More stories

  • in

    Trump Makes Big Promises, With Little Detail, for Michigan’s Auto Industry

    Two days after an apparent assassination attempt against him, former President Donald J. Trump showed few signs on Tuesday that he would shake up his approach to campaigning.At a town hall in Flint, Mich., for his first campaign event since the Sunday incident, he made grand promises to restore auto-making jobs to the state, the heart of the American auto industry, as he gave long-winded, often meandering responses to only a few questions.To the extent that Mr. Trump was focused, it was on repeatedly vowing that his tariffs would revitalize the auto industry in Michigan, a crucial battleground state, and that a Trump loss in November would be catastrophic — referring to such an outcome as a “tragedy.”Using the dire language he often uses to frame this election, he said if “we don’t win, there will be zero car jobs, manufacturing jobs.”“It will all be out of here,” he said.Speaking to thousands of supporters in the Dort Financial Arena in Flint, he also insisted vaguely that his tariff proposals would be enough to reverse a decades-long decline in the American auto industry and bring “so many auto plants” into the state if elected.Trump supporters outside the arena in Flint where Mr. Trump spoke.Doug Mills/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

  • in

    What Harris Must Do to Win Over Skeptics (Like Me)

    What does Kamala Harris think the United States should do about the Houthis, whose assaults on commercial shipping threaten global trade, and whose attacks on Israel risk a much wider Mideast war? If an interviewer were to ask the vice president about them, would she be able to give a coherent and compelling answer?It’s not an unfair or unprecedented question. As a presidential candidate, George W. Bush was quizzed on the names of the leaders of Taiwan, India, Pakistan and Chechnya. He got one right (Taiwan’s Lee Teng-hui) but drew blanks on the rest. It fueled criticism, as The Times’s Frank Bruni reported in 1999, that “he is not knowledgeable enough about foreign policy to lead the nation.”A few more questions for Harris: If, as president, she had intelligence that Iran was on the cusp of assembling a nuclear weapon, would she use force to stop it? Are there limits to American support for Ukraine, and what are they? Would she push for the creation of a Palestinian state if Hamas remained a potent political force within it? Are there any regulations she’d like to get rid of in her initiative to build three million new homes in the next four years? What role, if any, does she see for nuclear power in her energy and climate plans? If there were another pandemic similar to Covid-19, what might her administration do differently?It may be that Harris has thoughtful answers to these sorts of questions. If so, she isn’t letting on. She did well in the debate with Donald Trump, showing poise and intelligence against a buffoonish opponent. But her answers in two sit-down interviews, first with CNN’s Dana Bash and then with Brian Taff of 6ABC in Philadelphia, were lighter than air. Asked what she’d do to bring down prices, she talked at length about growing up middle-class among people who were proud of their lawns before pivoting to vague plans to support small business and create more housing.Lovely. Now how about interest-rate policy, federal spending and the resilience of our supply chains?All this helps explain my unease with the thought of voting for Harris — an unease I never felt, despite policy differences, when Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden were on the ballot against Trump. If Harris can answer the sorts of questions I posed above, she should be quick to do so, if only to dispel a widespread perception of unseriousness. If she can’t, then what was she doing over nearly eight years as a senator and vice president?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

  • in

    $50 Billion in Aid to Ukraine Stalls Over Legal Questions

    U.S. and European officials are struggling to honor their pledge to use Russian assets to aid Ukraine.A long-awaited plan to help Ukraine rebuild using Russian money is in limbo as the United States and Europe struggle to agree on how to construct a $50 billion loan using Russia’s frozen central bank assets while complying with their own laws.The fraught negotiations reflect the challenges facing the Group of 7 nations as they attempt to push their sanctions powers to new limits in an attempt to punish Russia and aid Ukraine.American and European officials have been scrambling in recent weeks to try to get the loan in place by the end of the year. There is added urgency to finalize the package ahead of any potential shifts in the political landscape in the United States, where support for Ukraine could waver if former President Donald J. Trump wins the presidential election in November.But technical obstacles associated with standing up such a loan have complicated matters.Group of 7 officials grappled for months over how to use $300 billion in frozen Russian central bank assets to aid Ukraine. After European countries expressed reservations about the legality of outright seizing the assets, they agreed that it would be possible to back a $50 billion loan with the stream of interest that the assets earn.The solution was intended to provide Ukraine with a large infusion of funds without providing more direct aid from the budgets of the United States and European countries. It also allowed western allies to make use of Russia’s assets without taking the step of actually spending its money, which many top officials in Europe believed would be illegal.But differences in the legal systems in the United States and in Europe, which both plan to provide the money up front, have made it difficult to structure the loan.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

