Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Lawyers Seek Indefinite Postponement of Documents Trial

      by

      The former president’s legal team argued in a court filing that no trial date should be set until all “substantive motions” in the case were resolved, setting up an early key decision by Judge Aileen M. Cannon.Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump asked a federal judge on Monday night to indefinitely postpone his trial on charges of illegally retaining classified documents after he left office, saying that the proceeding should not begin until all “substantive motions” in the case had been presented and decided.The written filing — submitted 30 minutes before its deadline of midnight on Tuesday — presents a significant early test for Judge Aileen M. Cannon, the Trump-appointed jurist who is overseeing the case. If granted, it could have the effect of pushing Mr. Trump’s trial into the final stages of the presidential campaign in which he is now the Republican front-runner or even past the 2024 election.While timing is important in any criminal matter, it could be hugely consequential in Mr. Trump’s case, in which he stands accused of illegally holding on to 31 classified documents after leaving the White House and obstructing the government’s repeated efforts to reclaim them.There could be complications of a sort never before presented to a court if Mr. Trump is a candidate in the last legs of a presidential campaign and a federal criminal defendant on trial at the same time. If the trial is pushed back until after the election and Mr. Trump wins, he could try to pardon himself after taking office or have his attorney general dismiss the matter entirely.Some of the former president’s advisers have been blunt in private conversations that he is looking to winning the election as a solution to his legal problems. And the request for an open-ended delay to the trial of Mr. Trump and his co-defendant, Walt Nauta, a personal aide, presents a high-stakes question for Judge Cannon, who came into the case already under scrutiny for making decisions favorable to the former president in the early phases of the investigation.The filing came in response to one submitted last month by prosecutors working for the special counsel, Jack Smith, who requested a trial date of Dec. 11. Judge Cannon, appearing to adopt the brisk calendar mandated by the Speedy Trial Act, had initially scheduled the case to go to trial in August.Judges have wide latitude to set schedules for trials, and scheduling orders are typically not subject to appeal to higher courts. That said, given the extraordinary nature of Mr. Trump’s case and the potential implications of a delay, prosecutors under Mr. Smith could in theory try to come up with a rationale to challenge a scheduling decision made by Judge Cannon to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.Mr. Trump’s lawyers pitched their request to Judge Cannon as a plea for cautious deliberation and as a means of safeguarding democracy.“This extraordinary case presents a serious challenge to both the fact and perception of our American democracy,” wrote the lawyers, Chris M. Kise and Todd Blanche for Mr. Trump, and Stanley Woodward Jr. and Sasha Dadan for Mr. Nauta.“The court now presides over a prosecution advanced by the administration of a sitting president against his chief political rival, himself a leading candidate for the presidency of the United States,” they wrote. “Therefore, a measured consideration and timeline that allows for a careful and complete review of the procedures that led to this indictment and the unprecedented legal issues presented herein best serves the interests of the defendants and the public.”The lawyers also took note of the unusual intertwining of law and politics in the case, suggesting that Mr. Trump’s status as a presidential candidate should be factored into the timing of the trial.“President Trump is running for president of the United States and is currently the likely Republican Party nominee,” they wrote. “This undertaking requires a tremendous amount of time and energy, and that effort will continue until the election on Nov. 5, 2024.”“Mr. Nauta’s job requires him to accompany President Trump during most campaign trips around the country,” they continued. “This schedule makes trial preparation with both of the defendants challenging. Such preparation requires significant planning and time.”Walt Nauta, Mr. Trump’s co-defendant and personal aide, leaving the federal courthouse in Miami on Thursday.Alon Skuy/Getty ImagesAnd they suggested that there was no rationale for an expedited trial.“While the government appears to favor an expedited (and therefore cursory) approach to this case, it cannot point to any exigency or urgency requiring a rapid adjudication,” they wrote. “There is no ongoing threat to national security interests nor any concern regarding continued criminal activity.”On Monday, hours before Mr. Trump’s lawyers requested a delay of the trial, a lawyer for Mr. Nauta asked Judge Cannon to postpone a hearing to discuss the issue of the classified materials in the case that was scheduled for Friday. The defense and the prosecution ultimately agreed to delay the hearing, which will take place in Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, Fla., until next Tuesday.Judge Cannon agreed to that schedule change in a brief order issued on Tuesday morning.In making their case to delay the trial, Mr. Trump’s lawyers cited the expansive discovery evidence provided to them by the government.The first discovery disclosure, they said, contained more than 833,450 pages of material, including about 122,650 emails and 305,670 other documents. The lawyers said that after subsequent troves of evidence were handed over, they would most likely make more requests to the government for further information.They also pointed to the complex process of deciding how to handle the sensitive materials at the heart of the case under the Classified Information Procedures Act — the subject of the hearing that had been scheduled for Friday. The lawyers strongly hinted that they were going to fight the government during the pretrial litigation over classified material, a process that could take up significant amounts of time.The filing by Mr. Trump’s legal team presents Judge Aileen M. Cannon, a Trump appointee, with a key early test.Southern District of Florida“In general, the defendants believe there should simply be no ‘secret’ evidence, nor any facts concealed from public view relative to the prosecution of a leading presidential candidate by his political opponent,” the lawyers wrote. “Our democracy demands no less than full transparency.”Aside from its request for a delay, the filing served as a preview of Mr. Trump’s legal strategy as the lawyers laid out ways in which they planned to attack his indictment.They suggested, for example, that they intended to challenge some of the charges he is facing by arguing that the Presidential Records Act permitted Mr. Trump to take documents with him from the White House. That interpretation of the Watergate-era law is at odds with how legal experts interpret it and was not successful during an extended legal battle last year over an outside arbiter who was put in place to review a trove of materials seized by the F.B.I. from Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s private club and residence in Florida.The former president’s lawyers also suggested that they might raise “constitutional and statutory challenges” to Mr. Smith’s authority as special counsel. Moreover, they laid the groundwork for questioning whether an impartial jury could be seated at the trial while Mr. Trump was running for office.“There is simply no question any trial of this action during the pendency of a presidential election will impact both the outcome of that election,” they wrote, “and, importantly, the ability of the defendants to obtain a fair trial.” More

