Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares63 Views

      in Elections

      Where the Gaza Cease-Fire Deal Goes Now Is Uncertain. Here’s What to Know.

      by

      As negotiators are holding discussions on multiple tracks, Palestinians and Israelis are in limbo.Nearly a week after the first stage of Israel and Hamas’s cease-fire expired, both Palestinians and Israelis are in limbo, uncertain how long the truce will hold.The Trump administration, the Arab world, Israel, Hamas and others are now wrangling over the future of the Gaza Strip in a complex series of negotiations — some of which are unfolding along different channels, adding to the confusion.Here’s a look at the state of the cease-fire talks and who is involved.Israel and Hamas are negotiating through mediators.In mid-January, after 15 months of devastating war, Israel and Hamas agreed to a truce that would free hostages held in Gaza since the Hamas-led October 2023 attack on southern Israel, in exchange for Palestinian prisoners.But the agreement did not end the war. Instead, the two sides committed to a complex, multiphase plan meant to build momentum toward a comprehensive cease-fire. They were supposed to negotiate terms for the full truce during the first stage, which lasted six weeks.Last weekend, the six weeks elapsed with little apparent success toward that goal, despite efforts by Qatar and Egypt, who have been mediating the talks. (Israel and Hamas do not negotiate directly.)Released Palestinian prisoners celebrating as they arrived in the Gaza Strip in February.Saher Alghorra for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares37 Views

      in Elections

      Who’s Got Trump’s Ear on Tariffs? Lutnick or Navarro?

      by

      Corporate leaders and investors continue to be caught off guard by the president’s trade policy, especially as deal talks heat up. Looking for tariff relief? Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, appears to be one to call.Tierney L. Cross for The New York TimesWho’s in the room President Trump’s tariff policy has given corporate chiefs and investors a serious case of whiplash. While the markets cheered on Wednesday’s delay on auto sector levies, setting off an impressive late-day rally, the move also adds to the confusion about what comes next.The latest: There’s increasing buzz that agricultural products are next in line for tariff relief, as the president faces intense lobbying from his party. And the release on Wednesday of the Fed’s beige book survey of regional activity showed that companies were growing worried that the levies would push up prices.One school of thought on Trump’s tariff plans: they could level the field before negotiations. Trump himself sees them as a tool to bolster the U.S. economy.A way to think about this is to look at the people in his orbit. On tariffs, there are two key, and seemingly polar opposite, figures.There’s Howard Lutnick, the former head of Cantor Fitzgerald who is a moderate on trade and now commerce secretary. And there is Peter Navarro, a longtime Trump lieutenant and a proponent of high tariffs who is generally opposed to trade deals.Who has more influence? For now, it seems to be Lutnick. Trump’s announcement of a one-month pause on tariffs on cars coming through Canada and Mexico wouldn’t have surprised anyone who heard Lutnick’s comments earlier in the day.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 Shares75 Views

      in Elections

      D.C.’s Planned Removal of Black Lives Matter Mural Reflects Mayor’s Delicate Position

      by

      Mayor Muriel Bowser’s decision comes amid calls by the president and other Republicans for more federal control of the city.On Wednesday morning in downtown Washington, D.C., Keyonna Jones stood on her artwork and remembered the time when she and six other artists were summoned by the mayor’s office to paint a mural in the middle of the night.“BLACK LIVES MATTER,” the mural read in bright yellow letters on a street running two city blocks, blaring the message at the White House sitting just across Lafayette Square. In June 2020, when Ms. Jones helped paint the mural, demonstrations were breaking out in cities nationwide in protest of George Floyd’s murder. The creation of Black Lives Matter Plaza was a statement of defiance from D.C.’s mayor, Muriel E. Bowser, who had clashed with President Trump, then in his first term, over the presence of federal troops in the streets of her city.But on Tuesday evening, the mayor announced the mural was going away.Ms. Jones said the news upset her. But, she added of the mayor in an interview, “I get where she is coming from.”The city of Washington is in an extraordinarily vulnerable place these days. Republicans in Congress have introduced legislation that would end D.C.’s already limited power to govern itself, stripping residents of the ability to elect a mayor and city council. Mr. Trump himself has said that he supports a federal takeover of Washington, insisting to reporters that the federal government would “run it strong, run it with law and order, make it absolutely, flawlessly beautiful.” In recent days, the administration has been considering executive orders in pursuit of his vision for the city.Potential laws and orders aside, the administration has already fired thousands of federal workers, leaving residents throughout the city without livelihoods and, according to the city’s official estimate, potentially costing Washington around $1 billion in lost revenue over the next three years.Given all this, Ms. Bowser, a Democrat, described her decision about Black Lives Matter Plaza as a pragmatic calculation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares79 Views

