United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Congress Calls for Tech Outage Hearing to Grill Executive

      by

      The House Homeland Security Committee called on the chief executive of the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike to testify on the disruption.A Congressional committee called on the chief executive of CrowdStrike to testify at a hearing about its role in a tech outage that roiled the global economy, in one of the first attempts to hold the cybersecurity company responsible.CrowdStrike sent a faulty security update to its customers Thursday night, resulting in millions of Microsoft Windows devices shutting down and disruptions to airlines, hospitals, logistics companies and others.Americans “deserve to know in detail how this incident happened and the mitigation steps CrowdStrike is taking,” wrote Representative Mark Green of Tennessee, the Republican chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, and Representative Andrew Garbarino, Republican of New York.The letter was sent to George Kurtz, CrowdStrike’s chief executive. Mr. Green and Mr. Garbarino asked the company for a response to scheduling the hearing this week, but did not specify when it would take place.“CrowdStrike is actively in contact with relevant congressional committees,” said a company spokeswoman. “Briefings and other engagement timelines may be disclosed at members’ discretion.”The request came as the world continued to deal with the fallout from the widespread outages. Delta Air Lines canceled more than 800 flights on Monday, leaving more passengers stranded. And other industries were still recovering after being knocked offline for hours.The outage underscores how the world has become reliant on a small group of companies to maintain its digital infrastructure. CrowdStrike, while little-known to most consumers, is the second largest American cybersecurity company. More than half of Fortune 500 companies use its products.“This incident demonstrates the interconnected nature of our broad ecosystem — global cloud providers, software platforms, security vendors and other software vendors, and customers,” said a Microsoft executive, David Weston, in a blog post on Saturday. “It’s also a reminder of how important it is for all of us across the tech ecosystem to prioritize operating with safe deployment and disaster recovery using the mechanisms that exist.”CrowdStrike’s products are used primarily by large businesses, not consumers. Its flawed update sent computers running Microsoft’s Windows operating system into a spiral where they continually rebooted. Although CrowdStrike sent a fix, many computers didn’t get it because of the loop. In many cases, businesses had to delete the damaging file from each machine manually.Mr. Kurtz on Friday told NBC’s “Today” show that the incident was not a cyberattack and was the result of the faulty update. But the congressional committee said in its letter to Mr. Kurtz on Monday said that the incident still presented vexing security questions.“Malicious cyber actors backed by nation-states, such as China and Russia, are watching our response to this incident closely,” the lawmakers said. “Protecting our critical infrastructure requires us to learn from this incident and ensure that it does not happen again.”Representative Ritchie Torres, Democrat of New York, on Friday also asked the Department of Homeland Security to investigate the outages. More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      What’s Next for the Harris Campaign

      by

      Vice President Kamala Harris faces many questions, from the management of her campaign to the selection of her running mate, should she be the Democratic Party’s nominee.President Biden endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to lead the presidential ticket after ending his re-election campaign on Sunday, raising the chance that she could be the first Black woman and the first person of Indian descent to be president of the United States.Ms. Harris in many ways has been preparing for this moment for the past year as she emerged as one of the Biden campaign’s more aggressive voices on abortion rights and attacks on former President Donald J. Trump. Mr. Biden spoke to Ms. Harris on Sunday morning before he posted a letter online informing the world that he would be stepping down as the Democratic nominee.In another post less than a half-hour later, he endorsed Ms. Harris, who quickly issued a statement saying she intended to “earn and win this nomination.”But as the details of the nominating process remain unclear, there are many questions Ms. Harris and her team will face in the days ahead.What About Her Campaign?Ms. Harris will now need to take over the vast infrastructure of Mr. Biden’s campaign, which has roughly 1,300 staff members and dozens of offices around the nation. There are signs that is already happening.On a call with the Biden campaign staff on Sunday, Jen O’Malley Dillon, the Biden campaign chairwoman, and Julie Chavez Rodriguez, the Biden campaign manager, informed the staff members that they were all now working for Harris for President, according to two people who listened to the call. “We’re all going to do it the same,” Ms. Chavez Rodriguez said.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Kamala Harris Rapidly Picks Up Democratic Support as 2024 Race Is Reborn