    • 38 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Read the Filing

      by

      Case 9:23-cr-80101-AMC Document 66 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/10/2023 Page 7 of 12

      11. Indeed, significant effort will be required to sort through the purportedly classified documents once received from the Government before any motions on behalf of the Defendants can even be filed. At present, based on the Government’s requested schedule, the trial would begin December 11, 2023, with pre-trial motions due in the preceding months. From a practical matter, the volume of discovery and the CIPA logistics² alone make plain that the Government’s requested

      schedule is unrealistic.

      12. By way of further example, the Government’s proposed timeline differs markedly from two relatively recent CIPA involved cases, United States v. Reality Winner, 464 F. Supp. 3d 1375 (S.D. Ga.), aff’d, 835 F. App’x 1002 (11th Cir. 2020), and United States v. Chaoqun, No. 18-CR-611, 2020 WL 1689826 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 7, 2020). In Winner, the defendant was indicted June 7, 2017, but trial was not set to commence until October 15, 2018 (a plea was ultimately entered prior to trial). In Chaoqun, the defendant was indicted January 24, 2019, but the case was not tried until September 12, 2022. The timelines in both these cases contrast starkly with the Government’s proposed six-month timeline in this case.

      Furthermore, contrary to the Government’s assertion regarding the nature of the legal issues in this matter, (see ECF No. 34), this case presents novel, complex, and unique legal issues, most of which are matters of first impression. As noted above, this Court will need to evaluate the intersection between the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2209, and the various criminal statutes forming the basis of the indictment. These will be questions of first impression for any court in the United States, and their resolution will impact the necessity, scope, and timing of any trial. Moreover, also as noted above, the Defendants anticipate pursuing

      13.

      2 For example, the Defendants cannot possibly provide the requisite notice under CIPA section 5(a) before a full review of the purportedly classified information.

      -7 More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Vivek Ramaswamy Leans Into His Hindu Faith to Court Christian Voters