      in Elections

      Federal Grant Program Opens Door to Elon Musk’s Starlink

      by

      The Trump administration said on Wednesday that it would overhaul a $42 billion federal grant program aimed at expanding high-speed internet to the nation, including easing some rules that could benefit Elon Musk’s satellite internet service, Starlink.The program will be revamped to “take a tech-neutral approach” in its distribution of funds to states, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in a statement. The program’s rules, which were created during the Biden administration, previously favored broadband lines made of fiber-optic cables attached to homes.“The department is ripping out the Biden administration’s pointless requirements,” Mr. Lutnick said. The Commerce Department will also remove regulatory and other barriers that slow down construction and connection to households, he added.Congress created the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment Program in 2021 to extend broadband to the most remote areas of the nation. The Commerce Department came up with standards and rules for states and territories applying for the funds — including the preference for fiber-optic broadband, which provides the fastest internet service speeds.Mr. Musk, who is a close adviser to President Trump and helping to lead a government efficiency initiative, is chief executive of SpaceX, the rocket company that makes Starlink. Starlink uses low-altitude satellites to beam internet service to dishes anywhere on the planet and then to devices. It serves nearly five million subscribers worldwide and was used by emergency responders late last year in North Carolina when communications networks shut down after a hurricane.The Commerce Department’s internet program has not yet disbursed any funds, and Republicans have used it as an example of a program that was slowed down by red tape.Some have accused the Biden administration of unfairly blocking Starlink from the grants and say the satellite service can immediately serve some of the most remote areas of the nation.In 2023, the Federal Communications Commission rejected Starlink’s application for almost $900 million in subsidies in a separate rural broadband program, saying the company failed to show it could meet service requirements for the funding.Brendan Carr, then a Republican F.C.C. commissioner and now chairman of the agency, opposed that decision and said the action had put the F.C.C. on a “growing list of administrative agencies that are taking action against Elon Musk’s businesses.”Mr. Musk’s business interests — which also include the electric-car maker Tesla and the social media company X — have prompted concerns about potential conflicts of interest as he makes important decisions in Washington.On Wednesday, some public interest groups expressed concern that Mr. Lutnick’s plans to change the broadband program could directly benefit Mr. Musk.“Fiber broadband is widely understood to be better than other internet options — like Starlink’s satellites — because it delivers significantly faster speeds,” said Drew Garner, a director of policy engagement for the nonprofit Benton Institute for Broadband & Society.The Commerce Department did not immediately respond to requests for details on the plan. Mr. Musk did not respond to a request for comment. More

    • 138 Shares71 Views

      in Elections

      Elon Musk Meets With Senate Republicans Amid Tensions Over Federal Cuts

      by

      Elon Musk heads to Capitol Hill for a diplomatic mission.Yesterday, Senate Republicans were quick to give Elon Musk a standing ovation in the House chamber as President Trump heaped praise on his efforts to overhaul the federal government.Today, though, they seized the opportunity to ask him some questions privately: an hour and 45 minutes’ worth of questions, to be exact.Musk’s foray into government led the world’s richest man, a person who intends to colonize Mars, to find himself in the more earthly confines of Senate Republicans’ regular Wednesday lunch.A phalanx of photographers and reporters waited in a Senate hallway, under a portrait of the former senator from Massachusetts Charles Sumner, hoping to get a chance to ask Musk about his first diplomatic mission to Capitol Hill since Trump took office.Photographers’ lenses swiveled every time someone came around the corner.“Not me!” Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota said at one point. “Next one.”Musk appeared shortly behind him, deep in conversation with Senator Rick Scott of Florida, before disappearing into the lunchroom.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares45 Views