  • in

    Secret Service Did Not Search Trump Golf Course Perimeter Before Gunman’s Arrest

    The Secret Service did not search the perimeter of the Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Fla., on Sunday before former President Donald J. Trump began his round, an acknowledgment that has put the besieged agency under renewed scrutiny two months after a similar episode in Pennsylvania.The decision raises further questions about whether the Secret Service has the resources and ability to adequately perform its duties during a time of increasing violence and a unique campaign between a sitting vice president and a former president.While the agency’s acting director hailed a Secret Service agent for acting swiftly and preventing any harm to Mr. Trump on Sunday, the F.B.I. said that data from a gunman’s cellphone indicated he spent almost 12 hours near the course before he aimed a rifle in the direction of Mr. Trump while he was golfing.In remarks to reporters at the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office on Monday afternoon, Ronald L. Rowe Jr., the Secret Service’s acting director, said, “The president wasn’t even really supposed to go there.”Mr. Rowe said Mr. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, did not have an outing on the course on his official schedule. Mr. Rowe did not clarify in his statements whether this meant that agents did not have time to sweep the golf course. Yet it is public knowledge that Mr. Trump frequently plays golf at one of his Florida courses on Sundays, raising the risk level for the former president.Mr. Rowe praised his agents for spotting the barrel of a gun poking through the bushes of the golf club and firing at the suspect, Ryan W. Routh, 58, before he could get off a shot. A manhunt commenced, leading to Mr. Routh being detained soon after. He was charged in federal court on Monday with possession of a firearm as a felon.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

  • in

    Suspect Never Took a Shot at Trump but Hid Undetected for 12 Hours

    Ryan W. Routh was charged with two federal gun crimes a day after Secret Service agents fired on him as he pointed a rifle toward the golf course where former President Donald Trump was playing.The man arrested after pointing a rifle through a fence ringing former President Donald J. Trump’s golf course in Florida on Sunday never got off a shot, but appears to have remained undetected for nearly 12 hours before being spotted by a Secret Service agent who drove him off with a volley of gunfire, officials said on Monday.The man, Ryan W. Routh, 58, a building contractor with an extensive criminal history, never had the former president in his line of sight but was able to hide in the bushes just outside the fence on the edge of the course until Mr. Trump was only hundreds of yards away.Mr. Routh did not fire at “our agents” before they fired at him, Ronald Rowe Jr., the acting Secret Service director, said at a news conference in West Palm Beach, Fla.Mr. Routh wore a blue inmate jumpsuit at his initial appearance in a federal courtroom in Florida on Monday. He faces two felony gun charges that allow the authorities to keep him in custody while they continue their investigation into what the F.B.I. has called an assassination attempt.The F.B.I.’s top agent in Miami, Jeffrey B. Veltri, speaking to reporters, said the bureau had no information that the suspect was working with anybody else. Agents in Hawaii and North Carolina — two states where the suspect lived — had fanned out to conduct interviews as part of a broad investigation into his travels, how he had acquired the rifle and what his motivations had been.Among the unanswered questions is how Mr. Routh knew Mr. Trump would be on the course. While Mr. Trump frequently plays golf at his properties, his Sunday outing was not a publicly announced appearance, unlike the rally in July in Butler, Pa., where a gunman got off multiple shots, leaving Mr. Trump slightly wounded, one rally attendee dead and two others wounded.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

  • in

    Elon Musk Deletes His Post Asking Why No One Has Tried to Assassinate Biden or Harris