      by

      Bristol Smith, a manager at a McDonald’s in Maryville, Tenn., came across Vivek Ramaswamy’s name this spring, shortly after Mr. Ramaswamy, an entrepreneur, announced he was running for president. Mr. Smith was intrigued. He liked the way Mr. Ramaswamy “stands up against the wokeness” and his plan to send the military to the southern border to combat drug cartels. He respected Mr. Ramaswamy’s acumen as a businessman worth hundreds of millions of dollars.Then Mr. Smith, 25, searched for Mr. Ramaswamy’s faith. Mr. Smith is an evangelical Christian who recently started a small church that meets at his parents’ house.“I looked up his religion and saw he’s Hindu,” he recalled. “I was going to vote for him until that came up.” What the country needs is to be “put back under God,” as Mr. Smith sees it, and he doesn’t want to take a chance on someone who is not a Christian.At that point, he said, “I got back on President Trump’s train.”Mr. Ramaswamy, 37, was raised by Indian immigrants and is a practicing Hindu. That poses a dilemma for some of the conservative Christian voters who make up a significant share of the Republican primary electorate and are accustomed to evaluating candidates not just on their policy proposals but also on their biographies and personal beliefs, including religious faith. For many conservative voters, a candidate’s faith is a signifier of his or her values, lifestyle, loyalties and priorities as a leader. It’s the Sunday-morning version of the classic question of which candidate you would most enjoy having a beer with: Who would fit in at your church? “It’s another hurdle people need to cross to go to him,” Bob Vander Plaats, an influential evangelical leader in Iowa, said of Mr. Ramaswamy.Mr. Ramaswamy stood for a prayer at the Veterans Freedom Center during a morning pancake breakfast in Dubuque, Iowa.Jordan Gale for The New York TimesMr. Vander Plaats recently had Mr. Ramaswamy’s family over for Sunday supper at his house, where the meal opened with a prayer and the reading of a passage from the Bible. He came away impressed with Mr. Ramaswamy and said that his message aligned with the priorities of many evangelical voters. He mentioned Mr. Ramaswamy’s list of 10 core “truths,” the first of which is: “God is real.” (The second: “There are two genders.”)“I think he’s really connecting with the audiences in Iowa,” said Mr. Vander Plaats, who has not endorsed a candidate. “He welcomes the deeper questions.” Mr. Ramaswamy is polling under 5 percent in most recent national polls.Mr. Ramaswamy’s approach has been to confront the issue directly and argue that he has more in common with observant Christians than they might think.“I’m not Christian. I was not raised in a Christian household,” he told Mr. Vander Plaats in June in front of a small audience at the headquarters of his organization, the Family Leader. “But we do share the same Christian values that this nation was founded on.”In an interview in late June, after leaving a meeting with a few dozen pastors in New Hampshire, Mr. Ramaswamy said his faith taught him that Jesus was “a son of God, absolutely.” (That “a” is a sharp distinction from the central Christian belief that Jesus is the son of God. Hinduism is a fluid and expansive tradition, and many believers embrace scores of deities, with some seeing Jesus as one teacher or god.)Although he is not a Christian, Mr. Ramaswamy pointed out, he speaks openly about why belief in God matters and why rising secularism in America is bad for the country, and about values like marital fidelity, duty, religious liberty and self-sacrifice.“I don’t have a quick pitch to say, ‘No, no, that doesn’t matter,’” he said of the theological differences between Hinduism and Christianity. “It’s that I understand exactly why that would matter to you.”At campaign stops, Mr. Ramaswamy refers to Bible stories, including the crucifixion of Jesus, and quotes Thomas Aquinas. He frequently mentions his experience attending a “Christian school” in Cincinnati (St. Xavier High School, a Catholic school). And he contrasts “religions like ours,” which have stood the test of time, with the competing worldviews of “wokeism, climatism, transgenderism, gender ideology, Covidism,” as he put it to an audience in New Hampshire.Iowa voters asked questions to Mr. Ramaswamy in Dubuque.Jordan Gale for The New York TimesMr. Ramaswamy’s campaign has disseminated clips of an Iowa pastor comparing him to the biblical figure of King David, and of his lengthy answer to a New Hampshire man who asked about his “spiritual beliefs” at a town hall. In Iowa, a woman pressed her hand to Mr. Ramaswamy’s chest and blessed him in the name of Jesus Christ.“Amen,” Mr. Ramaswamy said as she concluded her prayer.If Mr. Ramaswamy comes to have a chance with evangelical primary voters in the crowded Republican field, it will be thanks in part to forces beyond his campaign. Many conservative voters for whom a shared faith might have once been a litmus test now say they are looking not for a “pastor-in-chief” but for someone who shares their political and cultural goals, and who will fight on their behalf.“Theology matters, but the culture has changed. America has changed,” said David Brody, the chief political analyst for the Christian Broadcasting Network, who has interviewed Mr. Ramaswamy. The biggest objective now, Mr. Brody said, is combating “cultural Marxism” and correcting the course of “a country gone haywire.”He contrasted evangelical priorities in next year’s Iowa caucuses with those in 2008 and 2012, when Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum won on the strength of their conservative Christian bona fides.“The lazy narrative that he’s Hindu so he can’t appeal to evangelicals, I don’t buy it at all,” Mr. Brody said.In recent years, theological lines have blurred as political divides have hardened. Few churches split these days over old debates like the exact timing of the end times or the role of free will in salvation. About half of American Protestants now say they prefer to attend a church with people who share their political views, according to polling from Lifeway Research.Mr. Ramaswamy taking a question at a campaign event in Windham, N.H.John Tully for The New York TimesMr. Ramaswamy’s emphasis on his belief in one God has a long history for Hindus in the United States, especially those speaking to white Christian audiences, said Michael Altman, a professor of religious studies at the University of Alabama.Swami Vivekananda, who represented Hinduism at the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Chicago in 1893, took pains to depict his faith as monotheistic, in contrast to the stereotypes of its followers as “heathen” polytheists. Although the faith has many deities, they are generally subordinate to one ultimate “reality.” Many Hindus and scholars say its theology is too complex to be described as either wholly monotheistic or wholly polytheistic.“The polytheism hurdle is the first thing that has to be addressed” for many American Christian audiences, Mr. Altman said. He sees Mr. Ramaswamy’s pitch against “wokeism” as a way to counter stereotypes associating Hinduism with hippies, yoga and vegetarianism.Some evangelical observers say it was former President Donald J. Trump who opened up a new lane for Republican candidates who were not necessarily people that voters would expect to sit next to in church on Sunday morning. Many evangelical voters embraced the crude, thrice-married casino magnate not because he was one of them but because they believed he would fight in the public square on their behalf.Most Indian Americans, including Hindus, are Democrats. But some conservatives see an opening with a population that prioritizes family life, marriage and education. As president, Mr. Trump hosted Diwali celebrations at the White House, and in April the Republican National Committee announced a new Republican Hindu and Indian American Coalition. Prime minister Narendra Modi of India is a popular figure among a rising cohort of right-wing Indian Americans, attracting a crowd of 50,000 when he appeared with Mr. Trump in Houston in 2019. Mr. Ramaswamy spoke last year at a gala organized by the right-wing U.S. group HinduPACT, which is aligned with Mr. Modi’s style of nationalism.President Donald J. Trump lit the ceremonial diya lamp during Diwali celebrations in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in 2018.Doug Mills/The New York TimesNikki Haley, another Indian American contender in the 2024 primary, has similarly emphasized her background as the daughter of immigrants. But although Ms. Haley was raised Sikh, she converted to Christianity and now attends a large Methodist church in South Carolina. Bobby Jindal, a Louisiana Republican who ran for president in 2016, was raised Hindu but has described himself as an “evangelical Catholic.”Mr. Ramaswamy attends the same temple in Dayton, Ohio, that he did as a child and that his parents still do.One of the temple’s priests officiated his wedding in New York City in 2015. He and his wife and their two young sons attend temple on holidays and to mark special occasions, including the younger son’s first birthday in early July, his wife, Dr. Apoorva Ramaswamy, said. Dr. Ramaswamy, who has publicly discussed the family’s faith on the campaign trail, said there were more similarities among committed believers across traditions than between serious and nominal adherents within the same faith.“The fact that we are believers, that we have that sense of humility, that we raise our children with true respect and fear and love of God — that’s so much more unifying than the name of the God people pray to,” Dr. Ramaswamy said.The question for her husband’s campaign is whether enough Christian voters will agree.Ken Bosse, the pastor of New Life Church in Raymond, N.H., described himself as “an extreme follower of Jesus Christ” who would prefer to have a Christian in the White House, all things considered. But he would be open to the right candidate who is not a Christian, noting that “we have had some professing Christians in that position who didn’t follow biblical principles.”Mr. Bosse invited Mr. Ramaswamy to deliver a brief speech at his church on a Sunday morning in April. He liked the candidate’s emphasis on reclaiming a positive American identity, he said, and on his story as a self-made millionaire who is the child of immigrants.At the moment, however, Mr. Bosse is leaning toward supporting Mr. Trump. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Iowa Republicans Set the Date for the Party’s Caucuses — and It’s Early

