Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      D.E.I. in College, Attacked and Defended

      by

      More from our inbox:Why Trump Doesn’t Want Another DebateTrump’s Mental FitnessCancel the Sentinel Missile ProgramA Walker in Manhattan Eli DurstTo the Editor:Re “D.E.I. Is Not Working in Colleges. We Need a New Approach,” by Paul Brest and Emily J. Levine (Opinion guest essay, Sept. 5):Mr. Brest and Dr. Levine underscore the importance of inclusion for all students’ academic success. I agree: For students to succeed, they must have access to a rigorous learning environment in which they also feel they matter.But I disagree with the professors on the history and roles of diversity offices that are responsible for fostering such a sense of belonging. Diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in higher education are mission-driven, evidence-backed, research-informed and tailored to meet the particular needs of each campus.These practices seek to bring people together and collaboratively eliminate barriers to success, and they have evolved with legislative and judicial efforts to address decades of discrimination against protected categories under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.Given the complexities of differing institutional types, historical legacies and current contexts, the solution includes acknowledging that we live in a pluralist society, that we can value differences as a community of learners, and that doing so is not contrary to academic freedom and critical thinking.There is work ahead to ensure we can continue to meet the needs of our ever-evolving communities. There always will be work ahead; the pursuit of progress is, by definition, unending.Paulette Granberry RussellWashingtonThe writer is the president and C.E.O. of the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education.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 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Harris or Trump? Once Again, Election Results Could Take a While.

      by

      More Americans are using mail-in ballots, which take longer to count than those cast in person. In several battleground states, a winner may not be apparent on Nov. 5.The hosts of election night parties may want to book a room for more than just one night.For the second straight presidential election, it is becoming increasingly likely that there will be no clear and immediate winner on election night and that early returns could give a false impression of who will ultimately prevail.Large swaths of Americans have changed their voting habits in recent years, relying increasingly on mail-in ballots, which take more time to count than those cast in person on Election Day. States with prolonged vote-counting processes, such as Arizona, have become suddenly competitive. And the race between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump appears extremely close.If a winner is not declared on election night, it will not necessarily point to failures in the process. More likely, it will be a result of the intense security measures required for counting mail-in ballots.Election officials across the country are trying to telegraph to voters that waiting long hours or even days for a result is not unexpected in a close election. They are eager to counter conspiracy theorists who may seize on the uncertainty as evidence of fraud or malfeasance.“I keep objecting to the term ‘delays,’” said Al Schmidt, the Republican secretary of state in Pennsylvania. The ballots, he said, would be counted “as expeditiously as possible, and counting votes takes time.”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

    • 175 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      At a Key Moment in Trump’s Campaign, a Social-Media Instigator Is at His Side

      by

      The former president’s decision to elevate Laura Loomer, a far-right activist known for racist and homophobic posts online, has stunned even some Trump allies.Before Donald J. Trump traveled to Philadelphia for this week’s debate, he invited one of the internet’s most polarizing figures along for the ride.Laura Loomer was backstage with the Trump entourage while Mr. Trump squared off against Vice President Kamala Harris. She was in the spin room with the former president immediately afterward. And the next day, she flew with him to New York City and Shanksville, Pa., to commemorate the anniversary of Sept. 11.A far-right activist known for her endless stream of sexist, homophobic, transphobic, anti-Muslim and occasionally antisemitic social media posts and public stunts, Ms. Loomer has made a name for herself over the past decade by unabashedly claiming 9/11 was “an inside job,” calling Islam “a cancer,” accusing Ron DeSantis’s wife of exaggerating breast cancer and claiming that President Biden was behind the attempt to assassinate Mr. Trump in July.Just two days before the debate, Ms. Loomer, 31, posted a racist joke about the vice president, whose mother was Indian American. Ms. Loomer wrote on X that if Ms. Harris won the election, the White House would “smell like curry.”For many observers, including some of Mr. Trump’s most important allies, the Republican presidential nominee’s choice at a critical moment of the campaign to platform a social-media instigator, albeit one with 1.3 million followers on X, was stunning.“The history of this person is just really toxic,” Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Trump ally, told a reporter for HuffPost on Thursday. “I don’t think it’s helpful at all.”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

      Trump Calls for Ending Taxes on Overtime Pay in Tucson Speech

      by

      Although it had been billed as an event focused on housing and the economy, former President Donald J. Trump spent much of a meandering speech on Thursday in Tucson, Ariz., venting his grievances over his debate against Vice President Kamala Harris.But when he eventually did turn to the section on economic issues, Mr. Trump made a new proposal as he sought to win the votes of working- and middle-class Americans: He called for eliminating taxes on overtime pay.“The people who work overtime are among the hardest-working citizens in our country, and for too long, no one in Washington has been looking out for them,” Mr. Trump said. “Those are the people that really work. They’re police officers, nurses, factory workers, construction workers, truck drivers and machine operators.”Mr. Trump’s speech was his first campaign event since a debate performance on Tuesday night that some of his allies have admitted fell short. Mr. Trump insisted to around 2,000 supporters in Tucson that it was a “monumental victory” for him that rendered the need for a subsequent debate unnecessary.“Because we’ve done two debates and because they were successful, there will be no third debate,” Mr. Trump said, repeating a declaration he made earlier on his social media platform, Truth Social.Even as he maintained that he had triumphed, Mr. Trump spent significant time during his speech bashing the debate’s host, ABC News, and its moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Debate Puts Trump’s Affinity for Putin Back in the Spotlight

