Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Official Pushed to Rewrite Intelligence So It Could Not Be ‘Used Against’ Trump

      by

      An assessment contradicted a presidential proclamation. A political appointee demanded a redo, then pushed for changes to the new analysis, too.New emails document how a top aide to Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, ordered analysts to edit an assessment with the hope of insulating President Trump and Ms. Gabbard from being attacked for the administration’s claim that Venezuela’s government controls a criminal gang.“We need to do some rewriting” and more analytic work “so this document is not used against the DNI or POTUS,” Joe Kent, the chief of staff to Ms. Gabbard, wrote in an email to a group of intelligence officials on April 3, using shorthand for Ms. Gabbard’s position and for the president of the United States.The New York Times reported last week that Mr. Kent had pushed analysts to redo their assessment, dated Feb. 26, of the relationship between Venezuela’s government and the gang, Tren de Aragua, after it came to light that the assessment contradicted a subsequent claim by Mr. Trump. The disclosure of the precise language of Mr. Kent’s emails has added to the emerging picture of a politicized intervention.The final memo, which is dated April 7 and has since become public, still contradicts a key claim that Mr. Trump made to justify sending people accused of being members of the gang to a notorious Salvadoran prison without due process.Emails on the topic from Mr. Kent, who is also Mr. Trump’s pending nominee to lead the National Counterterrorism Center, have circulated within the intelligence community and were described by people briefed on them. Mr. Kent’s interventions have raised internal alarms about politicizing intelligence analysis.Defenders of Mr. Kent have disputed that his attempted intervention was part of a pressure campaign, arguing he was trying to show more of what the intelligence community knew about the gang.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 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Democrats Grill Defiant Rubio on Trump Policies

      by

      There was shouting and gavel banging as Marco Rubio and his former Senate Democratic colleagues clashed over U.S. foreign aid.A defiant Secretary of State Marco Rubio clashed in sometimes personal terms with his former Senate Democratic colleagues on Tuesday, calling their criticism evidence of his success.At a hearing on the State Department budget, several Democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee said that they were deeply disappointed in Mr. Rubio and regretted voting for his confirmation.The contentious scene reflected Democratic fury over President Trump’s policies, such as the evisceration of U.S. foreign aid programs, which they said benefited rivals like China. Mr. Rubio, they argued, had betrayed his principles while serving Mr. Trump.“I have to tell you, directly and personally, that I regret voting for you for secretary of state,” Senator Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland, told Mr. Rubio after castigating him for approving huge cuts to aid programs promoting human rights, public health, food assistance and democracy.“First of all, your regret for voting for me confirms I’m doing a good job,” Mr. Rubio retorted, launching into an unapologetic response that produced shouting and gavel banging as Mr. Van Hollen called portions of Mr. Rubio’s answer “flippant” and “pathetic.”In January, the Senate confirmed Mr. Rubio, who served on the Foreign Relations Committee before joining Mr. Trump’s cabinet, by a 99-to-0 vote. Many Democrats said he had promised to be a responsible steward of the State Department. And they privately hoped Mr. Rubio would check Mr. Trump’s disruptive impulses.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

      Elon Musk Suggests He Will Spend ‘a Lot Less’ on Political Donations

      by

      The world’s richest person, who spent more money than anyone else last year as he helped elect President Trump, has indicated lately that he wants to turn back toward his business empire.Elon Musk was the country’s biggest political donor in 2024. But he might be ready to give up the title.Mr. Musk, the world’s richest person, said on Tuesday that he was planning to spend “a lot less” in future elections, the latest sign that he is fading into the background of American politics — at least for now.“In terms of political spending, I’m going to do a lot less in the future,” Mr. Musk said as he appeared virtually for a combative interview with Bloomberg News at the Qatar Economic Forum. “I think I’ve done enough.”He did keep the door open, however. Asked if his decision stemmed from any blowback he had faced for helping to guide the Trump administration, he said: “If I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I will do it. But I don’t currently see a reason.”Mr. Musk disclosed over $290 million in federal spending on the 2024 election cycle, most of which went toward backing Donald J. Trump through a super PAC that he started. He has told Mr. Trump’s advisers that he planned to donate about $100 million to pro-Trump groups before the 2026 midterm elections.In the months after Mr. Trump took office in January, Mr. Musk became a frequent presence in Washington as he steered an ambitious, controversial effort to sharply cut government spending. He has also remained a powerful player in Republican campaign finance. Along with an allied group, he spent roughly $25 million on a major Wisconsin Supreme Court race to back a conservative candidate who lost badly.Lately, Mr. Musk has indicated a desire to turn back to his business empire. After a sharp drop in profit at his electric-car company, Tesla, he told Wall Street analysts last month that he planned to spend less time in Washington and more on his companies.He did say on Tuesday, however, that he planned to be in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday, including for a dinner with Mr. Trump. More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Squeezes His Party on Domestic Policy Bill