      by

      The state party will hold a nominating contest in January, the earliest it has been held in recent campaign cycles.The NewsIowa Republicans voted on Saturday to hold their caucuses on Jan. 15, 2024, pushing the state’s first-in-the-nation nominating contest weeks earlier than in recent years.The state party voted unanimously to hold the elections on the third Monday of the month, which coincides with the federal holiday recognizing the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.Jeff Kaufmann, chairman of the state party, said in a statement after the vote that the Republicans “remain committed to maintaining Iowa’s cherished first-in-the-nation caucuses and look forward to holding a historic caucus in the coming months and defeating Joe Biden come November 2024.”Iowa Democrats were “aware of the decision” but “did not have a chance to have any input” on the date selection, according to a statement from Rita Hart, the chair of the state party.“No matter what, Iowa Democrats are committed to moving forward with the most inclusive caucus process in Iowa’s history,” Ms. Hart said.Republican voters at a caucus location in Pella, Iowa, in February 2016.Eric Thayer for The New York TimesWhy It Matters: Republicans Reaffirm While Democrats ReorderRepublican presidential hopefuls have been campaigning aggressively in the state, which is seen as crucial to many candidates, including former President Donald J. Trump, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, former Vice President Mike Pence and Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, all of whom are courting the state’s more rural and evangelical voters in an effort to gain early momentum in the race.The selected day is also the date that a judge has set for a defamation trial against Mr. Trump filed by E. Jean Carroll. Ms. Carroll (who also has filed a separate defamation suit) won a civil case against Mr. Trump in May.Iowa’s status as the first presidential contest was seemingly upended last year, when Democrats reordered their nominating calendar to prioritize states with more racial diversity and move away from the caucus system.With Mr. Biden’s approval, the D.N.C. in February voted in favor of a new calendar that propelled South Carolina — the state that saved his candidacy in 2020 — to the first primary spot on Feb. 3, 2024, from the fourth position it held in 2020. Democrats in New Hampshire and Nevada would then hold their contests three days later.Republicans did not follow suit, keeping Iowa in first position, meaning the Midwestern state remains a key battleground for Republicans as the large field of contenders try to dislodge Mr. Trump from his position as the front-runner for the party’s nomination.Background: Iowa Isn’t Always Right, but It’s Still ImportantThe date chosen by the state party is weeks earlier than it was for the past several caucuses: In 2020 the contest was held on Feb. 3, and in 2016 it fell on Feb. 1. The last time the state held its caucuses in January was in 2012, when they occurred just three days into the new year.Iowa has not selected the party’s eventual nominee, excluding incumbent presidents, since 2000, when George W. Bush won the caucuses and then the general election.Still, many Republican candidates, and voters nationwide, see the now-firmly-red state as crucial to gaining early momentum and national attention. In a year when Mr. Trump maintains a considerable lead in the primary polls, performing well with a constituency well-accustomed to being courted by politicians is seen by many candidates in the 2024 race as vital to any chance at success.What’s Next: The Date Has Changed, but Not Much ElseRepublican presidential hopefuls will continue to court Iowans in the six remaining months before the caucuses, as front-runners and long-shot candidates alike have ramped up their appearances in the state.Mr. Trump held a rally in Iowa on Friday, where he made farming issues central to his pitch for why voters should select him, a clear nod to the state’s agriculture-based economy. And Mr. DeSantis’s wife, Casey, visited Iowa on Thursday for an event held alongside the state’s Republican governor, Kim Reynolds.Several candidates will appear in the state next week for the Family Leadership Summit in Des Moines, advertised as “the Midwest’s biggest gathering of Christians seeking cultural transformation.” The event will feature appearances from candidates including Mr. Scott and Mr. Pence, as well as an interview with Mr. DeSantis and the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. More

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Can the Republican Party Reverse Course?

