Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares92 Views

      in Elections

      The Long Global Trail of Resentment Behind Trump’s Resurrection

      by

      As the Cold War wound down almost four decades ago, a top adviser to the reformist Soviet leader, Mikhail S. Gorbachev, warned the West that “we are going to do the most terrible thing to you. We are going to deprive you of an enemy.”In the celebrations of the triumph of Western liberal democracy, of free trade and open societies, few considered how disorienting the end of a binary world of good and evil would be.But when the spread of democracy in newly freed societies looked more like the spread of divisive global capitalism, when social fracture grew and shared truth died, when hope collapsed in the communities technology left behind, a yearning for the certainties of the providential authoritarian leader set in.“In the absence of a shared reality, or shared facts, or a shared threat, reason had no weight beside emotion,” said Nicole Bacharan, a French political scientist. “And so a dislocated world of danger has produced a hunger for the strongman.”A different Russia, briefly imagined as a partner of the West, eventually became an enemy once more. But by the time it invaded Ukraine in 2022, disillusionment with Western liberalism had gone so far that President Vladimir V. Putin’s tirades against the supposed decadence of the West enjoyed wide support among far-right nationalist movements across Europe, in the United States and elsewhere. Western allies stood firm in defense of Ukrainian democracy, but even that commitment is wobbling.The curious resurrection and resounding victory of Donald J. Trump amounted to the apotheosis of a long-gathering revolt against the established order. No warning of the fragility of democracy or freedom, no allusion to 20th-century cataclysm or Mr. Trump’s attraction to dictators, could hold back the tide.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

    • 100 Shares66 Views

      in Elections

      Will NYC Revive Congestion Pricing After Trump’s Victory?

      by

      Gov. Kathy Hochul, facing pressure from supporters of the contentious tolling plan, is said to be exploring options for adopting it in some form.Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York is exploring options for reviving a congestion pricing plan for New York City before President-elect Donald J. Trump has a chance to kill it, according to four people familiar with the matter.Ms. Hochul’s move to salvage the contentious plan comes as she faces pressure from various corners, including a group that represents transit riders and is planning to start an advertising blitz on Monday in support of the tolling program.The plan that Ms. Hochul, a Democrat, is now exploring differs slightly from the one she halted in June. She is trying to satisfy opponents who had complained about the $15 congestion-pricing toll that most motorists would have had to pay as well as supporters who want to reduce car traffic and fund mass transit improvements.The governor has talked to federal officials about the possibility of a $9 toll and about whether such a change might require the lengthy, involved process of additional environmental review, according to a Metropolitan Transportation Authority board member familiar with the matter. The discussions were first reported by Politico.Mr. Trump, a Republican, has said he opposes congestion pricing, and his victory on Tuesday has apparently pushed Ms. Hochul to try to find a compromise.“The timing is everything,” said Danny Pearlstein, a spokesman for Riders Alliance, the riders’ group that is planning the ad blitz. If congestion pricing has not started by January, he added “it’s very unlikely it would start.”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

    • 138 Shares126 Views

      in Elections

      How Trump’s Win Is Explained by Right and Left Media Outlets

      by

      Media outlets across the political spectrum offered very different explanations about why Donald J. Trump won the presidential election this week.On the right, some media outlets said Mr. Trump had won because of the left’s embrace of what they called extreme political views, while others focused on how Americans were deeply dissatisfied with the economy under President Biden, which Vice President Kamala Harris defended.Outlets on the left were more divided in their explanations. Some said American voters had chosen to “burn it all to the ground” by choosing Mr. Trump. Others blamed the Democratic Party as a whole, arguing that Democrats had failed to connect with voters on key issues, and that Ms. Harris had lost by defending what those commentators saw as a broken system.Here’s how a few outlets have covered the last few days in political news:FROM THE RIGHTBreitbart-Breitbart, a conservative outlet, highlighted that Americans were upset with how Democrats had handled the economy, and argued that Mr. Trump’s victory was a “mandate for Trumponomics.”In one article, the reporter John Carney ticked through what he saw as the reasons behind Mr. Trump’s victory. He pointed to the costs of basic necessities like groceries, housing and health care, all of which had soared over the last four years, as well as fears surrounding high levels of immigration. Americans, in Mr. Carney’s view, wanted “less inflation, more economic nationalism and an economy they could feel great about again.”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