    Hours after what the F.B.I. called a second attempted assassination of former President Donald J. Trump, Elon Musk wrote on his social media site — and then deleted — a post suggesting it was odd that nobody had tried to kill President Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris.Mr. Musk said the post on X had been intended as a joke.In response to a user who asked, “Why they want to kill Donald Trump?” Mr. Musk, who has endorsed the former president and comments frequently on the U.S. presidential campaign, wrote: “And no one is even trying to assassinate Biden/Kamala.” His post, which was captured by X users, included a thinking-face emoji.Mr. Musk took down the post after it immediately drew outrage. X says he has more than 197 million followers on the platform, which he bought in 2022.“Well, one lesson I’ve learned is that just because I say something to a group and they laugh doesn’t mean it’s going to be all that hilarious as a post on X,” he said in a follow-up post early Monday. “Turns out that jokes are WAY less funny if people don’t know the context and the delivery is plain text,” he wrote in another.The Secret Service said on Sunday that it had fired on an armed man at Mr. Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Fla., while the former president was playing. A suspect was later arrested. The incident followed one in July in which Mr. Trump was shot in the ear by a would-be assassin while he was holding a rally in Pennsylvania. The shooter was killed by law enforcement officers.Mr. Musk, the world’s richest man, has established a reputation as an edgy plutocrat not bound by social conventions when it comes to expressing his opinions and broadcasting what is on his mind to his followers. His power and wealth have made him relatively impervious to criticism, and his bluntness has made him a hero to many on the right who oppose what they call political correctness.Several of his recent posts about the election have drawn criticism. Last week, he amplified the bogus right-wing claims that immigrants were eating pets in Springfield, Ohio. And after the music superstar Taylor Swift said last week that she would vote for Ms. Harris, signing her endorsement “Childless Cat Lady” in a reference to comments by Mr. Trump’s running mate, Mr. Musk appeared to offer jokingly to impregnate Ms. Swift, writing: “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life.” More

  • in

    JD Vance’s Blood-and-Soil Nationalism Finds Its Target

    If Senator JD Vance of Ohio had a moral compass, a shred of decency or a belief in anything other than his own ambition and will-to-power, he would resign his Senate seat effective immediately, leave the presidential race and retire from public life, following a mournful apology for his ethical transgressions.As it stands, Vance has done none of the above, which is why he is still, as of today, using his position in the United States Senate and on the Republican Party presidential ticket to spread lies and smears against his own constituents in Springfield — Haitian immigrants who have settled there to make a new life for themselves.The main impact of those lies and smears — which began Monday when Vance told his followers on X that “reports now show that people have had their pets abducted and eaten by people who shouldn’t be in this country,” and continued Tuesday when Donald Trump told an audience of 67 million people that “they’re eating the dogs, the people that came in, they’re eating the cats” — has been to terrorize the entire Springfield community.On Thursday, bomb threats led to the evacuation of two elementary schools, city hall and the state motor vehicle agency’s local facility. The mayor has received threats to his office, and local families fear for the safety of their children. Several Springfield residents, including Nathan Clark — father of Aiden Clark, the 11-year-old killed when his school bus was struck by a minivan driven by a Haitian immigrant — have pleaded with Trump and Vance to end their attacks and leave the community in peace.“My son was not murdered. He was accidentally killed by an immigrant from Haiti,” said Clark, rebutting a claim made by Vance. “This tragedy is felt all over this community, the state and even the nation, but don’t spin this towards hate,” he continued. “Using Aiden as a political tool is, to say the least, reprehensible for any political purpose.”This direct rebuke from a grieving father has stopped neither Vance nor Trump from spreading anti-immigrant — and specifically anti-Haitian — lies and fanning the flames of hatred. “Don’t let biased media shame you into not discussing this slow moving humanitarian crisis in a small Ohio town,” Vance said on Friday. “We should talk about it every 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

  • in

    What Undecided Voters Might Be Thinking

    Since the populist surge that gave us Brexit and the rise of Donald Trump, politics in the Western world has polarized into a distinctive stalemate — an inconclusive struggle between a credentialed elite that keeps failing at basic tasks of governing and a populist rebellion that’s too chaotic and paranoid to be trusted with authority instead.The 2024 campaign in its waning days is a grim illustration of this deadlock. We just watched Kamala Harris, the avatar of the liberal establishment, smoothly out-debate Trump by goading him into expressing populism at its worst — grievance-obsessed, demagogic, nakedly unfit.But her smoothness was itself an evasion of the actual record of the administration in which she serves. Harris offered herself as the turn-the-page candidate while sidestepping almost every question about what the supposed adults in the room have wrought across the last four years.A historic surge in migration that happened without any kind of legislation or debate. A historic surge in inflation that was caused by the pandemic, but almost certainly goosed by Biden administration deficits. A mismanaged withdrawal from Afghanistan. A stalemated proxy war in Eastern Europe with a looming threat of escalation. An elite lurch into woke radicalism that had real-world as well as ivory-tower consequences, in the form of bad progressive policymaking on crime and drugs and schools.All of this and more the Harris campaign hopes that voters forgive or just forget, while it claims the mantle of change and insists that “we’re not going back.”Undecided voters in a polarized America generate a lot of exasperated criticism from both sides of the partisan divide. And no doubt it will exasperate many readers when I suggest that the choices presented in this election make indecision entirely understandable.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