      by

      Readers discuss a guest essay by a former judge urging the G.O.P. to “put country over party.”To the Editor:Re “It’s Not Too Late for the Republican Party,” by J. Michael Luttig (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, June 25):Judge Luttig is to be commended for being a voice in the wilderness of Republican politics; however, the party isn’t worth saving. If it were, the judge would offer some of the party’s alternatives to the grievances and demonization that have been its hallmarks since long before Donald Trump.The party chose enemies over ideas a long time ago. Its leaders have shown no interest in putting forth meaningful policies while they have kept their voters distracted and convinced that, all evidence to the contrary, Hillary or gay or Jewish or Black people or drag queens or the Bidens or Mexicans are to blame for everything.Donald Trump isn’t the only problem. In fact, without his talents as a confidence man, Republicans would have to face their own failures of leadership, and the people of this country might find out that the party does have an agenda that has very little to do with improving the daily lives of its “base.”Stuart BernsteinShohola, Pa.To the Editor:Judge J. Michael Luttig has meticulously captured just about every free-floating, rambling thought that I (and probably millions of us) have had about Donald Trump, MAGA Republicans and unfortunately the bulk of the complicit Republican Party.Here, in Maine, Senator Susan Collins has never had the gumption above a “tut, tut” here and there to rise to the caliber of statesmanship and bravery of Senator Margaret Chase Smith, who went after the rabid Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s (“Declaration of Conscience” Senate speech).Remember what “leadership” was? Remember when we all, Republicans and Democrats, could be inspired and admire a politician? I take no satisfaction as a Democrat in seeing the Republican Party act as if it were the antithesis of its purported values, and rot away. I admire a worthy adversary and wish for the sake of the country we had one.I hope the few honorable, outspoken, patriotic Republicans can get their act together after the 2024 election dust settles and finally shake the extremists’ power grip on the party for good.David GainesYarmouth, MaineTo the Editor:As the progression of deepening legal issues with compelling evidence continues to plague former President Donald Trump, the growing chorus of criticism of him by former members of his administration and other notable loyalists is at once welcome and unconscionably long overdue.Some of the same people who are belatedly coming forth to castigate Mr. Trump formerly lavished praise on their unhinged idol, directly enabling his illegal and unethical conduct at great cost to the country.William Barr, probably the most notable defector, went from leading an egregiously politicized Justice Department — acting essentially as Mr. Trump’s personal attorney — to denouncing his former boss’s criminal and unethical behavior in a string of interviews. Chris Christie, now in a quest for the White House himself, is reprimanding as unfit for office the man he once obsequiously praised as he sought a cabinet appointment.Clearly, more Republicans who, reluctantly or not, embraced or tolerated Mr. Trump’s misdeeds need to finally break their silence with the same fervor they exhibited to support him.Any effort by members of his own party, however belated, that discredits the former president and short-circuits his hopes of re-election would be an indispensable contribution to the best interests of the majority of Americans.Roger HirschbergSouth Burlington, Vt.To the Editor:Finally, someone with stature addresses the “elephant” in the room. Liz Cheney sacrificed her congressional seat for principle. Why don’t the seasoned Republicans who likely will never seek office or an appointed political post again, and have nothing to lose, show some courage?I think of: Olympia Snowe, Dan Quayle, George W. Bush, George Pataki, John Danforth, Pete Wilson, Elizabeth Dole, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Phil Scott, Christine Todd Whitman, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chuck Hagel, Nancy Kassebaum, John Ashcroft, Dan Coats, William Cohen, Alfonse D’Amato, Jeff Flake, Bill Frist, Alan Simpson, Ted Olson, William Weld and a host of others.J. Michael Luttig could not have put it better: “It’s finally time for [Republicans] to put the country before their party and pull back from the brink — for the good of the party, as well as the nation. If not now, then they must forever hold their peace.”J.D. RosinSan FranciscoTo the Editor:Does Judge J. Michael Luttig, whose criticism of the present-day Republican Party and its elevation of Donald Trump is so unsparing and cleareyed, not recognize that they are both the inevitable products of the G.O.P.’s win-at-any-cost philosophy, which has dominated the party’s political decisions for at least the past 30 years?That was his party.Cheryl KraussBrooklynTo the Editor:Judge J. Michael Luttig’s essay is titled “It’s Not Too Late for the Republican Party,” but he shows little hope this is true, stating, “There’s no stopping Republicans now, until they have succeeded in completely politicizing the rule of law in service to their partisan political ends.” His indictment of the Republican Party is withering and spot on.Sadly, most politicians and voters currently calling themselves Republicans will ignore Judge Luttig’s indictment. In the Orwellian world of the far right, the reactionaries who have taken over the Republican Party (as the soulless pods in “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” took over real human beings) will dismiss him as a RINO — though RINOs are the true Republicans.Judge Luttig surmises, “If the indictment of Mr. Trump … fails to shake the Republican Party from its moribund political senses, then it is beyond saving itself. Nor ought it be saved.” He adds, “There is no path to the White House for Republicans with Mr. Trump.”Judge Luttig is right that the Republican Party is probably beyond saving, but he might be wrong that the Republicans cannot win politically. If they do, what will save our democracy?Michael BialesActon, Mass. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump and DeSantis Are Battling for Iowa Voters. And for Its Governor, Too.

