first term

Nancy Pelosi retirement shows her political savvy to the end

When Nancy Pelosi first ran for Congress, she was one of 14 candidates, the front-runner and a target.

At the time, Pelosi was little known to San Francisco voters. But she was already a fixture in national politics. She was a major Democratic fundraiser, who helped lure the party’s 1984 national convention to her adopted home town. She served as head of California’s Democratic Party and hosted a salon that was a must-stop for any politician passing through.

She was the chosen successor of Rep. Sala Burton, a short-timer who took over the House seat held for decades by her late husband, Philip, and who delivered a personal benediction from her deathbed.

But at age 49, Pelosi had never held public office — she was too busy raising five kids, on top of all that political moving and shaking — and opponents made light of role as hostess. “The party girl for the party,” they dubbed her, a taunt that blared from billboards around town.

She obviously showed them.

Pelosi not only made history, becoming the nation’s first female speaker of the House. She became the party’s spine and its sinew, holding together the Democrat’s many warring factions and standing firm at times the more timorous were prepared to back down.

The Affordable Care Act — President Obama’s signature achievement — would never have passed if Pelosi had not insisted on pressing on when many, including some in the White House, wished to surrender.

She played a significant role in twice helping rescue the country from economic collapse — the first time in 2009 amid the Great Recession, then in 2020 during the shutdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic — mustering recalcitrant Democrats to ensure House passage.

“She will go down in history as one of the most important speakers,” James Thurber, a congressional expert at Washington’s American University, said. “She knew the rules, she knew the process, she knew the personalities of the key players, and she knew how to work the system.”

Pelosi’s announcement Thursday that she will not seek reelection — at age 85, after 38 years in Congress — came as no surprise. She saw firsthand the ravages that consumed her friend and former neighbor, Dianne Feinstein. (Pelosi’s eldest daughter, Nancy, was a last caretaker for the late senator.)

She was not about to repeat that final, sad act.

Pelosi, who was first elected in 1987, once said she never expected to serve in Congress more than 10 years. She recalled seeing a geriatric House member hobbling on a cane and telling a colleague, “It’s never going to be me. I’m not staying around that long.”

(She never used a cane, but did give up her trademark stiletto heels for a time after suffering a fall last December and undergoing hip replacement surgery.)

Pelosi had intended to retire sooner, anticipating Hillary Clinton would be elected president in 2016 and seeing that as a logical, and fitting, end point to her trailblazing political career. “I have things to do. Books to write; places to go; grandchildren, first and foremost, to love,” she said in a 2018 interview.

However, she was determined to stymie President Trump in his first term and stuck around, emerging as one of his chief nemeses. After Joe Biden was elected, Pelosi finally yielded the speaker’s gavel in November 2022.

But she remained a substantive figure, still wielding enormous power behind the scenes. Among other quiet maneuvers, she was instrumental in helping ease aside Biden after his disastrous debate performance sent Democrats into a panic. He was a personal friend, and long-ago guest at her political salon, but Pelosi anticipated a down-ticket disaster if Biden remained the party’s nominee. So, in her estimation, he had to go.

It was the kind of ruthlessness that gave Pelosi great pride; she boasted of a reptilian cold-bloodedness and, indeed, though she shared the liberal leanings of her hometown, Pelosi was no ideologue. That’s what made her a superb deal-maker and legislative tactician, along with the personal touch she brought to her leadership.

“She had a will of steel, but she also had a lot of grace and warmth,” said Thurber, “and that’s not always the case with speakers.”

History-making aside, Pelosi left an enduring mark on San Francisco, the place she moved to from Baltimore as a young mother with her husband, Paul, a financier and real estate investor. She brought home billions of dollars for earthquake safety, re-purposing old military facilities — the former Presidio Army base is a spectacular park — funding AIDS research and treatment, expanding public transit and countless other programs.

Her work in the 1980s and 1990s on AIDS funding was crucial in helping move discussion of the disease from the shadows — where it was viewed as a plague that mainly struck gay men and drug users — to a pressing national concern.

In the process, she become a San Francisco institution, as venerated as the Golden Gate Bridge and beloved as the city’s tangy sourdough bread.