      by

      Powerful leaders of the Democratic establishment quickly embraced Vice President Kamala Harris on Sunday after President Biden’s shocking exit from the race, hoping that a seamless succession could end a month of damaging chaos and transform a contest widely believed to be tipping toward Republicans.By Sunday evening, Ms. Harris appeared to have a glide path to the nomination: No other top Democrats announced plans to challenge her, though some stopped short of an endorsement, including the party’s top congressional leaders and former President Barack Obama.With breathtaking speed, she took control of Mr. Biden’s enormous political operation and contacted Democratic leaders in Congress and state houses to ask for their support. The Biden campaign formally renamed itself “Harris for President,” giving her immediate access to an account that had $96 million in cash at the end of June. On an internal call, the Biden campaign’s leaders told staff members that they would now work for Ms. Harris.“I will do everything in my power to unite the Democratic Party — and unite our nation — to defeat Donald Trump and his extreme Project 2025 agenda,” Ms. Harris said in a statement. “We have 107 days until Election Day. Together, we will fight. And together, we will win.”The rapid turn of events plunged the party and the nation into unfamiliar political territory, giving unelected Democratic officials the final say over the party’s nominee. Complicated decisions loom. Ms. Harris must choose a running mate, take charge of the campaign with little time before early voting begins in some states in September, rebuild support among voters who had fled Mr. Biden and prepare to withstand a full-blown Republican assault.Speculation immediately turned to her potential running mate, with many Democrats privately arguing that Ms. Harris should pick a white man to widen her appeal and provide demographic balance to the ticket. A flotilla of governors — including Roy Cooper of North Carolina, Andy Beshear of Kentucky, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Tim Walz of Minnesota — as well as Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona have been frequently mentioned by donors, officials and other lawmakers.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

      After Biden Drops Out, Democratic Voters Express Both Relief and Doubt

      by

      Democratic voters said they were relieved that President Biden was ending his campaign, but many said they remain worried about the political path ahead.For Democratic voters who have spent much of the summer brooding about President Biden’s fitness for office, his decision on Sunday not to seek re-election came as a relief. Now, they figured, their political party might stand a chance in November — though many still expressed deep doubts.“I’m overjoyed, absolutely overjoyed,” said Mark Oliver Rylance, 67, a Democrat from Columbus, Ohio, said about Mr. Biden’s announcement. Just last weekend, Mr. Rylance participated in a demonstration outside of the Ohio Democratic Party convention calling for Mr. Biden to step aside.“If Biden had stayed in, we would have lost absolutely everything,” he added, echoing the feelings of many Democrats. “We would have lost the House, would have lost the Senate, and it could very well have been a landslide.”The delicate subjects of whether Mr. Biden, 81, was fit for another term and how long he might stay in the race after his disastrous debate performance last month had found their way into conversations at dinner parties, neighborhood parks and church gatherings. The end of Mr. Biden’s candidacy on Sunday shifted some Democrats’ emotions from profound anxiety to hopeful determination, even if what comes next for their party remains unclear.There was also plenty of resignation to the idea that no Democrat might be able to pull off a victory against former President Donald J. Trump.Mr. Biden’s endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris to replace him on the ticket drew quick support from some voters eager to chart a path forward. But, underscoring the party’s tumult, others were certain that Ms. Harris, whose own presidential campaign four years ago fizzled, would face ugly attacks and rejection.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

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Antisemitism on Campuses, Ivy and Beyond

      by

      More from our inbox:A Middleman’s Role in Drug PrescriptionsObjection, Your HonorTrump vs. the Environment Alex Welsh for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Should American Jews Abandon Elite Universities?,” by Bret Stephens (column, June 26):Mr. Stephens has issued a sobering and well-documented indictment of antisemitism on elite campuses. The question asked by the headline is timely and troubling for many Jewish high school students and their families.As noted by Mr. Stephens, confused administrators and revisionist curriculums contributed to this crisis. But the insensitivity and hypocrisy of supposedly idealistic and enlightened college students may be the most striking and unkind cut of all.“Safe spaces” and rules against “microaggressions” have become commonplace on campuses. Yet when Jewish students made it known that calling for deadly attacks on Jews (“Globalize the intifada!”) is offensive and intimidating, they were ignored.Chants in favor of colonization or racism would never — and should never — be met with such indifference. It hurts.Perhaps the headline of Mr. Stephens’s column should be rephrased: “Have Elite Universities Abandoned American Jews?”Alan M. SchwartzTeaneck, N.J.To the Editor:While the Ivies have claimed the antisemitism spotlight this year, Jew-hatred is flourishing on many other campuses, including mine, the University of California, 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

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      I Was a White House Doctor. Presidents Should Have to Take Cognitive Tests.

      by

      The job of president is physically and mentally demanding. I witnessed this firsthand as a White House physician for three presidents, including as the designated physician to the president for Barack Obama during his first term. My presidential patients often worked 12-hour days seven days a week. The leader of the free world travels constantly, and participates in or leads briefings in which he must retain huge amounts of information.Health scares can happen at any moment. My role as White House physician was to keep the president healthy and performing optimally, and to provide the public with a candid medical assessment of his ability to carry out the duties of his office.I participated in tabletop exercises in the Situation Room to go over how to follow Section 3 of the 25th Amendment, which deals with succession in the event the president is disabled or incapacitated. Typically, the 25th Amendment came into play when a president was going under general anesthesia for a colonoscopy or scheduled surgical procedure.It is widely assumed that the physician to the president will gather and provide pertinent medical information to those contemplating whether the amendment needs to be invoked. This is not stipulated, but most in the medical community agree that the appropriate role for a physician is to offer a medical opinion, based on facts, that is then weighed by the patient — in this case the president — and those around him.The debates around the fitness of Joe Biden and Donald Trump in the last several weeks have created new pressure to start having serious conversations about exactly how the White House medical team should evaluate presidents and determine their fitness for duty — cognitively as well as physically. This has been the subject of decades of discussion within the White House medical team as well as with the broader medical community.Many Americans may want the White House medical team to take a more active role in declaring the president fit for duty. Many would probably like to see the same standard apply to candidates running for president as well. For those things to happen, these medical teams will need access to more data about these individuals than they now collect. And perhaps even more important, we should seriously consider the need for an age limit for those running for president, given the high stakes of the office and the realities of cognitive decline with aging.Many cognitive abilities decrease with ageWhile we retain much of our vocabulary as we get older, cognitive abilities such as speed and reasoning tend to decline more rapidly after age 60. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Democratic Elites Were Slow to See What Voters Already Knew

