More stories

  • in

    Iran’s Supreme Leader Rebuffs Trump’s Outreach Over Its Nuclear Program

    Iran’s supreme leader decried “bullying governments” and bristled on Saturday at the idea of negotiating over the country’s nuclear program with the United States in an apparent response to a letter sent by President Trump earlier in the week.Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the leader, indirectly addressed Mr. Trump’s suggestion that Iran negotiate over its rapidly advancing nuclear program or face potential military action, while speaking at a meeting with government and military officials for Ramadan. Though he did not explicitly mention the letter, Mr. Trump or even the United States by name, it was clear he was speaking about Washington’s recent gesture.“Some bullying governments insist on negotiations not to resolve issues but to impose,” Mr. Khamenei said, according to state media. He added that “negotiation is a path for them to make new demands, it’s not just nuclear issues to speak about the nuclear topic, they are making new demands which will definitely not be accepted by Iran.”Speaking on Friday in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump suggested that Iran’s nuclear capabilities — which now include enough near-bomb-grade fuel to produce about six weapons — were reaching a critical point. He said he had offered the country a chance to negotiate or risk losing its program in a military strike.The White House did not provide any specifics about the content of Mr. Trump’s letter, which the president said he sent on Wednesday.Iranian officials are currently at odds over whether the country should negotiate over the program. While the ayatollah denounced Mr. Trump’s offer, other moderate and reformist leaders have spoken in favor of opening negotiations, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, who took office last year. Ultimately however, Mr. Khamenei, who has long said Iran cannot trust the United States, has the final say.The 2015 nuclear accord negotiated by President Barack Obama had been effective, officials say. Iran had shipped nearly all its nuclear fuel stockpile out of the country, and international inspectors said the Iranians were abiding by the sharp restrictions on new production of nuclear fuel.But Mr. Trump, who had repeatedly criticized the accord, withdrew from the nuclear agreement with Iran during his first term and reimposed heavy economic sanctions on the country, gambling that Tehran would respond by pleading for a new deal more advantageous to the United States.Iran did not come back to the table, and now the program has reached a critical juncture, experts say.Mr. Trump has also potentially undermined his proposal by upending two U.S. programs that for decades have worked to expose Iran’s atomic bomb programs. One program has since been restored, but experts worry the disruptions will hurt the worldwide struggle to contain nuclear proliferation.Farnaz Fassihi More

  • in

    House Republicans Unveil Spending Bill to Avert Government Shutdown

    House Republicans on Saturday unveiled a measure to fund the government through Sept. 30, boosting spending on the military and daring Democrats to oppose it and risk being blamed for a government shutdown that would begin after midnight Friday.The 99-page legislation would slightly decrease spending overall from last year’s funding levels, but would increase spending for the military by $6 billion, in a nod to the concerns of G.O.P. defense hawks that stopgap measures would hamstring the Pentagon. It would not include any funds for any earmarks for projects in lawmakers’ districts or states, saving roughly $13 billion, according to congressional aides.The bill provides a slight funding boost for Immigration and Customs Enforcement — an additional $485 million — but gives the administration more flexibility on how the agency can spend it. It also increases funding for the federal program that provides free groceries to millions of low-income women and children, known as W.I.C., by about $500 million.Speaker Mike Johnson in the Capitol this week. If Democrats are unanimously opposed to the Republicans’ spending bill, Mr. Johnson will have just a vote or two to spare to get the bill through the House next week.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesIt was unclear whether the legislation could pass the Republican-controlled Congress. Speaker Mike Johnson will need to navigate the bill through his extremely narrow House majority as early as Tuesday and has just a vote or two to spare if Democrats are unanimously opposed. The pressure would shift quickly to the Senate if House Republicans can pass the legislation, raising the question of whether Democrats would mount a filibuster against the bill and trigger a shutdown.While conservative House Republicans have in the past dug in and opposed such spending bills, forcing Mr. Johnson to rely on Democrats to keep the government open, President Trump called on Republicans to unite and push this measure through so he and Republicans on Capitol Hill could focus on their new budgetary and tax-cutting plans.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