“She’s an icon,” said Aaron Peskin, a former San Francisco County supervisor and 2024 candidate for mayor. “She walks into a room, people left, right and center, old, young, white, Black, Chinese stand on their feet. She’s one of the greatest speakers we have ever had and this town understands that.”

Pelosi grew up in Baltimore in a political family. He father, Tommy D’Alesandro, was a Democratic New Deal congressman, who went on to serve three terms as mayor. “Little Nancy” stuffed envelopes — as her own children would — passed out ballots and often traveled by her father’s side to campaign events. (D’Alesandro went on to serve three terms as mayor; Pelosi’s brother, Tommy III, held the job for a single term.)

David Axelrod, who saw Pelosi up close while serving as a top aide in the Obama White House, said he once asked her what she learned growing up in such a political household. “She didn’t skip a beat,” Axelrod said. “She said, ‘I learned how to count.’ ”

Meaning when to call the roll on a key legislative vote and when to cut her losses in the face of inevitable defeat.

Pelosi is still so popular in San Francisco she could well have eked out yet another reelection victory in 2026, despite facing the first serious challenge since that first run for Congress. But the campaign would have been brutal and potentially quite ugly.

More than just about anyone, Pelosi knows how to read a political situation with dispassion, detachment and cold-eyed calculation.

She knew it was time.

Source link

Column: Trump’s tone-deaf displays are turning off voters

President Trump has long acknowledged that he doesn’t read books, so perhaps he’s never cracked the spine of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby.” But hasn’t he seen one of the several movies? Does he really not know that Gatsby is a tragedy about class, excess and hubris?

It seems not. On Halloween, there was Trump, dressed as himself, hosting a Gatsby-themed party at his Gatsby-era Mar-a-Lago estate. The president was fresh from a diplomatic tour of Asia during which he’d swept up an array of golden gifts (a crown!) from heads of state paying tribute in hopes of not paying tariffs.

Trump’s arriving guests, costumed as Roaring ’20s flappers, bootleggers and pre-crash tycoons, passed a scantily clad woman seductively writhing in a giant Champagne glass, then entered his gilded ballroom beneath a sign in Art Deco script pronouncing the night’s theme: “A little party never killed nobody.”

That’s the title of a song from the soundtrack of Baz Luhrmann’s 2013 film take on Gatsby, the most recent. Perhaps Trump is unaware that in the wake of the fictional Gatsby’s own debauched party, three people died, including Gatsby.

The tone-deaf Trump faced a comeuppance far short of tragedy after his party, but painful nonetheless: a blue wave in Tuesday’s elections. Revulsion at his imperial presidency swamped Republican candidates and causes.

The apparent ignorance of Mr. Make America Great Again about one of the great American novels, now in its centennial year, wasn’t the worst of Trump’s weekend show of excess. This was: The president of the United States held court at Mar-a-Lago, amid free-flowing liquor and tables laden with food, hours before federal food aid would end for 42 million Americans. Meanwhile, more than 1 million federal employees were furloughed or worked without pay amid a five-week-old government shutdown, some of them joining previously fired public servants at food banks. The online People magazine juxtaposed a photo of Trump surveying his Palm Beach party with a shot of nearby Miamians in a food line.

The president, who for nearly 10 months has seized powers he doesn’t have under federal law and the Constitution, professed to be all but powerless to avert the nutrition assistance cutoff, despite two federal judges’ rulings that he do so. And, characteristically, he claimed to be blameless about the shutdown that provoked the nutrition crisis.

“It’s their fault,” Trump said of congressional Democrats as he flew to Mar-a-Lago for the fete. “Everything is their fault. It’s so easily solved.”

How? Why, Democrats have to bend the knee, of course. They must abandon their quest to get Trump and Republicans to reverse their Medicaid cuts and to extend Obamacare subsidies for the working poor. Even as Mr. Art of the Deal claims (falsely) to have settled eight wars, bargaining even with Hamas, he’s refused to negotiate with Democrats. The shutdown is now the longest ever, on Tuesday surpassing the 35-day record Trump set in his first term.

There’s more.

