Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      What Biden Is Doing to Survive as He Faces Calls to Drop Out of Race

      by

      Eleven days after his disastrous debate performance, the president’s strategy is coming into focus.Good evening. Tonight, we’re taking a look at the strategy behind President Biden’s efforts to steady his candidacy. And I’m covering a new ad campaign from Republicans who want to defeat Trump.The latest developmentsAn expert on Parkinson’s disease visited the White House eight times in eight months, including at least once for a meeting with President Biden’s physician.Biden told his biggest donors he is staying in the presidential race.Jill Biden, the first lady, emphasized to voters in several states that her husband was “all in” on his campaign.A defiant President Biden sent a simple message on Monday to the detractors who say he needs to bow out of the presidential race: Bring it.“Any of these guys that don’t think I should run, run against me. Announce for president, challenge me at the convention,” Biden said while calling into MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show, all but daring the Democrats who have been complaining about his electability since his disastrous debate performance to stand up and do something about it.Biden has been roundly criticized not just for his halting debate performance but also for moving too slowly to acknowledge and quell the hailstorm of doubts about his fitness to campaign and serve another four years. He is now rolling out a more aggressive playbook to try to shut down talk of his being shoved aside as the Democratic presidential nominee.Biden campaigned in North Carolina the day after his showdown with Donald Trump, but it wasn’t until Friday, eight days after the debate, that he sat for questions about it in a major television interview. He held campaign events in two swing states over the holiday weekend.“Even the president acknowledges that, that there was too much distance between, you know, between the debate and being out there,” said Gov. Wes Moore of Maryland, a Democrat, noting the North Carolina stop. “He understands that, in order to be successful, we’re going to have to do that and then some.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s Independent Streak Marked Supreme Court Term

      by

      The junior member of the court’s six-justice conservative supermajority often questioned its approach and wrote important dissents joined by liberal justices.Justice Amy Coney Barrett, 52, is the youngest member of the Supreme Court and the junior member of its conservative supermajority. Last week, she completed what was only her third full term.Yet she has already emerged as a distinctive force on the court, issuing opinions that her admirers say are characterized by intellectual seriousness, independence, caution and a welcome measure of common sense.In the term that ended last week, she delivered a series of concurring opinions questioning and honing the majority’s methods and conclusions.She wrote notable dissents, joined by liberal justices, from decisions limiting the tools prosecutors can use in cases against members of the Jan. 6 mob and blocking a Biden administration plan to combat air pollution. And she voted with the court’s three-member liberal wing in March, saying the majority had ruled too broadly in restoring former President Donald J. Trump to the Colorado ballot.The bottom line: Justice Barrett was the Republican appointee most likely to vote for a liberal result in the last term.That does not make her a liberal, said Irv Gornstein, the executive director of Georgetown University’s Supreme Court Institute.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 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Biden Campaigns in Pennsylvania, as Calls Continue for Him to Quit the Race

      by

      President Biden will continue his efforts to rescue his imperiled re-election effort on Sunday, with two campaign stops in Pennsylvania, a key swing state.Mr. Biden will visit Philadelphia and then Harrisburg, as a growing number of Democrats from across the party’s ideological spectrum are calling for him to drop out of the race over concerns about his age and mental sharpness.Pennsylvania is one of the states that Mr. Biden almost certainly must win if he hopes to retain the White House. And its largest city, Philadelphia, is one of his favorite places to campaign. But former President Donald J. Trump has pulled ahead in the state in many polls.Mr. Biden won Pennsylvania in 2020, but Mr. Trump now leads the president by about three percentage points, according to a FiveThirtyEight polling average. Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, a top Biden surrogate, spent Friday and Saturday campaigning for the president in Western Pennsylvania and Bucks County, a hotly contested battleground.Mr. Biden had been expected to speak at a meeting of the National Education Association in Philadelphia on Sunday, but he pulled out after the powerful education union’s staff went on strike. He will instead deliver an address at a church service in Northwest Philadelphia on Sunday morning.“President Biden is a fierce supporter of unions, and he won’t cross a picket line,” Lauren Hitt, a Biden campaign spokeswoman, said in a statement.After Philadelphia, Mr. Biden will travel to Harrisburg for a community organizing event with union members on Sunday afternoon. His campaign said he would be joined throughout the day by Gov. Josh Shapiro and Pennsylvania’s two senators, Bob Casey and John Fetterman, both Democrats.Since a poor debate performance where he frequently lost his train of thought, Mr. Biden has largely stuck to delivering prepared remarks from a teleprompter. Without the device, he has sometimes struggled to speak clearly.This week, he stumbled over his words during two radio interviews, even though his aides had provided the hosts with the questions, a practice that goes against standard journalistic ethics. And he gave several confusing answers during an interview with ABC News on Friday.Even Mr. Biden’s allies have said that his campaign should ensure that he appears more in public without a teleprompter to demonstrate his mental sharpness.“They don’t need scripted remarks,” said Steve Sisolak, the former Democratic governor of Nevada, who supports Mr. Biden. “He needs to show people that he can do it on the spot and answer questions — tough questions — and be out there with voters. Be out there, mingle with your folks.”Despite doubts from many Democrats, Mr. Biden has defiantly insisted that he will stay in the race. On Friday, the president told ABC News that only the “Lord Almighty” could force him to drop out. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      4 conclusiones de la entrevista de Joe Biden en ABC News tras el debate