      by

      The former president’s refusal to back Ukraine’s war effort showed the likely limits of U.S. support for Kyiv if he returns to the White House.Donald J. Trump’s refusal to say that he hopes Ukraine will win its war against Russia has cast a spotlight on what promises to be an abrupt U.S. policy shift toward the conflict — and Washington’s relations with Moscow — if Mr. Trump returns to the White House.Twice Mr. Trump was asked directly at the debate on Tuesday night whether he hoped for Ukraine’s victory, and both times he insisted that his main goal was for the war to end quickly. “I think it’s in the U.S.’s best interest to get this war finished and just get it done, negotiate a deal, because we have to stop all of these human lives from being destroyed,” he said.The former president went on to suggest that he would leverage his friendly relationship with the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, underscoring clear signs that he intends to reverse President Biden’s confrontational relationship with Russia.Mr. Trump’s answers “should tell people all they need to know — which is that if Trump gets elected and gets involved, Ukraine’s going to be the loser and Russia’s going to be the winner,” said John R. Bolton, who served as Mr. Trump’s national security adviser. Mr. Bolton has become a vocal critic of the former president, who fired him after repeated policy disagreements.Mr. Trump offered little detail on how he would negotiate a rapid end to the Ukraine war, saying only that he would speak to both Mr. Putin and Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to strike a deal even before he was inaugurated in January.That is a seemingly impossible goal. Mr. Zelensky has ruled out any settlement with Russia that does not restore his country’s original borders, while Mr. Putin seems determined to conquer even more of Ukraine than the roughly one-fifth of its territory that his army now occupies.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 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      After a Bruising Debate, Trump Is Warmly Embraced in Lower Manhattan

      by

      This is a tale about two sides of the same street.A little after 10 a.m. on Sept. 11, way down on the tip of Lower Manhattan, a Chevrolet Suburban was pulling into the firehouse at 42 South St., which belongs to Engine Company 4, Ladder 15.The men of 4-15 look after Wall Street; the massive emblem hanging inside their firehouse depicts the statue of the Charging Bull, wreathed in flame. On this day, they wore their best class A suits, all crisp navy and patent leather, and crowded around the Chevy. A door opened and out stepped former President Donald J. Trump. The firefighters lined up to shake his hand, to give him a pat on the back.Mr. Trump made the rounds. “Hey, fellas, I didn’t see you over there,” he said, turning to shake the hand of one particularly awe-struck firefighter. “Mr. President,” said the firefighter, “great job last night.”Mr. Trump thanked him, paused and then added, “We had three-on-one.”He was talking about his televised debate, the night before, with Vice President Kamala Harris. To Mr. Trump, his opponents also seemed to include the two moderators from ABC News, who he said treated him unfairly.“There was three-on-one,” he repeated.What was that tone in his voice? Not quite ashamed, or embarrassed, exactly, or even sullen — but resigned, perhaps. Resigned to the fact that he had been bested by Ms. Harris. She had called him a “disgrace” to his face, several times, with more than 60 million people watching. She had hit him where it hurt, taunting him about the people who leave his rallies early. Perhaps what was most devastating was the fact that it all seemed to work — he had taken her bait, allowed himself to get knocked off course, and now even his friends on Fox News seemed to think he got played for a sucker.But inside the firehouse, he was still a champion.“They were going at you,” the firefighter chuckled. “You did a great job, though.” He stuck out his hand for another shake. Mr. Trump took it again, and thanked him again.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Al debatir con Trump, las expresiones de Harris fueron un arma

      by

      Serena y sin perder la compostura, Kamala Harris usó sus palabras, y sobre todo su lenguaje corporal, para desestabilizar a Donald Trump, provocar su ira y luego simplemente dejar que se hiciera daño a sí mismo.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]Ella lo miró con una ceja arqueada. Un suspiro calmado. Una mano en la barbilla. Una risa. Una mirada compasiva. Un movimiento de cabeza desdeñoso.Desde los primeros momentos del debate contra Donald Trump, Kamala Harris explotó hábilmente la mayor debilidad de su oponente.No se centró en su historial. Tampoco en sus políticas divisivas ni en sus múltiples declaraciones incendiarias.En vez de eso, se enfocó en una parte mucho más básica de él: su ego.En sus mítines, en sus serviles redes sociales y cuando está rodeado de aduladores en Mar-a-Lago, a Trump nadie lo cuestiona, nadie le discute, nadie se burla de él.Eso cambió durante 90 minutos el martes en Filadelfia, cuando la mujer que nunca antes se había reunido con él logró, poco a poco, penetrar su seguridad y provocar su enfado y su ira.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

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Certification of Election Will Get Extra Security to Try to Prevent Another Capitol Attack

      by

      In an effort to prevent another attack on the Capitol, the Department of Homeland Security has declared Jan. 6, 2025, to be a special event that requires added security measures when Congress meets to certify the winner of the 2024 presidential election.The designation of a National Special Security Event, announced by Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the director of homeland security, on Wednesday means that significant federal, state and local resources will be directed toward the Capitol a few months from now to increase the security protections and a comprehensive security plan will be put in place.The Secret Service will oversee the security plan.“National Special Security Events are events of the highest national significance,” Eric Ranaghan, the special agent in charge of the Secret Service’s Dignitary Protective Division, said in a statement, adding that Secret Service officials, in collaboration with federal, state and local partners, “are committed to developing and implementing a comprehensive and integrated security plan to ensure the safety and security of this event and its participants.”The Capitol was overrun on Jan. 6, 2021, by a pro-Trump mob that sought to halt the counting of the Electoral College votes from the 2020 election to disrupt the certification of President Biden’s victory. The Capitol Police force was caught unprepared for the mob violence, even though Mr. Trump had summoned the crowd to Washington days earlier and promised a “wild” rally.After the attack, during which more than 150 police officers were injured and several people died, the Government Accountability Office recommended consideration of the special security designation. More