En route to Florida aboard Air Force One, the presidential plane that Trump is replacing with a truly royal jet, a gift from Qatar, and having left behind the ruins of the East Wing where his $300-million ballroom will rise, Trump took to social media to boast of his latest project in the Mar-a-Lago-fication of the White House: an all-marble and gold do-over of the bathroom adjoining the Lincoln Bedroom. “Highly polished, Statuary marble!” he crowed, sending two dozen photos in a series of posts. Trump wrote that the previous 1940s-era bathroom “was totally inappropriate for the Lincoln Era,” but his changes fixed that.

“Art Deco doesn’t go with, you know, 1850 and civil wars and all of the problems,” he’d told wealthy donors last month. “But what does is statuary marble. So I ripped it apart and we built the bathroom. It’s absolutely gorgeous and totally in keeping with that time.”

And with that, Trump again showed his ignorance of America’s history as well as its literature. That said, the new bathroom is more attractive than the one at Mar-a-Lago in which Trump stashed boxes of government documents, including top-secret papers, after his first term.

Trump’s lust for power and its trappings seems to have made him blind to bad optics and deaf to the dissonance of his utterances. The politician who’s gotten so much credit — and won two of three presidential elections — for speaking to working-class Americans’ grievances now seems completely out of touch. There’s also his family’s open accrual of wealth, especially in crypto, and Trump’s recent demand for $230 million from the ever-accommodating Justice Department, to compensate him for the past legal cases against him for keeping government documents and attempting to reverse his 2020 defeat.

All of this while Americans’ costs of living remain high, people are out of jobs thanks to his policies and longtime residents, including some citizens, are swept up in his immigrant detentions and deportations, sundering families.

This week’s election results aren’t the only thing that suggests Trump is finally paying a price. So did the release of several polls timed for the first anniversary of his reelection. Despite Trump’s claims to the contrary, his job approval ratings are the lowest since the ignominious end of his first term. Majorities oppose his handling of most issues, including the ones — the economy and immigration — that helped elect him.

The narrator in “The Great Gatsby” famously says of two central characters, “They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

I’m looking forward to the day when the careless Trump is gone and his mess can be cleaned up — including all that gold defiling the People’s House.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes

Source link

Trump isn’t canceling travel, golf or his ballroom even with the government shut down

President Trump isn’t curtailing travel. He’s not avoiding golf or making do with a skeleton staff in the West Wing. Even hamburgers served at the White House aren’t from McDonalds, this time.

In shutdowns past — including during Trump’s first term — presidents normally scaled back their schedules. With staffers deemed “non-essential” sent home, the White House often sought to appear sympathetic to Americans affected by disruptions to healthcare, veterans benefits and other key services.

The current one has left around 750,000 federal employees furloughed and others working without pay. Funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, is lapsing after Friday.

Nonetheless, it’s been mostly business as usual for Trump over the last 29 days.

“It’s like that country song: ‘Sometimes falling feels like flying for a little while,’” said Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist and former advisor to President Clinton, who presided over two shutdowns between 1995 and 1996. “They seem to be like, ‘So far, so good, man.’ ”

Ballroom, golf and trips

Trump was on a six-day swing through Asia, after a recent, whirlwind Middle East visit. He hosted a White House fundraiser for major donors to his $300-million ballroom that has seen construction crews tear down the East Wing, and held another fundraiser at his Florida estate.

Members of the Cabinet have similarly hit the road. Vice President JD Vance traveled to Israel, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem went to Oregon and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth toured Topgun, the U.S. Navy’s elite fighter weapons school in Nevada.

Only 32% of staff in the Executive Office of the President were set to be furloughed during the current shutdown, according to a White House budget office contingency report. That’s down from 61% during the last shutdown in 2018-19, in Trump’s first term. About half of the Executive Mansion’s team that includes housekeepers, ushers, valets and butlers are currently working. Last time, more than 70% were furloughed.

It’s often been hard to tell a shutdown is happening with so many staffers remaining at their desks.

“I don’t even know if they’re supposed to be working, but they wouldn’t miss a day,” Trump said during an event last week.

