Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      House Votes to Rename Gulf of Mexico as Gulf of America, Taking a Symbolic Step

      by

      The legislation was all but certain to die in the Senate, but the move put the Republican-led House on the record supporting President Trump’s nomenclature.A divided House on Thursday approved legislation to permanently rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, moving over the taunting objections of Democrats to codify President Trump’s executive order renaming the body of water in line with his “America First” worldview.The 211-to-206 mostly party-line vote to pass the bill amounted to a symbolic show of Republican deference to Mr. Trump, given that Democrats are unlikely to allow the legislation to move forward in the Senate. But it put the G.O.P.-led House on the record backing the president in his effort to rewrite the rules of geography and to dare critics to defy him.Just one Republican, Representative Don Bacon of Nebraska, voted no.The White House has barred journalists from The Associated Press from covering events in the Oval Office and flying aboard Air Force One, as punishment for the news organization’s continued use of the name Gulf of Mexico.“The American people deserve pride in their country, and pride in the waters that we own and we protect with our military and our Coast Guard,” said Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia Republican who sponsored the bill, calling it “one of the most important things we can do this Congress.”Democrats dismissed the legislation as a pandering and performative waste of time when Republicans were struggling to reach agreement on legislation to fulfill the president’s domestic policy agenda — the “big, beautiful bill” that could include unpopular cuts to Medicaid.Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the minority leader, called it a “silly, small-minded and sycophantic piece of legislation.” He said the only silver lining of the exercise was that it underscored how Republicans were laboring to enact that domestic policy measure, which he warned would impose the largest Medicaid cut in history.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Administration to Announce Trade Deal With Britain

      by

      A deal would be a positive sign for both governments, which have eyed an agreement since President Trump’s first term.President Trump is expected to announce on Thursday that the United States will strike a trade agreement with Britain, according to three people familiar with the plans.Mr. Trump teased a new trade agreement in a social media post on Wednesday night, though he did not specify which nation was part of the deal.“Big News Conference tomorrow morning at 10:00 A.M., The Oval Office, concerning a MAJOR TRADE DEAL WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF A BIG, AND HIGHLY RESPECTED, COUNTRY. THE FIRST OF MANY!!!” he wrote.A spokesman for the White House declined to comment beyond Mr. Trump’s post. A spokesman for the British Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment.The agreement would be the first deal announced since Mr. Trump imposed stiff tariffs on dozens of America’s trading partners. He later paused those temporarily in order to allow other nations to reach agreements with the United States.A deal between the United States and Britain could be a significant win for both countries, which have long sought closer economic cooperation.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 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Courts Must ‘Check the Excesses’ of Congress and the President, Roberts Says

      by

      The chief justice, in rare public remarks, defended judicial independence before a crowd of lawyers and judges.Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. defended the independence of the judiciary and denounced any attempt to impeach judges over disagreements with their rulings during rare public remarks on Wednesday evening.“Impeachment is not how you register disagreement with a decision,” the chief justice told a crowd of about 600 people, mainly lawyers and judges, gathered in Buffalo, his hometown.The remarks were his first since issuing a similar, though also unusual, written statement in March in response to threats by President Trump and his allies to impeach federal judges who have issued decisions against administration policies.The chief justice did not mention the president directly in his comments on Wednesday, and he did not elaborate further in his answer about threats of impeachment, which he gave in response to a direct question during an event to commemorate the 125th anniversary of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York.But the commentary was nevertheless notable given that justices typically avoid weighing in on political matters. His comments came less than a week after another justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, denounced attacks on the judiciary during remarks at a conference for judges held in Puerto Rico.Justice Jackson criticized what she called “relentless attacks” on judges, as well as an environment of harassment that “ultimately risks undermining our Constitution and the rule of law.”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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Federal Judge Casts Doubt on Trump Arguments in Venezuelan Migrants Case

      by

      The judge pressed a lawyer for the Justice Department on the government’s role and responsibilities in the men’s deportation and incarceration in El Salvador.A federal judge on Wednesday night expressed skepticism about the Trump administration’s reasons to avoid seeking the return of scores of Venezuelan immigrants who had been expelled to El Salvador in March, saying he was inclined to order officials to provide more information on the arrangement between the American and Salvadoran governments.The questions raised by the judge, James E. Boasberg, came at a hearing in Federal District Court in Washington, where lawyers for the deported men claimed that because the administration had sent them to a prison in El Salvador under an apparent agreement with the Salvadoran government, it should be responsible for facilitating their return to U.S. soil.Over the past several weeks, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union have secured orders from judges in several courts across the country stopping the Trump administration from using the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century wartime law, to summarily deport Venezuelans accused of being gang members to a terrorism prison in El Salvador.But at least so far, the lawyers have not been able to protect about 140 Venezuelan migrants who are already in Salvadoran custody after the United States sent them on charter flights under the act on March 15.The hearing in Washington on Wednesday night was held in part to debate two crucial issues: what role the Trump administration played in having the men detained in the Salvadoran prison in the first place, and whether officials could be held accountable for bringing them back to the United States.In seeking to answer the first of those questions, Judge Boasberg pressed a Justice Department lawyer about a recent statement by President Trump concerning Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man who was wrongfully expelled to El Salvador in the same set of flights as the Venezuelan migrants.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Are U.S. Tariffs Affecting Your Business? We Want to Hear From You.