      by

      En su primera entrevista televisiva desde el debate, el presidente de EE. UU. intentó tranquilizar a sus partidarios, pero pasó gran parte de la conversación resistiéndose a las preguntas sobre sus capacidades.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]Le restó importancia. Lo negó. Lo desestimó.La primera entrevista televisiva del presidente Joe Biden desde su floja actuación en el debate de la semana pasada se anunciaba como una oportunidad para tranquilizar al pueblo estadounidense en horario de máxima audiencia y asegurarle que aún tiene lo necesario para postularse, ganar y ocupar el cargo más alto de la nación.Pero Biden, con voz claramente carrasposa, pasó gran parte de los 22 minutos resistiéndose a una serie de preguntas que le había planteado George Stephanopoulos, de ABC News, sobre su aptitud, sobre la aplicación de un examen cognitivo y sobre su posición en las encuestas.El viernes, el presidente no tuvo dificultades para cerrar sus ideas como en el debate. Pero tampoco era el senador de su juventud que hablaba con suavidad, ni siquiera el mismo estadista mayor al que el partido le confió hace cuatro años la misión de derrotar al expresidente Donald Trump.Fue una entrevista de alto riesgo con un presidente de 81 años cuyo propio partido está dudando cada vez más de él, pero que no sonaba como un hombre con dudas sobre sí mismo.A continuación, cuatro conclusiones:Biden minimiza el debate como un error puntualLa entrevista fue la aparición sin guion más larga de Biden en público desde su vacilante actuación en el debate. El retraso había desconcertado a sus aliados en el Capitolio y fuera de él acerca de las razones que tenían al presidente en actos a puerta cerrada —o valiéndose de apuntadores— durante tanto tiempo.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Judge Denies Effort by Trump Co-Defendant to Have Charges Dismissed

      by

      Walt Nauta, a personal aide to former President Donald J. Trump, claimed that he was the victim of vindictive prosecution in the classified documents case.The federal judge overseeing former President Donald J. Trump’s classified documents case on Saturday rejected an effort by one of his co-defendants to have the charges he is facing dismissed by claiming that he was the victim of a vindictive prosecution by the government.The co-defendant, Walt Nauta, who works as a personal aide to Mr. Trump, had accused prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, Jack Smith, of unfairly indicting him because he declined to help their efforts to build a case against the former president by testifying against him in front of a grand jury.Mr. Nauta’s lawyer, Stanley Woodward Jr., also claimed that at a meeting at the Justice Department two years ago, prosecutors had threatened to derail a judgeship he was seeking if he did not prevail on his client to turn on Mr. Trump.But in an order issued on Saturday night, Judge Aileen M. Cannon rejected those arguments, ruling that even though Mr. Nauta had refused to provide testimony against Mr. Trump, there was “no evidence suggesting that charges were brought to punish him for doing so.”And while Judge Cannon refused to weigh in on the details about Mr. Woodward’s claims that prosecutors had sought to twist his arm to win Mr. Nauta’s cooperation, she denied his vindictive prosecution motion because, as she noted, he had claimed that the government was biased against him, not against his client, as required by the law.The indictment in the documents case, which was filed last June in Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, Fla., accuses Mr. Nauta of conspiring with Mr. Trump to hide from the government several boxes of classified materials that the former president removed from the White House when he left office and took to Mar-a-Lago, his private club and residence in Florida.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

    • 50 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Fact-Checking Biden’s ABC Interview

      by

      The president defended his debate performance with exaggerations about polling, his recent appearances and his opponent.President Biden rejected concerns about his fumbling performance in the first presidential debate last month in a prime-time interview on Friday.In the interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News, Mr. Biden downplayed and misstated polls showing him falling farther behind former President Donald J. Trump since the debate, exaggerated Mr. Trump’s proposals and made hyperbolic statements about his own record and recent events.Here’s a fact check.what Was SAID“After that debate, I did 10 major events in a row, including until 2 o’clock in the morning after the debate. I did events in North Carolina. I did events in — in — in Georgia, did events like this today, large crowds, overwhelming response, no — no — no slipping.”This is exaggerated. Since the debate on June 27, Mr. Biden has traveled up and down the East Coast and participated in more than a dozen events, according to his public calendar. Whether or not the events can be considered “major” and crowds “large” are matters of opinion, but Mr. Biden did misspeak at several.Before the interview on Friday, Mr. Biden said of Mr. Trump at a rally in Wisconsin that he would “beat him again in 2020.”At a Fourth of July barbecue with military members and their families, Mr. Biden referred to Mr. Trump as “one of our former colleagues” before correcting himself.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Dear Elites (of Both Parties), the People Will Take It From Here, Thanks