It’s a departure from Trump’s first term, when he cut out golf and canceled a planned trip to Florida for Christmas during the 2018 shutdown, which stretched into the new year. He made a surprise visit to troops in Iraq then, but nixed plans to go to the Swiss Alps for the World Economic Forum.

When hosting Clemson University football players celebrating their NCAA football championship, Trump brought in burgers and fries from McDonald’s and Domino’s pizza because of White House staff furloughs.

This time, the president had Republican senators over for a lunch that featured burgers, too. But staff made them. “They do great food at the White House,” Trump said.

‘A smarter approach’

Some say barreling ahead like there’s no shutdown has some political advantages for Trump, allowing him to look presidential while avoiding congressional bickering.

“It’s a much smarter approach,” said Marc Short, chief of staff to former Vice President Mike Pence.

In Trump’s first-term shutdown, he rejected a congressional compromise to force the government to close — an attempt to win funding to wall off the U.S.-Mexico border. Then, he named Pence as lead negotiator to end the shutdown while involving his son-in-law Jared Kushner — creating the visual of them having to go to Capitol Hill.

“The first go-around, he was pretty clear with cameras rolling: He said he wanted the shutdown. He claimed ownership,” Short said. This time? “The White House has been clear about not owning it.”

Back in 1995, Begala recalled talking strategy with Clinton during a sweaty summer run at Fort McNair in Washington, and telling the president that Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich and his party “think they can roll you,” forcing cuts to Medicare by threatening a shutdown.

Clinton responded: “‘My favorite movie’s ‘High Noon,’ ” Begala recalled, meaning the western in which a marshal stands up to outlaws. ”They do that — then I just have a Gary Cooper, ‘High Noon’ moment. That’s easy.”

When Gingrich later came to the White House to negotiate, Begala said Clinton wouldn’t budge, even though some advisors urged him to cut a deal. Voters ultimately blamed congressional Republicans more than the White House for the government closing, and Clinton was easily reelected in 1996.

“That could have really gone badly for Clinton,” Begala said. “But he did understand that standing strong, and having a Gary Cooper moment, would be really good for him.”

Trump could probably find a way to end the current shutdown if he wanted to prioritize it, said Leon Panetta, who worked to end past government closures as Clinton’s chief of staff. But Trump’s “attention is focused on everything but sitting down and getting both parties together to resolve this issue,” Panetta said.

‘Continuing to work night and day’

During the 16-day government shutdown of 2013, President Obama scrapped a four-country Asia trip and skipped the Congressional Hispanic Caucus gala. His schedule featured events meant to show the shutdown’s effects, including visiting a Maryland construction firm that benefited from the kind of federal loans jeopardized with the government shuttered.

In 2019, as that shutdown dragged on, Trump’s White House officials acknowledged feeling pressure to end it. This time, the administration’s approach has been to blame the Democrats, while signaling that it’s prepared to wait — even warning of coming travel delays during the Thanksgiving holidays.

“President Trump is continuing to work night and day on behalf of American people,” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson. “The entire administration, including the president, will continue highlighting the workers and families who are suffering because of the Democrats’ decision to shut down the government.”

Bill Daley, a White House chief of staff to Obama before the 2013 shutdown, said Trump isn’t acting like he’s feeling political heat to reopen the government, even before next Tuesday’s gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey — both home to sizable federal workforces.

“My guess is, he thinks it helps him,” Daley said, “until — and I don’t know if it will — the bottom falls out.”

Democrats are demanding an extension of expiring tax credits that have helped millions of people afford health insurance, while Republicans say they won’t negotiate until the government is reopened.

Trump has said the shutdown must end, but also used it to cut federal positions and target programs Democrats favor, while redirecting funds to his own priorities — like covering military paychecks. The president has even said of closed museums, “We should probably just open them.”

Americans, meanwhile, are divided on who’s to blame.

Roughly 6 in 10 say Trump and congressional Republicans have “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of responsibility for the shutdown, while 54% say the same about Democrats in Congress, according to a recent poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Mike McCurry, a White House press secretary under Clinton, said Democrats have yet to settle on a clear shutdown message that has resonated. Trump has the presidency to deliver his take, but McCurry noted he has been “mercurial.”

