in Democratic politics, is known for throwing lavish fund-raising parties and writing checks so large they can start a campaign.A who’s who of the Democratic Party has made a point of stopping by over the years. Bill and Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama. Kamala Harris. Nancy Pelosi. The political elite in San Francisco still recall the time Mr. Clinton’s Secret Service agents got trapped in Ms. Tompkins Buell’s elevator and had to be rescued by firefighters.In other words, the Pacific Heights tower built in the 1920s is not the sort of place where you would expect to find an acerbic, conservative cryptocurrency executive with a fondness for President Trump and Elon Musk.Nonetheless, Jesse Powell wanted in.Mr. Powell, an early Bitcoin proponent and the founder of the cryptocurrency exchange Kraken, had his heart set on unit No. 9 and its sprawling 3,500 square feet three levels below Ms. Tompkins Buell’s penthouse. The living room’s picture windows offer stunning views of the sparkling bay, the Golden Gate Bridge and Alcatraz Island.He could have figured there would be problems, given his conservative politics and his past. But what would unfold wasn’t just a feud between a co-op board and a buyer whose reputation preceded him. The dispute in Susie’s Building would lead to a lawsuit this week and would become the latest political skirmish in a polarized nation.Jesse Powell, the founder of the cryptocurrency exchange Kraken, said he believed residents of a San Francisco co-op rejected his purchase of a unit in their building because of his political views.David Paul Morris/BloombergWe 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

    Harris Begins Final Phase of Accelerated V.P. Search

    The law firm hired by the Harris campaign to investigate potential vice-presidential candidates has completed its work, leaving the final decision — the most important yet of the still-new campaign — squarely in Vice President Kamala Harris’s hands.Covington & Burling, the Washington law firm tasked with the vetting, completed the job on Thursday afternoon and turned over its findings to Ms. Harris, according to two people briefed on the process.Ms. Harris has blocked off several hours on her calendar this weekend to meet with the men being considered to join the ticket, according to two people who had viewed her schedule and who, like others interviewed, spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the private process. The Harris campaign has suggested it will announce the decision by Tuesday evening, when the vice president and her to-be-named running mate begin a five-day tour of presidential battleground states, starting in Philadelphia.Several of the contenders, including Govs. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Andy Beshear of Kentucky, canceled events this weekend, reflecting both a desire to be available for those conversations and to avoid drawing additional speculation from the news media about their chances. The choice of a running mate is one of the most consequential decisions of Ms. Harris’s political career, one that can pay dividends in votes and years of counsel or backfire disastrously. In some ways, Ms. Harris is setting a direction for the future of the party, a reality she intimately understands given her own head-spinning ascension to the top of the ticket.But unlike previous nominees, who spent months considering candidates, she must make her decision on a compressed timeline. The shortened process clashes with what some former aides described as her typically deliberative decision-making approach.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