      by

      When Kim Reynolds, the Republican governor of Iowa, stopped by a donor retreat that Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida held last year, no one paid it much mind.When she sat earlier this year with Mr. DeSantis onstage, at another donor gathering down the road from Donald J. Trump’s residence, people began to notice. When she glowingly appeared with Mr. DeSantis not once, not twice, but at all three of his first visits to her state this year, eyebrows arched. And by the time Ms. Reynolds appeared on Thursday alongside Casey DeSantis, the governor’s wife, alarms inside the Trump headquarters were blaring.Ms. Reynolds has said — including privately, to Mr. Trump — that she does not plan to formally endorse a candidate in the presidential race, in keeping with a tradition that the Iowa governor stays on the sidelines, keeping the playing field level for the first G.O.P. nominating contest. But through her words and deeds, Ms. Reynolds seems to be softening the ground in Iowa for Mr. DeSantis, appearing to try to create the conditions for an opening for him to take on Mr. Trump.For Mr. DeSantis, Iowa is where his allies acknowledge he must first halt Mr. Trump’s momentum to prevent him from steam-rolling his way to a third consecutive G.O.P. nomination. For Mr. Trump, it is where he hopes to snuff out his challengers’ candidacies, and win where he did not in 2016.And there is no politician in Iowa with greater sway than Ms. Reynolds, 63, who has overseen her party’s swelling state legislative majorities with an approval rating among Republicans near 90 percent. Republicans say she can command attention and shape the landscape even without making a formal endorsement.“I mean I think Kim could be considered for just about anything that a president would pick,” Mr. DeSantis said, when asked by a television interviewer if he’d consider Ms. Reynolds for a potential cabinet post.Jordan Gale for The New York TimesMs. Reynolds has appeared alongside other candidates — including Mr. Trump, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy and Tim Scott — but the warmth of her embrace of Mr. DeSantis has become conspicuous. It has been the subject of internal Trump campaign discussions — it has not escaped their notice that one of her senior political advisers, Ryan Koopmans, is also a top DeSantis super PAC adviser — and even public fulminations from the former president.“I hate to say it, without me, you know, she was not going to win, you know that, right?” Mr. Trump said of Ms. Reynolds when he campaigned in Iowa in June.The Republican crowd, notably, did not applaud that off-key remark, which came only months after Ms. Reynolds had romped to re-election, carrying 95 of the state’s 99 counties. But the claim spoke to the former president’s self-centered view of the world: That it was his appointment of her predecessor, Terry Branstad, as his ambassador to China that cleared the way for Ms. Reynolds, then Mr. Branstad’s lieutenant governor, to take the state’s top job.Ms. Reynolds is said to have tired of Mr. Trump, and she reacted with disbelief to his comment that she owed him her governorship, according to people familiar with her thinking and her response. Still, she sided with Mr. Trump after his most recent indictment, lashing out at the Biden administration and saying it was a “sad day for America.”The two do have a shared history: Ms. Reynolds narrowly won a full term in 2018 with only 50.3 percent of the vote after Mr. Trump held a late rally for her, hailing her as “someone who has become a real star in the Republican Party.” More recently, however, Mr. Trump has been privately complaining about Ms. Reynolds and other prominent Republicans, who he feels owe him their endorsements because of his past support.Before Mr. Trump’s latest visit to Iowa on Friday, a behind-the-scenes standoff played out for days over whether Ms. Reynolds would join him. Ms. Reynolds has said she will make an effort to appear with whomever invites her, but an aide said she had not actually been invited. The Trump team sees her as having a standing invitation. Ultimately, she did not attend.The relationship with Mr. DeSantis, who has privately courted Ms. Reynolds for many months, has been strikingly different.He calls her Kim.She calls him Ron.They banter with a degree of familiarity and friendship that Mr. DeSantis rarely flashes with other politicians. People who know them say they forged a bond during the coronavirus pandemic, as two governors who pressed to open their states over the warnings of some public health officials. They sat down for a private dinner in March, on his first visit to Iowa this year, according to two people briefed on the meal, and in 2022 Mr. DeSantis called Ms. Reynolds to offer his encouragement ahead of her State of the Union response.When Mr. DeSantis was asked by a local television interviewer on his first trip to Iowa as a presidential candidate if he’d consider Ms. Reynolds for a potential cabinet post, he offered a surprisingly expansive answer, suggestive of something even more lofty: “I mean I think Kim could be considered for just about anything that a president would pick.”At times, she has had the look of a running mate.Appearing with Mr. DeSantis at three of his four visits to Iowa this year, and now with his wife as well, Ms. Reynolds has extolled Florida’s achievements under his leadership and connected his state’s successes to Iowa’s. The two lavish compliments on each other, and their talking points echo in perfect harmony.He says Florida is “the Iowa of the Southeast.” She says Iowa is “the Florida of the North.”In her introduction at his kickoff event, she made a point of specifically praising Mr. DeSantis for signing a six-week abortion ban, which Mr. Trump has criticized.