“It is not likely we’re going to have clear winners or losers after this,” McCurry said. “It’s going to be a bit of a muddle.”

Weissert writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Column: Why MAGA’s ideologues can’t always get what they want

MAGA has a problem, in the form of Donald Trump. Put simply: MAGA wants to define what MAGA (or “America first”) means, and Donald Trump wants it to mean whatever he says at any given moment.

I should offer a little definitional clarity and political nuance. Make America Great Again means different things to different people. The Trump coalition is not monolithic, it contains factions that do not necessarily consider themselves to be MAGA. But as shorthand, MAGA is an identifiably distinct bloc on the right, and it’s the dominant faction in the broader GOP coalition. Its internal diversity notwithstanding, it still has a worldview or ideology. And the MAGA faithful are increasingly frustrated by the fact that Trump doesn’t always share, or prioritize, that ideology.

They believed that if you could just “let Trump be Trump” he would follow their conception of MAGA. In Ronald Reagan’s first term, many movement conservatives were frustrated by what they perceived as the Gipper’s drift toward centrism. They blamed moderates in the administration. “Let Reagan be Reagan” became a rallying cry on the right.

“It’s a piece of conventional wisdom on the new American right that Donald Trump struggled in his first term because he hired the wrong people — old-think Bush Republicans, figures like Rex Tillerson and Steven Mnuchin, who didn’t have a populist bone in their bodies,” the news website Semafor’s Ben Smith offers in an astute analysis.

As a result, Smith continues, “Trump’s most passionate supporters weren’t going to make that mistake again. They created initiatives like American Moment, Project 2025, and others aimed at grooming and credentialing a cadre of MAGA appointees. When Trump took office, the America Firsters moved en masse into the Department of Defense. Big Tech avengers seized the antitrust apparatus. Conspiracy-minded podcasters took over the FBI.

“And yet — just as Trump often ignored his conventional advisers in the first term, he’s stunned loyalists by sweeping aside this carefully assembled apparat in 2025.”

Trump said as much to the Atlantic magazine last month: “I think I’m the one that decides” what “America first” means.

“It turns out that personnel isn’t policy,” the executive director of the American Conservative, Curt Mills, “glumly” told Smith. The idea that “personnel is policy” is another Reagan-era mantra; put Reaganites in important positions and you’ll get Reaganite policies. Putting Trumpists in powerful positions doesn’t yield the same results.

Immigration hawks have been panicking over the president’s suggestion that farm and hotel workers should be excluded from his deportation schemes. As Trump told Fox News, “I’m on both sides of the thing.” Foreign policy “restrainers” were beclowned by his support of Israel’s strikes on Iran and his apparent about-face on helping Ukraine.

On China, Trump’s been a hawk as promised, except when he hasn’t, allowing NVIDIA to sell chips to China, and ignoring the law by refusing to sell or shutter TikTok.

Then there’s the Jeffrey Epstein fiasco, which has bedeviled Trump for weeks. It’s intensity and durability can best be explained by the fact that it divides those who define Trumpism as loyalty to Trump and those who believe that loyalty would be, must be rewarded by a cleansing of corrupt globalist elite — or something.

In short, there is no “Trumpism” that is an analogue to Reaganism. Reaganism is a philosophical approach. What defines Trump’s reign is better understood as a psychological phenomenon both as an explanation of his behavior and of his fans’ cultish and performative loyalty. To the extent Trump has a philosophy it is to follow his instincts, which are most powerfully informed first by his own ego but also the dramaturgy of professional wrestling, reality TV and Norman Vincent Peale’s prosperity gospel.

He’s said many times that he considers unpredictability a virtue in itself, which by definition means he is going to disappoint anyone who expects philosophical coherence. When Trump was a bull in a China shop, the people most excited by the sound of breaking vases and dishware assumed there was a broader method to the madness. But now the same people are learning that Trump won’t be saddled by his fans any more than he is by norms.

This was always going to be the case (as I noted in 2017), but what adds to MAGA’s frustration is that anyone can see and copy the bull-handling techniques that are most likely to work. Compliment him, call him “daddy,” celebrate his genius and expertise, and you too can manipulate him with at least moderate success.

