Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Holocaust Museum Board Member Condemns Silence on Trump Firings

      by

      Board members clashed over email after a Biden appointee sent a scathing letter invoking the Holocaust as he denounced the museum’s silence on President Trump’s firings of board members.A member of the board that oversees the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum wrote a blistering letter to the other board members on Friday condemning the institution’s silence after President Trump’s recent firings and invoking the Holocaust as he warned about the dangers of not speaking out.In late April, Mr. Trump fired a number of board members appointed by former President Joseph R. Biden Jr., including Doug Emhoff, the husband of former Vice President Kamala Harris, as well as other former senior administration officials.The firings were widely criticized as an effort to politicize an organization dedicated to educating the world about one of the worst atrocities in history. But the museum’s statement at the time made no mention of the terminations and instead emphasized an eagerness to work with the Trump administration.Kevin Abel, who was appointed to the museum’s board by Mr. Biden in 2023, wrote in his letter on Friday that Mr. Trump’s “campaign of retribution” had been met with troubling “public silence” by the museum.Mr. Abel wrote that while it was “understandable” that museum leaders might fear speaking out at the risk of losing funding, it was vital to do so.“At this juncture of rising threats and a swirling atmosphere of hatred, it is ever more imperative that the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the one institution that can most credibly call out the administration’s attack of its Council for what it is, not choose to remain silent,” Mr. Abel wrote, invoking Martin Niemöller’s words “about the danger of not speaking out,” which he noted were “inscribed on the wall of the Museum’s permanent exhibition.”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 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Eric Adams to Meet With Trump in Washington About NYC ‘Priorities’

      by

      The meeting on Friday between Mayor Eric Adams of New York City and President Trump comes as documents related to his abandoned federal corruption case are set to be released.Mayor Eric Adams of New York City was scheduled to meet with President Trump in Washington on Friday just hours before documents related to his abandoned federal corruption case were set to be released.The mayor’s office announced on Friday morning that Mr. Adams would visit Mr. Trump at 3 p.m. to “discuss New York City priorities.”The timing coincides with the expected release of material related to the shuttered criminal case against Mr. Adams, which the Trump administration dropped earlier this year. The material, which is scheduled to be filed by the Justice Department late Friday afternoon, includes search warrants related to the investigation, as well as affidavits describing the evidence.The material is expected to elucidate the charges against Mr. Adams, which a federal judge, Dale E. Ho, dismissed last month after a request from high-ranking officials in the Justice Department who said it was hindering the mayor’s cooperation with the president’s immigration agenda.Earlier this week, the New York Police Department announced it was investigating why its officers gave investigators from the Department of Homeland Security the sealed arrest record of a New Jersey woman who was detained at a protest as part of their efforts to deport her.The Justice Department’s move to abandon the case against Mr. Adams caused an uproar within the department and led to the resignation of at least eight prosecutors in New York and Washington, including the acting U.S. attorney in Manhattan, Danielle Sassoon.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 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Republicans Writing Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ Face Risks on Medicaid

      by

      Representatives from swing districts face tough votes as soon as next week, when key House panels are scheduled to consider legislation that would cut popular programs to pay for President Trump’s agenda.Gabe Evans, then a Republican state lawmaker in Colorado, defeated a Democratic member of Congress in November by less than 1 percentage point — just 2,449 votes — writing his ticket to Washington.Now Mr. Evans, 39, is helping to write legislation that could cement his own ticket back home.The first-term congressman, whose swing district just north of Denver includes 151,749 Medicaid recipients, sits on the Energy and Commerce Committee. The Republican budget resolution that lays the groundwork for sweeping legislation to enact President Trump’s domestic agenda instructs the panel, which has jurisdiction over Medicaid, to slash spending by $880 billion over the next decade to help pay for a large tax cut. That number is impossible to reach without substantially reducing the cost of Medicaid, the government program that provides health insurance for lower-income Americans.As Republicans in Congress struggle to coalesce around the core pieces of what Mr. Trump calls his “one big, beautiful bill,” Mr. Evans and other G.O.P. lawmakers from some of the most competitive districts in the country are facing committee votes next week to approve cuts to popular programs that could come back to haunt them politically.And Democrats are gleeful at the prospect of Republican incumbents going on the record supporting the effort.“These members of Congress won with fewer votes than the number of people in their district on Medicaid,” said Jesse Ferguson, a veteran Democratic strategist and a former spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Voting for this is like being the captain of the Titanic and deciding to intentionally hit the iceberg.”The group includes Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Republican of Iowa, who also sits on the Energy and Commerce Committee and is on even shakier ground than Mr. Evans, despite having warded off a challenger multiple times. Last year, Ms. Miller-Meeks, who represents 132,148 Medicaid recipients, won her seat by 0.2 percent, or 799 votes. Her local office in Davenport has been besieged by demonstrators concerned about spending cuts.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

    • 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