      by

      The president visited the weekly meeting of House Republicans to make the case for the legislation and pressure members of his party to fall into line.President Trump on Tuesday huddled with House Republicans on Capitol Hill to urge them to unify around a wide-ranging bill to deliver his domestic agenda, ratcheting up the pressure for the party to overcome divisions that could sink the package.Joining Republicans at their weekly closed-door meeting, Mr. Trump praised Speaker Mike Johnson, who has been toiling to cobble together the votes to pass what the party has dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which they hope to bring to a vote by the end of the week.“I’m his biggest fan — I love this guy,” Mr. Trump said of Mr. Johnson before the meeting. The speaker can afford to lose no more than three votes on the bill if all Democrats oppose it, as expected, and every lawmaker is present and voting.The president made it clear that he saw passage of the measure as a test of loyalty to him, saying he had been a “cheerleader” for the party, and warning that any holdouts “wouldn’t be a Republican much longer.”But he minimized the very real rifts within his party that could derail the measure, saying there were “one or two grandstanders” holding it up.That is not the case. Several Republican factions have expressed concern about the details of the sprawling bill, which would extend the 2017 tax cuts and eliminate taxes on tips and overtime pay; raise spending on the military and immigration enforcement; and cut Medicaid, food stamps, education and subsidies for clean energy to pay for some of it.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Rep. McIver Charged With Assault Over Clash Outside Newark ICE Center

      by

      The Department of Justice also announced it was dropping a trespass charge against the city’s mayor stemming from the same episode.The Justice Department charged a New Jersey congresswoman with assaulting federal agents during a clash outside a Newark immigration detention center and dropped a trespass charge against the city’s mayor that arose from the same episode, the department said Monday.Alina Habba, the interim U.S. attorney for New Jersey, disclosed the move in a post on X, saying that the congresswoman, LaMonica McIver, had been charged “for assaulting, impeding and interfering with law enforcement” when she visited the detention center with two other Democratic members of Congress from New Jersey on May 9.“No one is above the law — politicians or otherwise,” Ms. Habba said in a statement. “It is the job of this office to uphold justice impartially, regardless of who you are. Now we will let the justice system work.”She added that she had sought a resolution without bringing criminal charges, but that Ms. McIver had declined.In a statement on Monday, Ms. McIver blamed federal law enforcement for instigating the clash, saying that “ICE agents created an unnecessary and unsafe confrontation.”“The charges against me are purely political — they mischaracterize and distort my actions, and are meant to criminalize and deter legislative oversight,” she said.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Advances Crypto Regulation Bill With Bipartisan Support

      by

      Democrats who had sided with the rest of their party last week to block the measure over concerns that President Trump could benefit dropped their objections. They argued that regulating the industry was urgent.The Senate on Monday revived a first-of-its-kind bill to regulate parts of the cryptocurrency industry, after a small number of Democrats who had joined the rest of their party in blocking the measure joined Republicans in allowing it to advance.The vote was 66 to 32 to move forward with the legislation, which would create a regulatory framework for stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency tied to the value of an existing asset, often the U.S. dollar. Sixteen Democrats joined the majority of Republicans in support, acting over the opposition of most others in their party, who were concerned that President Trump and his family were inappropriately profiting from crypto.The vote was a victory for the cryptocurrency industry, which has made significant advances in Washington with the backing of Mr. Trump and a bipartisan group of lawmakers. It suggested that the measure would have enough support to pass the Senate and potentially make it to Mr. Trump’s desk in short order. A parallel effort in the House has faced similar backlash from Democrats, who earlier this month blocked a hearing on the legislation but are unlikely to have the votes to prevent it from passing.In the Senate, a bloc of Democratic supporters had pressed in recent days to include stronger consumer protections and transparency requirements in the legislation, as well as provisions aimed at combating money laundering and terrorism financing.But the most animating worry for Democrats was that the legislation could enable the president and his family to profit by issuing their own stablecoins. Concerns over the Trump family’s involvement in the industry intensified after reporting by The New York Times showed how a firm associated with the president had recently become one of the most influential players in the industry.In a prolonged round of bipartisan negotiations over the bill, Republicans steadfastly refused to consider adding any provision to rein in Mr. Trump’s involvement in the industry, or make any modification that could interfere with his or his family’s ability to benefit.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Targets Harris Campaign’s Links to Oprah Winfrey, Beyoncé and Bruce Springsteen