    • 88 Shares86 Views

      in Elections

      Read the Trump Assassination Plot Criminal Complaint

      by

      and committed out of the jurisdiction of any particular State or district of the United States,
      FARHAD SHAKERI, CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, the
      defendants, and others known and unknown, at least one of whom is expected to be first brought
      to and arrested in the Southern District of New York, knowingly and willfully did combine,
      conspire, confederate, and agree together and with each other to commit murder-for-hire, in
      violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1958.
      6. It was a part and an object of the conspiracy that FARHAD SHAKERI,
      CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, and others known and
      unknown, would and did knowingly travel in and cause others to travel in interstate and foreign
      commerce, and would and did use and cause another to use a facility of interstate and foreign
      commerce, with intent that a murder be committed in violation of the laws of the State of New
      York or the United States as consideration for the receipt of and as consideration for a promise or
      agreement to pay anything of pecuniary value, to wit, SHAKERI, RIVERA, and LOADHOLT
      participated in an agreement whereby RIVERA and LOADHOLT would kill Victim-1 in exchange
      for payment, and used cellphones and electronic messaging applications to communicate in
      furtherance of the scheme.
      (Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1958 and 3238.)
      COUNT FIVE
      (MONEY LAUNDERING CONSPIRACY)
      7. From at least in or about December 2023, up to and including the date of
      this Complaint, in Iran, the Southern District of New York, and elsewhere, and in an offense begun
      and committed out of the jurisdiction of any particular State or district of the United States,
      FARHAD SHAKERI, CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, the
      defendants, and others known and unknown, at least one of whom is expected to be first brought
      to and arrested in the Southern District of New York, knowingly and willfully did combine,
      conspire, confederate, and agree together and with each other to commit money laundering, in
      violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956.
      8. It was further a part and an object of the conspiracy that FARHAD
      SHAKERI, CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, the defendants,
      and others known and unknown, in an offense involving and affecting interstate and foreign
      commerce, knowing that the property involved in certain financial transactions represented the
      proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, would and did conduct and attempt to conduct such
      financial transactions which in fact involved the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, to wit,
      the proceeds of the murder-for-hire offenses charged in Counts Three and Four of this Complaint,
      knowing that the transactions were designed in whole and in part to conceal and disguise the
      nature, location, source, ownership, and control of the proceeds of said specified unlawful activity,
      in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i).
      9. It was further a part and an object of the conspiracy that FARHAD
      SHAKERI, CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, the defendants,
      and others known and unknown, would and did transport, transmit, and transfer, and attempt to
      transport, transmit, and transfer, monetary instruments and funds to a place in the United States
      3 More

    • 125 Shares69 Views

      in Elections

      Cómo el sur hispano de Texas prefirió a Donald Trump

      by

      Las victorias más amplias de Donald Trump se produjeron en la frontera de Texas, un bastión demócrata donde la mayoría de los votantes son hispanos. Ganó 12 de los 14 condados de la región.En ningún lugar de Estados Unidos los condados históricamente demócratas han cambiado tanto y tan rápido en dirección al expresidente Donald Trump como en las comunidades de Texas a lo largo del Río Grande, donde los residentes hispanos constituyen una abrumadora mayoría.En las últimas elecciones, la mezcla de centros urbanos en expansión y ranchos rurales de la región, que habían sido bastiones demócratas fiables durante generaciones, empezaron a volverse republicanos.Entonces, el martes, Trump se llevó el sur de Texas y la región fronteriza firmemente hacia su lado, tomando 12 de los 14 condados a lo largo de la frontera con México, y haciendo incursiones significativas incluso en El Paso, la ciudad más grande de la frontera. En 2016, Trump solo ganó en cinco de esos condados.El apoyo a Trump a lo largo de la frontera de Texas fue el ejemplo más claro de lo que ha sido una amplia aceptación nacional del candidato republicano entre los votantes hispanos y de clase trabajadora. Ese cambio se ha producido tanto en comunidades rurales como en grandes ciudades, como Miami, y en partes de Nueva York y Nueva Jersey.Pero Texas destacó. Ocho de los 10 condados demócratas que más se inclinaron hacia Trump el martes estaban en la frontera de Texas o a poca distancia en coche.Una de las mayores oscilaciones se produjo en el condado de Starr, una zona rural de 65.000 habitantes salpicada de pequeños pueblos dondese han levantado tramos de muro fronterizo, los ingresos son bajos y muchos viajan largas distancias para trabajar en los campos petrolíferos del oeste de Texas. El condado se volvió republicano el martes, apoyando a Trump por unos 16 puntos porcentuales. En 2016, perdió el condado frente a Hillary Clinton por 60 puntos.[El mapa muestra el cambio del voto presidencial en Texas en comparación con 2020].Hispanic counties in Texas shifted right, and some flipped for Trump More