Perhaps most significant, it’s becoming clear that a movement defined by loyalty to a mercurial personality is bound to split apart once that personality leaves the stage — if not sooner.

X: @JonahDispatch

Insights

L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.

Viewpoint
This article generally aligns with a Center point of view. Learn more about this AI-generated analysis
Perspectives

The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.

Ideas expressed in the piece

  • The author contends that MAGA faces a fundamental problem with Donald Trump himself, as the movement seeks to define what “America First” means while Trump insists it means whatever he declares at any given moment. This creates an inherent tension between ideological consistency and Trump’s mercurial leadership style.

  • The piece argues that MAGA faithful have grown increasingly frustrated with Trump’s failure to consistently share or prioritize their worldview, despite their belief that allowing Trump to “be Trump” would naturally align with their conception of the movement. This frustration stems from Trump’s tendency to disappoint supporters across various policy areas including immigration, foreign policy, and China relations.

  • The author maintains that the Reagan-era principle of “personnel is policy” fails to apply to Trump, as placing committed Trumpists in powerful positions does not guarantee the implementation of coherent MAGA policies. Instead, Trump often ignores or sidelines his carefully selected advisers just as he did with conventional Republicans in his first term.

  • The analysis suggests that there is no coherent “Trumpism” philosophy comparable to Reaganism, describing Trump’s approach as fundamentally psychological rather than philosophical. The author characterizes Trump’s governing style as driven primarily by ego and influenced by professional wrestling, reality TV, and prosperity gospel theatrics.

  • The piece concludes that any movement defined by loyalty to a mercurial personality is destined to fracture once that personality exits the political stage, if not sooner, as Trump’s unpredictability prevents the philosophical coherence necessary for lasting political movements.

Different views on the topic

  • Contrary perspectives suggest that Trump has successfully consolidated control over the Republican Party, with his MAGA movement having effectively routed the GOP establishment and become the new institutional power structure[1]. This view emphasizes Trump’s political dominance rather than internal fractures or ideological inconsistencies.

  • Some observers argue that Trump’s influence within his own coalition remains strong, noting that his ability to intimidate reporters and maintain loyalty from supporters, social media influencers, and Fox News hosts demonstrates continued political power[2]. This perspective suggests that apparent divisions may be temporary rather than signs of fundamental weakness.

  • Alternative viewpoints acknowledge tensions within the MAGA coalition but frame them as natural political evolution rather than fatal flaws, suggesting that political movements often experience internal debates and realignments without necessarily fracturing[1]. These perspectives emphasize Trump’s track record of successfully navigating previous challenges to his leadership.

Source link

Controversial Trump official will lead U.S. Institute of Peace

A senior State Department official who was fired as a speechwriter during President Trump’s first term and has a history of racially charged, incendiary statements has been appointed to lead the embattled U.S. Institute of Peace.

The move to install Darren Beattie as the institute’s new acting president is seen as the latest step in the administration’s efforts to dismantle the organization, which was founded as an independent, nonprofit think tank. It is funded by Congress to promote peace and prevent and end conflicts across the globe. The battle is currently being played out in court.

Beattie, who currently serves as the undersecretary for public diplomacy at the State Department and will continue in that role, was fired during Trump’s first term after CNN reported that he had spoken at a 2016 conference attended by white nationalists. He defended the speech he delivered as containing nothing objectionable.

A former academic who taught at Duke University, Beattie also founded a right-wing website that shared conspiracy theories about the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, and he has a long history of posting inflammatory statements on social media.

“Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work,” he wrote in October 2024. “Unfortunately, our entire national ideology is predicated on coddling the feelings of women and minorities, and demoralizing competent white men.”

A State Department official confirmed Beattie’s appointment by the Institute of Peace board of directors, which includes Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. “We look forward to seeing him advance President Trump’s America First agenda in this new role,” they said in a statement.

The institute has been embroiled in turmoil since Trump moved to dismantle it shortly after taking office as part of his broader effort to shrink the size of the federal government and eliminate independent agencies.