      in Elections

      Mike Johnson’s Chief of Staff Arrested for DUI After Trump Speech, Police Say

      by

      The U.S. Capitol Police said the chief of staff to Speaker Mike Johnson was arrested for drunken driving on Tuesday night after the top aide backed his car into a parked Capitol Police vehicle.The arrest came soon after President Trump, with Mr. Johnson presiding behind him, finished delivering his first address to a joint session of Congress since returning to office.“A driver backed into a parked vehicle last night around 11:40 p.m.,” a Capitol Police spokesman said in a statement. “We responded and arrested them for D.U.I.”Mr. Johnson’s office confirmed on Wednesday that Hayden Haynes, the speaker’s chief of staff, was involved in an “encounter” with Capitol Police on Tuesday night, releasing a statement that indicated that he would continue to hold his powerful post.“The speaker has known and worked closely with Hayden for nearly a decade and trusted him to serve as his chief of staff for his entire tenure in Congress,” Taylor Haulsee, Mr. Johnson’s spokesman, said in a statement about the arrest, which was reported earlier by NBC News. “Because of this and Hayden’s esteemed reputation among members and staff alike, the speaker has full faith and confidence in Hayden’s ability to lead the speaker’s office.”Mr. Haynes was released with a citation, rather than taken to jail, and would have a court date “within the coming weeks,” according to the Capitol Police. Since drunken driving cases in Washington, D.C., are prosecuted by the district’s attorney general rather than the U.S. district attorney’s office under the Justice Department, the Trump administration would have no apparent role in the case. More

    • 125 Shares41 Views

      in Elections

      Pro-Palestinian Activists Occupy Barnard Building for 2nd Time in Week

      by

      The Police Department said several demonstrators were taken into custody during the sit-in at the college’s main library.About two dozen pro-Palestinian demonstrators at Barnard College in Manhattan occupied the lobby of the school’s main library on Wednesday, escalating a confrontation with school administrators and leading to several protesters being taken into custody, the police said.Chanting “Free Palestine” and wearing masks and kaffiyeh over their faces, the protesters began their sit-in inside the Milstein Center for Teaching and Learning about 1 p.m. The school blocked access to the building shortly afterward, and classes were disrupted.The protest came at a moment when pro-Palestinian activism on college campuses is a subject of intense interest to the Trump administration. In executive orders, President Trump has threatened to revoke federal funding to universities that allow what he and his administration regard as antisemitic activity, and he has made clear that pro-Palestinian protests, particularly those that appear to support Hamas, can qualify as such in his view.Hours after the protest began on Wednesday afternoon, the situation remained fluid as Police Department vans and officers with zip ties began gathering near Barnard’s campus at 116th Street and Broadway. Shortly afterward, Barnard administrators announced to protesters that they had received a bomb threat, and police and security began evacuating the building.The protesters initially decided to remain, chanting over the sound of alarms, according to a witness and social media reports.At 5 p.m., Police Department officers walked through the lobby inspecting the building as chanting continued, according to a video shot on site. About 10 minutes later, the police began pushing the protesters out of the building.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares41 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Bid to Freeze Foreign Aid

      by

      The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected President Trump’s emergency request to freeze nearly $2 billion in foreign aid as part of his efforts to slash government spending.The court’s brief order was unsigned, which is typical when the justices act on emergency applications. It said only that the trial judge, who had ordered the government to resume payments, “should clarify what obligations the government must fulfill.”But the ruling is one of the court’s first moves in response to the flurry of litigation filed in response to President Trump’s efforts to dramatically reshape government. The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the three liberal members to form a majority.Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., writing for the four dissenting justices, said the majority had gone profoundly astray.“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) $2 billion taxpayer dollars? “ he asked. “The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.”The administration halted the aid on Jan. 20, President Trump’s first day in office. Recipients and other nonprofit groups filed two lawsuits challenging the freeze as an unconstitutional exercise of presidential power that thwarted congressional appropriations for the U.S. Agency for International Development.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