  • in

    My Father Spoke to Me Only Once About Why He Led This Nation

    My father spoke only once to me about why he wanted to be president of the United States. It was the night of his inauguration in 1981. I had been assigned to one of the inaugural balls and was supposed to wait there for my parents to arrive. After sitting onstage, on a metal folding chair with a crowd of people staring up at me for what felt like an hour, I broke the rules and left. Lying awake in the Lincoln Bedroom, I hoped Lincoln’s ghost would visit me as he has been said to have visited others in the White House living quarters. I had some serious questions for him.Late that night, my father came in to see me. Sitting down on the bed, he commented on my early departure that evening and I apologized, although I think both of us knew I wasn’t really sorry. Then he said that he knew his election was hard on everyone and would change everyone’s life. But, he said: “I really believe I can make this world a safer, more peaceful place. That’s why I ran for president.” When he left and the stillness of Lincoln’s bedroom folded around me, with all of its history and stories, I was struck by the fact that he spoke about the world, not just America.I’ve thought about that night a lot lately, as America becomes more isolated, as we back away from allies and tensions grow. I’ve thought also about the lessons my father imparted to me as a child. He taught me at an early age about the Holocaust and that no country is immune to horrors like that. He told me that America’s democracy, while strong, is also fragile, and to remain strong, we had to recognize that. He believed our democracy was a “grand experiment,” and as such it should be treated carefully. Those conversations also trail behind me these days, making me wish my father’s ghost would visit just as I’d wished Lincoln’s ghost would appear to me in the White House.So often these days, people will tell me that even though they didn’t support my father when he was in office, now they miss him. Me too, I always tell them. It’s no secret that I publicly opposed some of his policies, nor that I have expressed regrets about some of the ways I did so. I also apologized to my father in quiet moments later in his life. But even in my public disagreements with his policies, I never doubted his motivations. I knew he wanted America to be a strong partner in the world, bonding with other countries to defeat tyranny and aggression.He nurtured the alliances that are important in this unpredictable world. Queen Elizabeth II and my father went horseback riding in Windsor in 1982 and the following year she and Prince Philip visited my parents’ ranch in Santa Barbara. Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada became a friend as well as an ally. My father and Mikhail Gorbachev stepped onto history’s stage and made the world safer, at least for a while. When my father died, Mr. Gorbachev, Mr. Mulroney and then-Prince Charles came to his service. Margaret Thatcher, whom he had become good friends with, sent a filmed tribute because she was too ill to travel. Mr. Mulroney, in his eulogy, quoted William Butler Yeats: “Think where man’s glory most begins and ends, and say my glory was I had such friends.”After President Trump’s speech to Congress and the nation on Tuesday night, Senator Elissa Slotkin gave the Democratic response, in which she mentioned Mr. Trump’s use of my father’s phrase “peace through strength.” She said that Ronald Reagan is probably rolling in his grave. My wish is that he would whisper from the grave and remind those in power that America is supposed to be a beacon to guide others, to shine brightly for them, a country that reaches beyond its own borders to help those in need and make this world a little safer, a little stronger. He really did see us as a shining city on the hill — a place that other countries looked to and trusted. A place that shared its light and its strengths, and in doing so, became stronger.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

  • in

    The Thing That Could Be Trump’s Undoing

    If there are Martian scholars examining the United States right now, they might be puzzling over the great Trump paradox.It’s that President Trump is doing immense long-term damage to the United States by undermining democratic norms, vandalizing the federal government and siding with alleged war criminals in the Kremlin, yet if support for him falls, I doubt it will have anything to do with all this. Rather, it may be … egg prices.American voters have been, to my mind, surprisingly comfortable with a felon who pardons other, violent felons and engages in reckless attacks on our rule of law and the global system that we created in 1945 and that has hugely enriched and empowered us. Trump doubled down on his, er, “cultural revolution” in his speech to Congress a few days ago, and about three-quarters of those who watched the speech approved of it to some degree (largely because those who watched were disproportionately Republican).Attacks by Democrats on Trump as undemocratic never got much traction among working-class voters; they cared less about issues at 30,000 feet and more about economic and cultural concerns at three feet. So in a strange way, what may impede Trump and preserve American democracy is not popular revulsion at the historic damage that he is doing to America but rather alarm at the myriad banal impacts on our daily lives because of Trumpian mismanagement.Trump’s tariffs, even if partly delayed, presumably will raise consumer prices and hurt the financial markets and thus our retirement savings; they will create a mess of supply chains for manufacturing goods. One gauge of what to expect: The latest estimate from the Atlanta Federal Reserve is an astonishing 2.4 percent decline in American G.D.P. in the first quarter of 2025.Americans may put up with a president calling journalists enemies of the people, may even accept a president pardoning felons who club police officers while trying to overturn an election. But historically, they’ve not been very forgiving of presidents who preside over recessions.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