Trump issued an executive order in February that targeted the organization and three other agencies for closure. The first attempt by the White House team known as the Department of Government Efficiency, formerly under the command of tech billionaire Elon Musk, to take over its headquarters led to a dramatic standoff.

Members of Musk’s group returned days later with the FBI and Washington Metropolitan Police to help them gain entry.

The administration fired most of the institute’s board, followed by the mass firing of nearly all of its 300 employees, in what they called “the Friday night massacre.”

The institute and many of its board members sued the Trump administration in March, seeking to prevent their removal and to prevent DOGE from taking over the institute’s operations. DOGE transferred administrative oversight of the organization’s headquarters and assets to the General Services Administration that weekend.

District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell overturned those actions in May, concluding that Trump was outside his authority in firing the board and its acting president and that, therefore, all subsequent actions were also moot.

Her ruling allowed the institute to regain control of its headquarters in a rare victory for the agencies and organizations that have been caught up in the Trump administration’s downsizing. The employees were rehired, although many did not return to work because of the complexity of restarting operations.

They received termination orders — for the second time — after an appeals court stayed Howell’s order.

Most recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied the U.S. Institute of Peace’s request for a hearing of the full court to lift the stay of a three-judge panel in June. That stay led to the organization turning its headquarters back over to the Trump administration.

In a statement, George Foote, former counsel for the institute, said Beattie’s appointment “flies in the face of the values at the core of USIP’s work and America’s commitment to working respectfully with international partners.” He also called it “illegal under Judge Howell’s May 19 decision.”

“We are committed to defending that decision against the government’s appeal. We are confident that we will succeed on the merits of our case, and we look forward to USIP resuming its essential work in Washington, D.C., and in conflict zones around the world,” he said.

Fields and Colvin write for the Associated Press.

Source link

Judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit against Chicago ‘sanctuary’ laws

A judge in Illinois dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit Friday that sought to disrupt limits Chicago imposes on cooperation between federal immigration agents and local police.

The lawsuit, filed in February, alleged that so-called sanctuary laws in the nation’s third-largest city “thwart” federal efforts to enforce immigration laws.

It argued that local laws run counter to federal laws by restricting “local governments from sharing immigration information with federal law enforcement officials” and preventing immigration agents from identifying “individuals who may be subject to removal.”

Judge Lindsay Jenkins of the Northern District of Illinois granted the defendants’ motion for dismissal.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said that he was pleased with the decision and that the city is safer when police focus on the needs of Chicagoans.

“This ruling affirms what we have long known: that Chicago’s Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety. The City cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration’s reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,” he said in a statement.

Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, welcomed the ruling, saying in a social media post, “Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court.”

The Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security and did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

The administration has filed a series of lawsuits targeting state or city policies it sees as interfering with immigration enforcement, including those in Los Angeles, New York City, Denver and Rochester, N.Y. It sued four New Jersey cities in May.

Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades and has beefed up its laws several times, including during President Trump’s first term in 2017.

That same year, then-Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed more statewide sanctuary protections into law, putting him at odds with his party.

There is no official definition for sanctuary policies or sanctuary cities. The terms generally describe limits on local cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE enforces U.S. immigration laws nationwide but sometimes seeks state and local help.

Source link

Guatemala’s president denies new asylum deal with U.S.

Guatemala President Bernardo Arévalo said Friday he has not signed an agreement with the United States to take asylum seekers from other countries, pushing back against comments from U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

Noem and Arévalo met Thursday in Guatemala and the two governments publicly signed a joint security agreement that would allow U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers to work in the capital’s airport, training local agents how to screen for terrorism suspects.

But Noem said she had also been given a signed document she called a safe-third-country agreement. She said she reached a similar deal in Honduras and said they were important outcomes of her trip.

Asked about Noem’s comments Friday during a news conference, Arévalo said that nothing new was signed related to immigration and that Guatemala was still operating under an agreement reached with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in February. That agreement stipulated that Guatemala would continue accepting the deportation of its own citizens, but also citizens of other Central American nations as a transit point on their way home.

Arévalo said that when Rubio visited, safe third country was discussed because Guatemala had signed such an agreement during President Trump’s first term in office. But “we made it clear that our path was different,” Arévalo said.