“He proudly signed a law that makes it illegal to stop a baby’s beating heart — the same heartbeat bill that I was proud to sign,” she said of Mr. DeSantis.Some Iowa Republicans said Ms. Reynolds is simply being a gracious host.“She’s very popular but I don’t think she’s playing favorites,” said Steve Scheffler, one of the state’s Republican National Committee members and the president of the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition. “People read way too much into this.”Mr. Trump has been privately complaining about Ms. Reynolds and other prominent Republicans, who he feels owe him their endorsements because of his past support. Doug Mills/The New York TimesBut Trump advisers have snickered privately about her having neutrality-in-name-only. “She is quote unquote neutral,” said a person close to Mr. Trump, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the team’s thinking, which is that Ms. Reynolds will do whatever she can to help Mr. DeSantis short of endorsing him.The Washington bureau chief for Breitbart News, Matthew Boyle, who is known for his close relationship with the former president, glaringly left Ms. Reynolds off his recent list of 14 Republicans Mr. Trump could pick as his 2024 running mate.Mr. Trump has some well-placed allies in Iowa — the state party chairman’s son, who is in the legislature, is among his paid advisers — and he is seeking more. On his June visit to the state, he invited a small group of prominent Republican officials whose endorsements are still up for grabs out for dinner at a steakhouse in downtown Des Moines, among them the state’s attorney general, according to people who attended the meal.In an interview, Mr. Branstad, the former Iowa governor, described the Trump-Reynolds relationship as “cordial,” praised Ms. Reynolds as a popular and effective governor and said her formal neutrality was good for all Iowans. He urged the former president to overcome his irritation.“Trump has got to get over it,” Mr. Branstad said. “He’s got to get over the jealousy and resentment and focus on the future. You win elections by focusing on the future and not the past.”There has been no recent independent polling in Iowa. In national surveys, Mr. Trump has led Mr. DeSantis by a wide margin.Ms. Reynolds is not just the governor of Iowa: She also presides over the Republican Governors Association, the nationwide campaign arm for Republicans seeking governorships. Both her elected G.O.P. counterparts leading the Senate and House campaign arms have already endorsed Mr. Trump.Yet like other prominent Iowa elected officials, Ms. Reynolds has made it clear that her primary goal is to ensure that Iowa keeps its “first in the nation” status. At a college-football game last fall in Iowa, Ms. Reynolds was in a V.I.P. box mingling with members of the state’s congressional delegation as they discussed the importance of staying “neutral” to protect Iowa’s enviable position at the top of the Republican voting calendar, according to a person present for the conversation (Democrats took away the state’s leadoff spot in 2024).“We aren’t going to get involved in campaigns, because we want everybody to feel welcome in Iowa,” Senator Chuck Grassley, the 89-year-old Republican senior statesman, said in an interview. “And if the governor were to back somebody, that may discourage other people from coming. Same way for me.”Casey DeSantis traveled to Iowa on Thursday, making her first solo appearance in her husband’s presidential campaign at an event with Ms. Reynolds.Kathryn Gamble for The New York TimesBut there is some burbling frustration with Mr. Trump inside the delegation.Last month, Mr. Trump skipped the signature “Roast and Ride” event organized by Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa. His campaign had expressed interest in sending videotaped remarks, and Ms. Ernst’s operation then rented large screens for the purpose of showing them, but he never sent a video — leaving Ms. Ernst’s team without a recording, and the cost of the equipment to cover, according to five people briefed on the incident.Ms. Ernst’s team had planned on using the chance to win a motorcycle helmet signed by all of the Republican candidates as a lure to sell tickets to the “Roast and Ride.” They sent the helmet to Mr. Trump, who returned it later than expected and had added the numbers “45” and “47,” signaling he would be the 47th president, the role everyone else is also running for, according to two people with knowledge of the episode. They never used the helmet.In March of this year, Ms. Reynolds did introduce Mr. Trump at an event. In a private meeting during that same trip, Ms. Reynolds stressed to Mr. Trump that her focus was on maintaining Iowa’s place as the first state in the nation on the campaign calendar, according to a person familiar with what took place but who was not authorized to discuss it publicly. Mr. Trump responded by telling her that he was the one who had protected the caucuses’ leadoff position, as president. (The Iowa caucuses have begun the nominating process since the 1970s.)At their joint event on Thursday, Ms. Reynolds and Ms. DeSantis bantered onstage and even exchanged a high-five.“I am a woman on a mission,” Ms. Reynolds said at one point, “and I think you are a woman on a mission, too.”Lisa Lerer More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Asked About I.R.S. Inquiry of F.B.I. Officials, Ex-Aide Says Under Oath