  • in

    Trump Seeks to Bar Student Loan Relief to Workers Aiding Migrants and Trans Kids

    President Trump signed an executive order instructing administration officials to alter a student loan forgiveness program for public servants to exclude nonprofit organizations that engage in activities that have what he called a “substantial illegal purpose.”His order to restrict the program appears to target groups supporting undocumented immigrants, diversity initiatives or gender-affirming care for children, among others, as the Trump administration has sought to eliminate federal support for efforts that have drawn right-wing ire.The order, made public on Friday, is the latest of many attempts to overhaul the loan forgiveness program, which has often whipsawed borrowers with rule changes and bureaucratic obstacles.The program, known as Public Service Loan Forgiveness, was created by Congress in 2007 and cannot be eliminated without congressional action, but the Education Department has some leeway to determine how it operates. Mr. Trump’s executive order directed the secretaries of education and the Treasury to amend the program to exclude workers for organizations supporting illegal actions, listing several categories of examples, including “aiding or abetting” violations of federal immigration law.The Trump administration has taken a broad view of what it considers to be support of illegal activities. The order cited as examples organizations that support “illegal discrimination,” which the administration has previously said includes diversity and inclusion initiatives.The order appeared to target groups supporting gender-affirming care. It said it would exclude from the loan forgiveness program any organization supporting “child abuse, including the chemical and surgical castration or mutilation of children.”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

  • in

    Trump Administration Sends Politically Charged Survey to Researchers

    Scientists on overseas projects must say whether they work with communist governments and help combat “Christian persecution.”The Trump administration has asked researchers and organizations whose work is conducted overseas to disclose ties to those regarded as hostile, including “entities associated with communist, socialist or totalitarian parties,” according to a questionnaire obtained by The New York Times.The online survey was sent this week to groups working abroad to research diseases like H.I.V., gather surveillance data and strengthen public health systems. Recipients received funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the United States Agency for International Development and other federal sources.The questionnaire appears to be very similar to one sent earlier this week to partners of the United States Agency for International Development, which has been all but dismantled by the Trump administration. Both were titled “Foreign Assistance Review.”Recipients were instructed to respond within 48 hours. Some grantees interviewed by The Times feared that impolitic or unsatisfactory answers could lead to cancellation of funding.“Taxpayer dollars must not fund dependency, socialism, corrupt regimes that oppose free enterprise, or intervene in internal matters of another sovereign nation,” the questionnaire said.“A truly prosperous America prioritizes domestic growth, innovation, and economic strength over foreign handouts,” it added.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

  • in

    Trump Offers to Reopen Nuclear Talks in a Letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader

    The letter appears to be President Trump’s opening bid to see if a newly vulnerable Iran is willing to negotiate.President Trump said on Friday that he had sent a letter to Iran’s supreme leader offering to reopen negotiations over the country’s fast-advancing nuclear program, but warned that the country would have to choose between curbing its fast-expanding program or losing it in a military attack.Speaking on Friday in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump suggested that Iran’s nuclear capabilities — which now include enough near-bomb-grade fuel to produce about six weapons — were reaching a critical point. “We’re down to final strokes with Iran,” he told reporters. “We can’t let them have a nuclear weapon.”Earlier on Friday on Fox Business, Mr. Trump said: “There are two ways Iran can be handled: militarily, or you make a deal. I would prefer to make a deal, because I’m not looking to hurt Iran. They’re great people.”He said the letter was sent Wednesday and addressed to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader. The White House did not provide the text or describe its contents with any specificity. It was unclear if it was sent through the Swiss — the traditional intermediary for communications between Washington and Tehran — or through Russia or another nation.Mr. Trump’s offer echoes a similar message to Iran during his first term, after he announced in 2018 that he was pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal that had been negotiated three years earlier by the Obama administration. But he never got talks started, and an effort by President Joseph R. Biden Jr. collapsed.Now, the strategic environment has changed radically. The Justice Department has accused Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps of seeking to assassinate Mr. Trump last year; it issued indictments before Mr. Biden left office. Iran’s nuclear facilities are now exposed to attack, after Israel destroyed almost all of the air defenses protecting them in October. And Iran’s regional proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, are in no condition to threaten Israel with retaliation should the Iranian facilities come under attack.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

  • in

    Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon Says We Don’t Need the Agency

    Education Secretary Linda McMahon delivered a stark message on Friday about the future of her agency. Asked on Fox News whether the United States “needs this department,” Ms. McMahon answered: “No, we don’t.”In the interview, her first since she was confirmed to her cabinet post this week, Ms. McMahon said that President Trump intended to sign an executive order aimed at closing her department, but she declined to give details on timing. She also did not address how the administration might persuade lawmakers to go along. The department cannot be closed without the approval of Congress.Such a move, in a closely divided Senate, would require support from Democrats, which appears unlikely after Ms. McMahon was confirmed along party lines. During the previous session of Congress, a proposal to eliminate the department failed in the Republican-controlled House when 60 Republicans voted against it.Asked about her message to parents and students concerned about what might happen should the department be eliminated, Ms. McMahon said, “We will see scores go up.”Republicans have pushed to close the agency by arguing that student test scores have not improved despite decades of funding from the federal government. Ms. McMahon has said she does not want to cut money for schools, but would rather deliver that funding to states with fewer restrictions.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