      by

      President Biden and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez agree on this much: It is the elites who are trying to take Biden down, ignoring the sentiments of legions of Democratic voters. But when I started arguing in February that his age would mortally wound his candidacy, it didn’t feel that way to me. I saw the elites propping him up, ignoring the sentiments of legions of Democratic voters.Who’s right?Maybe we both are. In any system, elites are most visible when they are fractured and factions are acting against each other. In July 2023 — before the primaries, before last month’s debate — a Times/Siena poll found that Democratic primary voters, by 50 to 45 percent, preferred that the party nominate someone other than Biden in 2024.But the Democratic Party’s elites were in lock step around Biden. They refused to listen to what their voters were saying. The fact that he was barely campaigning or giving unscripted interviews was rationalized rather than criticized. No major Democrats decided to challenge him for the nomination. Representative Dean Phillips’s effort to draft alternative candidates was rebuffed and his subsequent primary challenge ignored. Some of this reflected confidence in the president. Some of it reflected the consequences of challenging him.The White House and the Democratic Party apparatus it controls are powerful. Congressional Democrats will not get their bills prioritized or their amendments attached if they are too critical of the party leadership. Nonprofit leaders will stop getting their calls returned. Loyal party donors will abandon you if you’re branded a heretic. “I would be crucified by them if I spoke out of line,” an anonymous Democratic state party chair told NBC News early this month. “I know when you get out of line, they all of a sudden have a shift of priorities, and your races, your state is no longer on the map.” That was far truer a year ago, when Biden’s position in the party was unchallenged.These actions, decisions and calculations by Democratic Party elites were neither unusual nor conspiratorial. This is simply how parties work. But it meant that Democratic voters were given neither a real choice of candidates nor a demonstration of Biden’s fitness for the campaign. What they were given instead was signal after signal that every power broker in the party was behind Biden and confident in his ability to win re-election. Who were they to argue? Biden won the primary contest in a landslide.In February, after Biden skipped the Super Bowl interview and flubbed the news conference intended to defend his memory, I published a series of columns and interviews arguing that he should step aside and Democrats should choose a new ticket at the convention. My argument was that his age had become an insuperable problem — visible in every poll and appearance, omnipresent when you spoke to ordinary voters — and the way his team was insulating him from unscripted interviews reflected a recognition of his diminishment. Biden was trailing Donald Trump even then. He was not showing himself capable of the kind of campaign needed to close the gap. And the risk of frailty or illness causing a catastrophe across the long months of the campaign seemed unbearably high.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

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      One of the Republican Convention’s Weirdest Lies

      by

      I watched hour upon hour of the Republican National Convention, something I’ve done every four years since I was a young political nerd in 1984. I was even a Mitt Romney delegate at the Republican convention in 2012, and this was the first that was centered entirely around a fundamentally false premise: that in our troubled time, Donald Trump would be a source of order and stability.To bolster their case, Republicans misled America. Speaker after speaker repeated the claim that America was safer and the world was more secure when Trump was president. But we can look at Trump’s record and see the truth. America was more dangerous and the world was quite chaotic during Trump’s term. Our enemies were not intimidated by Trump. In fact, Russia improved its strategic position during his time in office.If past performance is any indicator of future results, Americans should brace themselves for more chaos if Trump wins.The most egregious example of Republican deception centered around crime. The theme of the second night of the convention was “Make America Safe Again.” Yet the public mustn’t forget that the murder rate skyrocketed under Trump. According to the Pew Research Center, “The year-over-year increase in the U.S. murder rate in 2020 was the largest since at least 1905 — and possibly ever.”That’s a human catastrophe, and it’s one that occurred on Trump’s watch. Republicans want to erase 2020 from the American mind, but we judge presidents on how they handle crises. Trump shouldn’t escape accountability for the collapse in public safety at the height of the pandemic. And while we can’t blame Trump for the riots that erupted in American cities over the summer of 2020, it’s hard to claim he’s the candidate of calm when he instigated a riot of his own on Jan. 6.It’s particularly rich for Trump to claim to be the candidate of order when the crime rate rose during his presidency and is plunging during Joe Biden’s. In 2023, there was a record decrease in the murder rate, and violent crime, ABC News reported, “plummeted to one of the lowest levels in 50 years.”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