    • 138 Shares90 Views

      in Elections

      California Shifts Rightward on Crime in an Election Fueled by Frustration

      by

      Voters in the Democratic-run state overwhelmingly approved a measure to impose harsher sentences for crimes and were on their way to ousting two progressive district attorneys.California has shown no signs of going Republican anytime soon, but in Tuesday’s elections the reliably liberal state lurched to the right in ways that might surprise other Americans.Fed up with open-air drug use, “smash-and-grab” robberies and shampoo locked away in stores, California voters overwhelmingly passed a ballot measure, Proposition 36, that will impose harsher penalties for shoplifting and drug possession. Voters in Oakland and Los Angeles were on their way to ousting liberal district attorneys who had campaigned on social justice promises to reduce imprisonment and hold the police accountable. And statewide measures to raise the minimum wage, ban the forced labor of inmates and expand rent control, all backed by progressive groups and labor unions, were heading toward defeat.Amid a conservative shift nationally that included Donald J. Trump’s reclamation of the White House, voters in heavily Democratic California displayed a similar frustration, challenging the state’s identity as a reflexively liberal bastion.And Mr. Trump appears to have gained ground in California compared with four years ago, based on initial election returns, despite facing Vice President Kamala Harris in her home state. (She was still ahead by nearly 18 percentage points after a vote count update on Thursday, but Joseph R. Biden Jr. won in 2020 by 29 points.)The mood this year was “very negative about the direction of the country especially, but also the state,” said Mark Baldassare, who is a political scientist and the statewide survey director for the Public Policy Institute of California. “Lots of concerns about the direction of the economy, and worries about the cost of living and public safety.”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

    • 125 Shares90 Views

      in Elections

      Biden Administration Restricts Development in West to Protect Sage Grouse

      by

      Limits on building energy projects on at least 34.5 million acres could strongly protect the iconic Western bird. But the incoming Trump administration may reverse the rule.The Biden administration on Friday issued final regulations designed to protect the greater sage grouse, a speckled brown bird with a sprawling habitat across 10 Western states.The move to safeguard the iconic species would limit drilling and mining on federal lands as well as the development of clean energy such as solar and wind power.But the plan could soon be upended: President-elect Donald J. Trump has pledged to increase oil and gas development on public lands, and he sought to weaken sage grouse habitat restrictions in his first term.The conservation effort is part of a long tug of war between environmentalists and the drilling and mining industries over wildlife habitat across the Western states. The habitat of the grouse has shrunk in recent years due to mining and other industrial activity, along with wildfire and drought linked to climate change. Once abundant, the greater sage grouse, a bulbous bird with a fan of tail feathers that nests on the ground, is teetering toward endangered status.The sage grouse population has declined about 80 percent since 1965, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.“For too long, a false choice has been presented for land management that aims to pit development against conservation,” Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said in a statement. “This administration’s collaborative work has demonstrated that we can do both successfully.”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

    • 125 Shares69 Views

      in Elections

      Powell, Fed Chair, Will Likely Face Heavy Pressure From Trump

      by

      The chair of the Federal Reserve made clear he would not resign, even under pressure. But pressure from the White House is likely, market watchers say.Jay Powell, the Fed chair, with President Trump during more tranquil times in 2017.Carlos Barria/ReutersPowell pushes back Jay Powell and the Fed may have pulled off the improbable soft landing in taming inflation while not crashing the economy into recession, proving many a Wall Street naysayer wrong.But an even bigger wildcard looms in another Donald Trump presidency — what Trump 2.0 might mean for interest rates, Fed independence and the Fed chair’s own job.That tension burst into the open at the Fed’s news conference on Thursday. The usually dry event had moments of high drama that nearly overshadowed the decision to cut the benchmark lending rate by a quarter percentage point. Powell delivered a forceful “no” when asked by Victoria Guida of Politico if he would consider resigning if Trump asked.He delivered a more emphatic response when pressed by another reporter on whether the president had the legal authority to fire him. “Not permitted under the law,” Powell said.Trump has made waves by saying that a president should have a say in rates policy. And suggestions have circulated from inside the president-elect’s camp that he would sideline Powell if re-elected — something Trump flirted with during his first term after appointing Powell in 2017.The S&P 500 advanced as the news conference wore on, closing at another record, and Treasury bonds also rallied.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