      by

      I first learned about the opioid crisis three presidential elections ago, in the fall of 2011. I was the domestic policy director for Mitt Romney’s campaign and questions began trickling in from the New Hampshire team: What’s our plan?By then, opioids had been fueling the deadliest drug epidemic in American history for years. I am ashamed to say I did not know what they were. Opioids, as in opium? I looked it up online. Pills of some kind. Tell them it’s a priority, and President Obama isn’t working. That year saw nearly 23,000 deaths from opioid overdoses nationwide.I was no outlier. America’s political class was in the final stages of self-righteous detachment from the economic and social conditions of the nation it ruled. The infamous bitter clinger and “47 percent” comments by Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney captured the atmosphere well: delivered at private fund-raisers in San Francisco in 2008 and Boca Raton in 2012, evincing disdain for the voters who lived in between. The opioid crisis gained more attention in the years after the election, particularly in 2015, with Anne Case and Angus Deaton’s research on deaths of despair.Of course, 2015’s most notable political development was Donald Trump’s presidential campaign launch and subsequent steamrolling of 16 Republican primary opponents committed to party orthodoxy. In the 2016 general election he narrowly defeated the former first lady, senator and secretary of state Hillary Clinton, who didn’t need her own views of Americans leaked: In public remarks, she gleefully classified half of the voters who supported Mr. Trump as “deplorables,” as her audience laughed and applauded. That year saw more than 42,000 deaths from opioid overdoses.In a democratic republic such as the United States, where the people elect leaders to govern on their behalf, the ballot box is the primary check on an unresponsive, incompetent or corrupt ruling class — or, as Democrats may be learning, a ruling class that insists on a candidate who voters no longer believe can lead. If those in power come to believe they are the only logical options, the people can always prove them wrong. For a frustrated populace, an anti-establishment outsider’s ability to wreak havoc is a feature rather than a bug. The elevation of such a candidate to high office should provoke immediate soul-searching and radical reform among the highly credentialed leaders across government, law, media, business, academia and so on — collectively, the elites.The response to Mr. Trump’s success, unfortunately, has been the opposite. Seeing him elected once, faced with the reality that he may well win again, most elites have doubled down. We have not failed, the thinking goes; we have been failed, by the American people. In some tellings, grievance-filled Americans simply do not appreciate their prosperity. In others they are incapable of informed judgments, leaving them susceptible to demagoguery and foreign manipulation. Or perhaps they are just too racist to care — never mind that polling consistently suggests that most of Mr. Trump’s supporters are women and minorities, or that polling shows he is attracting far greater Black and Hispanic support than prior Republican leaders.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 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Trump, Biden and Who Gets to Defy the Naysayers

      by

      In a way, we’ve been here before. A presidential candidate seemingly unfit for office but nonetheless in position to be his party’s standard-bearer. A media drumbeat demanding that somebody, somehow, step in and push him out. A raft of party leaders and important officeholders hanging around uncertainly with their fingers in the wind.As with Joe Biden in 2024, so it was with Donald Trump at various times in 2016 — both during the primary season and then especially in the fall when the “Access Hollywood” tape dropped and it seemed the G.O.P. might abandon him.For Biden and his inner circle, an arguable lesson of that experience is that they aren’t actually finished, they don’t have to listen to the drumbeat and they can just refuse to leave and spite all the naysayers by winning in the end.After all, it didn’t matter that not only the mainstream press but much of right-wing media deemed Trump unfit for high office — that Fox News anchors tried to sandbag him in the early Republican debates, that National Review commissioned a special issue to condemn him, that longstanding pillars of conservative punditry all opposed him. It didn’t matter that his rivals vowed “never” to support him, that the former Republican nominee for president condemned him, that leading Republicans retracted their endorsements just weeks before the election. Trump proved that nothing they did mattered so long as he refused to yield.But I don’t think history will repeat itself. I think Biden will bow out, his current protestations notwithstanding, because of three differences between the current circumstance and Trump’s position eight years ago.First, while both political parties are hollowed out compared with their condition 50 years ago, the Democrats still appear more capable of functioning and deciding as a party than the Republicans. Biden’s own presidency is proof of that capacity: He became the nominee in 2020 in part because of a seemingly coordinated effort to clear the field for him against Bernie Sanders, exactly the thing the G.O.P. was incapable of managing four years earlier with Trump.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