      by

      The president claimed without evidence on Monday that Kamala Harris had violated campaign-finance law, essentially by paying superstars for endorsements “under the guise of paying for entertainment.”President Trump is calling for a “major investigation” into the celebrities Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé, Oprah Winfrey and Bono, bringing his retribution campaign to the music industry.Mr. Trump, in a pair of posts on Truth Social on Monday, argued that Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party nominee was violating campaign-finance law, essentially by paying those figures for endorsements “under the guise of paying for entertainment.”There is no evidence that Ms. Harris paid for the endorsements, although details on celebrity engagements can be somewhat murky. Under campaign finance law, campaigns are required to pay the fair-market value for the costs of events so as to make sure that a company or individual is not donating in excess of federal contribution limits.Ms. Harris paid $1 million to Ms. Winfrey’s production company for a live-streamed town hall in Detroit, according to campaign-finance records. Ms. Winfrey has said the money paid for costs and salaries related to the event and was not a personal fee.Beyoncé headlined a rally for Ms. Harris in her hometown of Houston for an abortion-rights event, and Ms. Harris’s campaign paid the singer’s company $165,000 in November for “campaign event production,” according to campaign-finance records. Mr. Trump falsely claimed on Monday that her payment was $11 million, citing unspecified “news reports.” The artist’s mother has called that figure a “lie.”Mr. Trump’s angry posts come as his ire has been raised against Mr. Springsteen, who sharply criticized Mr. Trump during a concert in Manchester, England, last week. Mr. Trump responded with a social media post calling him a “dried out ‘prune’ of a rocker.” Mr. Springsteen performed at a rally in Atlanta in the final weeks of the presidential race, though no records available yet show any payment from Ms. Harris’s campaign.It was not clear why Mr. Trump named Bono, the Irish singer-songwriter who fronts the band U2. While he is a friend of former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and received from him a Presidential Medal of Freedom, the country’s highest civilian award, he did not appear at any campaign events with Ms. Harris, nor did he endorse her. More

    • 163 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      How Trump’s Search for a New Air Force One Led to Qatar’s Jet

      by

      President Trump wanted a quick solution to his Air Force One problem.The United States signed a $3.9 billion contract with Boeing in 2018 for two jets to be used as Air Force One, but a series of delays had slowed the work far past the 2024 delivery deadline, possibly beyond Mr. Trump’s second term.Now Mr. Trump had to fly around in the same old planes that transported President George H.W. Bush 35 years ago. It wasn’t just a vanity project. Those planes, which are no longer in production, require extensive servicing and frequent repairs, and officials from both parties, reaching back a decade or more, had been pressing for replacements.Mr. Trump, though, wanted a new plane while he was still in office. But how?“We’re the United States of America,” Mr. Trump said this month. “I believe that we should have the most impressive plane.”The story of how the Trump administration decided that it would accept a free luxury Boeing 747-8 from Qatar to serve as Air Force One involved weeks of secret coordination between Washington and Doha. The Pentagon and the White House’s military office swung into action, and Mr. Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steven Witkoff, played a key role.Soon after Mr. Trump took office, military officials started to discuss how the United States could buy a temporary plane for Mr. Trump to use while Boeing’s work creaked along, an investigation by The New York Times found. But by May 11, when the president announced on social media that Qatar would be providing the plane to the United States, he characterized it as “a GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE.”There are lingering questions about how much financial sense the still-unsigned deal would make, given the costs of refitting the plane for presidential use and operating it over the long run — or even whether the plane could be ready for Mr. Trump to use before the end of his second term.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