      by

      In a court filing, John Kelly, who was a chief of staff under Donald Trump, said the former president had asked about having the tax agency look into Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.John F. Kelly, who served as former President Donald J. Trump’s second White House chief of staff, said in a sworn statement that Mr. Trump had discussed having the Internal Revenue Service and other federal agencies investigate two F.B.I. officials involved in the investigation into his campaign’s ties to Russia.Mr. Kelly said that his recollection of Mr. Trump’s comments to him was based on notes that he had taken at the time in 2018. Mr. Kelly provided copies of his notes to lawyers for one of the F.B.I. officials, who made the sworn statement public in a court filing.“President Trump questioned whether investigations by the Internal Revenue Service or other federal agencies should be undertaken into Mr. Strzok and/or Ms. Page,” Mr. Kelly said in the statement. “I do not know of President Trump ordering such an investigation. It appeared, however, that he wanted to see Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page investigated.”Mr. Kelly’s assertions were disclosed on Thursday in a statement that was filed in connection with lawsuits brought by Peter Strzok, who was the lead agent in the F.B.I.’s Russia investigation, and Lisa Page, a former lawyer in the bureau, against the Justice Department for violating their privacy rights when the Trump administration made public text messages between them.The disclosures from Mr. Kelly, made under penalty of perjury, demonstrate the extent of Mr. Trump’s interest in harnessing the law enforcement and investigative powers of the federal government to target his perceived enemies. In the aftermath of Richard M. Nixon’s presidency, Congress made it illegal for a president to “directly or indirectly” order an I.R.S. investigation or audit.The New York Times reported last July that two of Mr. Trump’s greatest perceived enemies — James B. Comey, whom he fired as F.B.I. director, and Mr. Comey’s deputy, Andrew G. McCabe — were the subject of the same type of highly unusual and invasive I.R.S. audit.It is not known whether the I.R.S. investigated Mr. Strzok or Ms. Page. But Mr. Strzok became a subject in the investigation conducted by the special counsel John Durham into how the F.B.I. investigated Mr. Trump’s campaign. Neither Mr. Strzok nor Ms. Page was charged in connection with that investigation, which former law enforcement officials and Democrats have criticized as an effort to carry out Mr. Trump’s vendetta against the bureau. Mr. Strzok is also suing the department for wrongful termination.Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page exchanged text messages that were critical of Mr. Trump and were later made public by Rod J. Rosenstein, then the deputy attorney general under Mr. Trump, as he faced heavy criticism from Republicans on Capitol Hill who were trying to find ways to undermine him.The sworn statements from Mr. Kelly are similar to ones he made to The New York Times in November, in which he said that Mr. Trump had told him that he wanted a number of his perceived political enemies to be investigated by the I.R.S., including Mr. Comey, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page.Mr. Kelly told The Times last year that Mr. Trump’s demands were part of a broader pattern of attempts to use the Justice Department and his authority as president against people who had been critical of him, including seeking to revoke the security clearances of former top intelligence officials.In the sworn statement, Mr. Kelly said that Mr. Trump had discussed having the security clearances of Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page revoked, although Mr. Kelly did not take action on the idea. Mr. Kelly said that his notes showed that Mr. Trump discussed the investigations of the two on Feb. 21, 2018.“I did not make a note of every instance in which then President Trump made a comment about Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page,” Mr. Kelly said. “President Trump generally disapproved of note-taking in meetings. He expressed concern that the notes might later be used against him.”Mr. Kelly said that he never took any steps to follow through on Mr. Trump’s desires to have his enemies investigated.Mr. Trump has said he knew nothing about the audits of Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe and their spouses. The I.R.S.’s inspector general found last year that Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe had been randomly selected for the audits, though the inspector general’s report acknowledged some deviations from the I.R.S.’s rigorous rules for random selection when the agency made final selections of the returns that would be audited.Mr. Kelly told The Times last year that Mr. Trump had at times discussed using the I.R.S. and the Justice Department to address others in addition to Mr. Comey, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page.They included, Mr. Kelly said, the former C.I.A. director John O. Brennan; Hillary Clinton; and Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon and the owner of The Washington Post, whose coverage often angered Mr. Trump. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      In Ag-Friendly Iowa, Trump Goes After DeSantis on Farming Issues

      by

      At a rally in Iowa on Friday, the former president questioned his top Republican rival’s support for the agriculture industry.Donald J. Trump attacked Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida on Friday over his support for farmers, saying his chief rival for the Republican presidential nomination would be “a catastrophe” for the country’s agriculture industry.Mr. Trump claimed at a rally in Iowa that Mr. DeSantis would outsource American farming jobs overseas and oppose the federal mandate for ethanol, a fuel made from corn and other crops. Support for ethanol, which Iowa is a national leader in producing, is a quadrennial issue in presidential elections in this early voting state.In 2017, Mr. DeSantis supported legislation that would end the renewable fuel standard, a nearly two-decade-old standard that requires refiners to blend biofuel into gasoline nationwide. The policy is opposed by some conservatives, who see the mandate as onerous government regulation.Speaking to more than 2,000 supporters in Council Bluffs, Iowa, on Friday, Mr. Trump rattled off his record of delivering on priorities for conservative farmers, including raising the exemption limit on the estate tax and replacing the North American Free Trade Agreement. Then, he eagerly highlighted what he claimed was his rival’s history of opposing an issue that carries outsize political weight in Iowa.“He has been fighting for years to kill every single job supported by this vital industry,” he said of ethanol. “If he had his way, the entire economy of Iowa would absolutely collapse.”Bryan Griffin, a spokesman for the DeSantis campaign, said in an email that Mr. Trump’s comments were a sign of his “eroding support” in Iowa.“This unfortunately isn’t the first instance of Donald Trump distorting the governor’s record, and we know it won’t be the last,” Mr. Griffin said. “As president, Ron DeSantis will be a champion for farmers and use every tool available to open new markets.” The event marked Mr. Trump’s first large event in the state in nearly four months, after a rally scheduled for May was canceled by the campaign, which cited possible severe weather.Held in a convention hall near the Nebraska border, the rally was packed with voters from the neighboring — and non-early voting — state.“I hope Nebraska is represented here,” Mr. Trump said as the crowd exploded in cheers. “That’s a big contingent.” More