Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Campaign Filming at Arlington Cemetery Dismayed Family of Green Beret

      by

      The family of a Green Beret who died by suicide after serving eight combat tours and is buried at Arlington National Cemetery expressed concern on Wednesday that Donald J. Trump’s campaign had filmed his gravesite without permission as Mr. Trump stood in an area where campaign photography isn’t allowed.Relatives of Master Sgt. Andrew Marckesano issued their statement two days after Mr. Trump’s visit, which also included a confrontation between members of the Trump campaign and an Arlington employee. The former president’s campaign took video in a heavily restricted section of the cemetery known as Section 60, which is largely reserved for the fallen veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.A woman who works at the cemetery filed an incident report with the military authorities over the altercation. But the official, who has not been identified, later declined to press charges. Military officials said she feared Mr. Trump’s supporters pursuing retaliation.Sergeant Marckesano died on July 7, 2020, after moving to Washington to begin a job at the Pentagon. He had three children, and friends said he had chronic post-traumatic stress disorder from his time in combat. He earned Silver and Bronze Stars during his service. His gravesite is adjacent to that of Staff Sergeant Darin Taylor Hoover, a Marine who was killed in the 2021 bombing at Abbey Gate outside the Kabul airport in Afghanistan.The Hoover family granted permission to the Trump team to film and take photographs at the gravesite; the Marckesano family did not, and filming and photographing at the gravesite for political purposes is a violation of federal law, according to cemetery officials. Yet Sergeant Marckesano’s grave was shown in photos from the visit that were published online. A video was posted to Mr. Trump’s TikTok account featuring footage from the Section 60 visit and the gravestones from behind, with narration criticizing the handling of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.In a statement from Sergeant Marckesano’s relatives after being contacted by The New York Times, his sister, Michele, said, “We fully support Staff Sergeant Darin Hoover’s family and the other families in their quest for answers and accountability regarding the Afghanistan withdrawal and the tragedy at Abbey Gate.”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 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      The Kamala Harris Interview Worth Revisiting Now

      by

      ‘She didn’t break eye contact. It was intense. You feel on trial.’Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, will sit down with Dana Bash of CNN tomorrow at 9 p.m. Eastern for the first major television interview of their presidential campaign.It’s a high-stakes moment for their nascent candidacy, a chance to define their campaign, defend their ideas and test their political dexterity in the run-up to Harris’s debate against former President Donald Trump on Sept. 10.It’s also an opportunity, following a month of rallies and campaign speeches, for the pair to tell a deeper story about themselves and their vision.But getting them to do that might not be easy.My colleague Astead Herndon, friend of the newsletter and host of the podcast “The Run-Up,” interviewed Harris as part of his reporting for a profile he wrote of Harris last year.The interview was contentious, but revealing, too, and I think it’s worth revisiting now. I called Astead to ask him what it taught him, and what he’s looking for from Harris’s interview tomorrow. Our conversation was edited and condensed.JB: Astead, thank you for joining me! You’ve held sit-down interviews with Harris twice, once in 2019 and once in 2023. How were those two interviews different?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

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Team Clashed With Official at Arlington National Cemetery

      by

      Members of Donald J. Trump’s campaign team and an official at Arlington National Cemetery confronted each other during the former president’s visit to the cemetery on Monday, the military cemetery said in a statement on Tuesday.The altercation was prompted, according to Trump campaign officials, by the presence of a photographer in a section of the cemetery where American troops who were killed in recent wars are buried. The cemetery released a statement saying that federal law prohibits political campaigning or “election-related” activities within Army cemeteries, including by photographers.An official with the cemetery tried to “physically block” members of Mr. Trump’s team, Steven Cheung, a Trump campaign spokesman, said in a statement. Mr. Cheung added that the cemetery official was “clearly suffering from a mental health episode” and that the campaign was prepared to release footage of the confrontation to support its account of the clash. The campaign did not provide that footage after several requests.Chris LaCivita, a top Trump campaign adviser, added in a separate statement that the cemetery official was “a disgrace and does not deserve to represent the hollowed grounds of Arlington National Cemetery.”Cemetery officials did not provide their own account of the encounter, saying instead that “there was an incident, and a report was filed.”The cemetery added that it had “reinforced and widely shared” to the Trump campaign the federal laws prohibiting campaign activities by photographers “or any other persons attending for purposes, or in direct support of a partisan political candidate’s campaign.”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