      by

      The New York Times wants to hear from European business owners about how they are navigating the uncertainty of President Trump’s tariffs.President Trump’s trade war has created chaos for companies around the world, snarling supply chains, sowing uncertainty and muddling their ability to plan for the future.After announcing tariffs that started at 20 percent for nearly all imports from European Union members — and more on other countries — the president has scaled the rate to 10 percent until July, saying his administration will use the time to negotiate bilateral deals with America’s trading partners. At the same time, Mr. Trump has escalated a trade war with China, potentially squeezing European companies.We are a team of reporters who write about business and economic issues in Europe for The New York Times. In recent weeks, we have covered how tariffs have been affecting the car industry, financial markets and economic expectations for European countries.To better understand the impact the tariffs are having on companies in Europe, including Britain, we would like to hear from business owners, entrepreneurs, managers and employees. How might the import taxes affect your company or job? Have you delayed hiring, postponed expansion plans or canceled orders? Have you altered your supply chains? We would also like to hear what tariffs mean for your production, and whether you are considering moving some part of it to the United States.We will read every response and reach out if we are interested in learning more. We won’t publish any part of your response without contacting you first and obtaining your consent. Your contact information will not be shared outside The Times newsroom and we will use it only to get in touch with you. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Administration Plans to Send Migrants to Libya on a Military Flight

      by

      Human rights groups have called conditions in the country’s network of migrant detention centers “horrific” and “deplorable.”The Trump administration is planning to transport a group of immigrants to Libya on a U.S. military plane, according to U.S. officials, another sharp escalation in a deportation program that has sparked widespread legal challenges and intense political debate.The nationalities of the migrants were not immediately clear, but a flight to Libya carrying the deportees could leave as soon as Wednesday, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the operation.The decision to send deportees to Libya was striking. The country is racked with conflict, and human rights groups have called conditions in its network of migrant detention centers “horrific” and “deplorable.”The Libya operation falls in line with the Trump administration’s effort to not only deter migrants from trying to enter the country illegally but also to send a strong message to those in the country illegally that they can be deported to countries where they could face brutal conditions. Reuters earlier reported the possibility of a U.S. deportation flight to Libya.The planning for the flight to Libya has been tightly held, and could still be derailed by logistical, legal or diplomatic obstacles.The White House declined to comment. The State Department and Defense Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.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’s Wishes Aside, Censoring Racial History May Prove Difficult

      by

      Late last month, when two federal grants to the Whitney Plantation in Louisiana were rescinded, the Trump administration seemed to be following through on its promise to root out what President Trump called “improper ideology” in cultural institutions focused on Black history.After all, the plantation’s mission was to show visitors what life was truly like for the enslaved, contrary to the watered-down Black history that the president seemed to back.Then just as quickly, the grants were restored a few weeks later, the Whitney Plantation’s executive director said in an interview.Because the money had already been approved, “maybe it was an exposure for lawsuits,” the executive director, Ashley Rogers, said, “but who knows?”Ever since Mr. Trump issued an executive order in March decrying cultural institutions that were trying to “rewrite our Nation’s history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth,” sites like the Whitney Plantation have lived with such uncertainty. An order specifically targeting the Smithsonian Institution tasked Vice President JD Vance and other White House officials with “seeking to remove improper ideology from such properties.”But reversals like the one in Louisiana and actions by the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture seem to indicate some misgivings about the president’s order. They also show that putting historical knowledge back into the bottle after decades of reckoning with the nation’s racist history will be more difficult than the administration believes.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

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s Idea to Turn Alcatraz Back Into a Prison Draws Criticism From Tourists

      by

      Boatloads of tourists traipsed around Alcatraz Island on Monday morning and peered into tiny prison cells, learning about the most notorious inmates who stayed there — and the ones who tried to escape.The tour was standard at the revered San Francisco attraction, save for one topic that simply could not be avoided in the conversations echoing off the old cellblock walls.Can you believe that President Trump wants to convert Alcatraz back into a federal prison?The morning tour groups were full of international travelers, and many of them had received phone alerts about Trump’s plan or read news reports over breakfast. Some wondered if they might actually be among the last visitors allowed to wander the island. But nobody seemed to think the idea was nearly as brilliant as Mr. Trump thought it was.“I thought it was a joke,” said Philipp Neumann, who was visiting from Germany. “It’s a ruin, isn’t it, more or less?”A ruin, yes, with some buildings deteriorating so badly they no longer have roofs or complete walls. The cells have broken toilets, if they have any at all, with no running water or sewage system.The exterior walls of the cellblocks are so weak that they are reinforced with netting to prevent chunks of concrete from crumbling onto tourists’ heads. Bird deposits coat much of the island. All supplies from food to fuel must be brought in by boat.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