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump y el equipo de Harris aún discuten las reglas del debate

      by

      Los dos han estado discutiendo sobre si los micrófonos serán silenciados cuando un candidato no está hablando durante el debate, que está programado para el 10 de septiembre.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]Donald Trump anunció por segunda vez que participaría en un debate presidencial con la vicepresidenta Kamala Harris organizado por ABC News e insinuó que se había resuelto el tema de si los micrófonos se silenciarán cuando un candidato no esté hablando.Pero una persona informada sobre la postura de la campaña de Harris dijo que el tema de si los micrófonos serán silenciados —algo que el equipo de Trump favorece y el equipo de Harris no— sigue siendo una discusión abierta. Un portavoz de ABC declinó hacer comentarios.Trump escribió en su red social que las reglas del debate “serán las mismas que en el último debate de CNN, que pareció funcionar bien para todos excepto, quizás”, para el presidente Joe Biden.El debate organizado por CNN, que se celebró en Atlanta el 27 de junio, fue calamitoso para Biden, precipitando su decisión del 21 de julio cuando finalizó su campaña de reelección. Durante ese debate, los micrófonos de los candidatos se silenciaron cuando no estaban hablando, una medida impulsada por el equipo de Biden.En última instancia, los asesores de Trump lo consideraron beneficioso para él, ya que evitó que el expresidente tuviera el tipo de arrebatos frecuentes y dañinos a los que es propenso. En su lugar, la atención se centró en Biden y sus luchas para articular sus pensamientos.Politico informó el lunes que el equipo de Harris y Trump habían llegado a un punto muerto sobre si los micrófonos se silenciarán para el debate del 10 de septiembre, que tendrá lugar en Filadelfia.El equipo de Trump acusó al equipo de Harris de engaño. Sin embargo, el propio Trump, en una comparecencia el lunes en Virginia, dijo que personalmente no le importaba.“No me importa”, dijo. “Creo que preferiría tenerlo encendido. Pero el acuerdo era que sería igual que la última vez”.Ammar Moussa, vocero de Harris, dijo en un comunicado que “ambos candidatos han dejado clara su voluntad de debatir con micrófonos no silenciados durante todo el debate para permitir intercambios sustantivos entre los candidatos, pero parece que Donald Trump está dejando que sus manipuladores lo anulen. Es triste”.El debate del 10 de septiembre se acordó por primera vez cuando Biden aún estaba en la contienda. El equipo de Harris planeó mantenerlo, pero Trump vaciló, y luego anunció en una conferencia de prensa hace unas tres semanas que estaría allí. Luego, el domingo, planteó la posibilidad de no asistir después de todo, alegando que ABC estaba sesgada en su contra. El equipo de Harris insistió públicamente el lunes en el tema de los micrófonos.Maggie Haberman es corresponsal política sénior que cubre la campaña presidencial de 2024, desde las contiendas electorales en todo el país hasta las investigaciones sobre el expresidente Donald Trump. Más de Maggie HabermanJohn Koblin reporta sobre la industria televisiva. Es coautor de It’s Not TV: The Spectacular Rise, Revolution, and Future of HBO.” Más de John Koblin More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The Big Border Change Harris Isn’t Talking About

      by

      A Biden administration border policy that has had a dramatic impact isn’t getting campaign play.Good evening. Tonight, my colleague Hamed Aleaziz, who covers immigration, looks at why the sharp drop in border crossings isn’t playing a bigger role in the presidential campaign. Plus, I want to hear about your favorite books about politics. — Jess BidgoodThe situation at the southern border looks very different these days.Gone are the headlines about surging border crossings crushing border communities and cities like New York struggling to fund housing for migrants who recently came to the country.The reality is that the numbers at the southern border have dropped to levels not seen before in the Biden administration — and lower than they were during parts of the Trump administration.The dramatic drop in border crossings came after a Biden administration policy seen by White House officials as a major success for an administration that has spent three years fighting Republican attacks over its handling of surging border crossings.Vice President Kamala Harris, however, has not focused on the dramatic change at the southern border in her presidential campaign. Tonight, I’ll explain what’s happening at the border, and offer some theories about why Harris isn’t talking it up.A border shutdown that workedThe border had seen a steady drop in crossings all year, but things took a dramatic turn in June. That’s when the Biden administration took a hallmark of the failed immigration bill from February — a measure allowing border officials to turn back migrants quickly when crossings exceed a certain level — and put a version of it into place via presidential proclamation.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      This National Guard Crowd Likes What It Hears From Trump

      by

      They knew they probably should not have been laughing.Hundreds of National Guard members sat chuckling in their camouflage uniforms as former President Donald J. Trump tore into Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, who served for 24 years in the National Guard. When Mr. Trump mocked him as “Tampon Tim” (a reference to a law he signed requiring schools to provide menstrual products to all students who need them) nervous laughter rippled through the crowd, then quickly dissipated.“This group is a little more low-key than the ones I’m used to speaking before,” Mr. Trump observed.It was Monday afternoon, and he was speaking at the National Guard Association’s annual conference in Detroit. There were people from all 50 states and various U.S. territories there. Those in uniform said they were prohibited from discussing politics with a reporter, but the crowd also included former service members who had gone to work for private contractors. These more casually dressed members of the defense sector were free to say what the others could not.“I think it’s phenomenal that he’s out and about, speaking with the military,” said Walt Nichols, a 58-year-old from San Antonio who said he served for 26 years in the Texas National Guard and did three tours in Iraq (he is now a sales engineer for TacMed Solutions, which manufactures high-tech manikins). “We need him back,” Mr. Nichols said of Mr. Trump.“We just found out this week that he was going to be here — we had no idea,” said Cliff Byrd, 45, a former Marine from Portsmouth, N.H., who now works for Vidarr Inc., which specializes in night vision technology. “As you can see, a lot of people came out for it.”The crowd at the National Guard Association conference included members in uniform, but also former service members who have gone to work for private defense contractors.Nick Hagen for The New York TimesWe 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 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Look to End the Electability Question

      by

      The party is battling a squishy, often self-reinforcing concept about the perceived ability to win.This year, Angela Alsobrooks, the county executive of Prince George’s County, Md., and a Democrat, sought support for her U.S. Senate bid from an elected official she had known for years.“She said to me, ‘I’m so sorry. I want to be really blunt with you, Angela,’” Alsobrooks, who is Black, said, recalling that the official, a fellow Democrat whom she did not name, said she thought Alsobrooks could not win. “We are not ready to elect a Black woman in the state of Maryland,” Alsobrooks recounted the official as saying.It turned out that Maryland Democrats were ready to do just that.Alsobrooks beat a white man in her Senate primary by more than 10 percentage points. Public polling has shown her leading another, former Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, whom she will face in November.But the exchange, which Alsobrooks described in an interview last week during the Democratic National Convention, underscores the way a party that is trying to elect the first Black female president is still battling anxieties about the idea of electability — and preparing to confront them.Electability — a squishy and often self-reinforcing concept about who is perceived as being able to win elections — was a through line of the Democratic primary in 2020, when voters stung by the 2016 election wrung their hands over whether preferred presidential candidates who were female, nonwhite or both could garner enough support in key battleground states. The party ultimately coalesced around Joe Biden.Democrats did not have a chance to air those concerns in a drawn-out primary in 2024, and many suggested last week that identity-based questions about electability should remain firmly in the past. They view the issue of electability as providing cover for racist and sexist notions about white voters being apprehensive about backing Black candidates and male voters being reluctant to vote for female candidates.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

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Inflation Is Fading, Statistically and Politically

      by

      Last week was full of speeches. Most of those that attracted national attention were at the Democratic National Convention, culminating in Vice President Kamala Harris’s big moment on Thursday. But there was another important speech on Friday: Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s talk at the Fed’s annual shindig in Jackson Hole, Wyo.Yes, Powell’s remarks were of particular interest to investors looking for clues about future monetary policy. But even though his speech was rigorously apolitical, it had important political implications. For what we’re seeing, I’d argue, is inflation fading away — not just in the data, but also as a political issue. And that, of course, is very good news for Democrats.About Powell’s speech: He noted that the inflation rate has declined a lot since it peaked in 2022 and expressed confidence that it’s on track to reach the Fed’s target of 2 percent — and why it’s getting there without the mass unemployment some economists had claimed would be necessary. Falling inflation all but guarantees that the Fed will cut interest rates at its Open Market committee meeting next month, although the size of the anticipated cut is uncertain.What has brought inflation down? Like many economists, myself included, Powell believes that inflation was largely caused by “pandemic-related distortions” and that “the unwinding of these factors took much longer than expected but ultimately played a large role in the subsequent disinflation.”Although Powell didn’t and couldn’t say so explicitly, this analysis implicitly exonerates the Biden administration. Many people, like Elon Musk — who, after demonstrating his political acumen last year by boosting Robert Kennedy Jr., has lately decided that he’s an expert on macroeconomics — attribute inflation to Biden-era government spending. Powell’s discussion suggests, however, that fiscal policy played at most a distinctly secondary role.But few voters follow Fed speeches; won’t they continue to blame Democrats for inflation?Not necessarily. Surveys suggest that the political salience of inflation and the economy in general have been fading. It’s probably too late to convince voters that Democrats have done a good job managing the economy, even though that’s objectively the case — overall, America has outperformed other wealthy nations, achieving exceptionally high growth without exceptionally high inflation. But the economy is looking less and less like the, um, trump card Republicans were counting on.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