He did add that Guatemala was willing to provide asylum to Nicaraguans who have been unable to return to their country because of the political situation there out of “solidarity.”

The president’s communications office said Noem had been given the ratification of the agreement reached through diplomatic notes weeks earlier.

During Trump’s first term, the U.S. signed such safe-third-country agreements with Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. They effectively allowed the U.S. to declare some asylum seekers ineligible to apply for U.S. protection and permitted the U.S. government to send them to those countries deemed “safe.”

Perez writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Trump says it might be better to let Ukraine and Russia ‘fight for a while’

President Trump said Thursday that it might be better to let Ukraine and Russia “fight for a while” before pulling them apart and pursuing peace.

In an Oval Office meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Trump likened the war in Ukraine — which Russia invaded in early 2022 — to a fight between two young children who hated each other.

“Sometimes you’re better off letting them a fight for a while and then pulling them apart,” Trump said. He added that he had relayed that analogy to Russian President Vladimir Putin in their phone conversation on Wednesday.

Asked about Trump’s comments as the two leaders sat next to each other, Merz stressed that both he and Trump agreed “on this war and how terrible this war is going on,” pointing to the U.S. president as the “key person in the world” who would be able to stop the bloodshed.

But Merz also emphasized that Germany “was on the side of Ukraine” and that Kyiv was only attacking military targets, not Russian civilians.

“We are trying to get them stronger,” Merz said of Ukraine.

Thursday’s meeting marked the first time that the two leaders sat down in person. After exchanging pleasantries — Merz gave Trump a gold-framed birth certificate of the U.S. president’s grandfather Friedrich Trump, who emigrated from Germany — the two leaders were to discuss issues such as Ukraine, trade and NATO spending.

Trump and Merz have spoken several times by phone, either bilaterally or with other European leaders, since Merz took office on May 6. German officials say the two leaders have started to build a “decent” relationship, with Merz wanting to avoid the antagonism that defined Trump’s relationship with one of his predecessors, Angela Merkel, in the Republican president’s first term.

The 69-year-old Merz — who came to office with an extensive business background — is a conservative former rival of Merkel’s who took over her party after she retired from politics.

A White House official said topics that Trump is likely to raise with Merz include Germany’s defense spending, trade, Ukraine and what the official called “democratic backsliding,” saying the administration’s view is that shared values such as freedom of speech have deteriorated in Germany and the country should reverse course. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to preview the discussions.

But Merz told reporters Thursday morning that if Trump wanted to talk German domestic politics, he was ready to do that but he also stressed Germany holds back when it comes to American domestic politics.

Merz has thrown himself into diplomacy on Ukraine, traveling to Kyiv with fellow European leaders days after taking office and receiving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Berlin last week. He has thanked Trump for his support for an unconditional ceasefire while rejecting the idea of “dictated peace” or the “subjugation” of Ukraine and advocating for more sanctions against Russia.

In their first phone call since Merz became chancellor, Trump said he would support the efforts of Germany and other European countries to achieve peace, according to a readout from the German government. Merz also said last month that “it is of paramount importance that the political West not let itself be divided, so I will continue to make every effort to produce the greatest possible unity between the European and American partners.”

Under Merz’s immediate predecessor, Olaf Scholz, Germany became the second-biggest supplier of military aid to Ukraine after the United States. Merz has vowed to keep up the support and last week pledged to help Ukraine develop its own long-range missile systems that would be free of any range limits.

In his remarks on Thursday, Trump still left the threat of sanctions on the table. He said sanctions could be imposed for both Ukraine and Russia.

“When I see the moment where it’s not going to stop … we’ll be very, very tough,” Trump said.

At home, Merz’s government is intensifying a drive that Scholz started to bolster the German military after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In Trump’s first term, Berlin was a target of his ire for failing to meet the current NATO target of spending 2% of gross domestic product on defense, and Trump is now demanding at least 5% from allies.

The White House official said the upcoming NATO summit in the Netherlands later this month is a “good opportunity” for Germany to commit to meeting that 5% mark.

Scholz set up a 100-billion euro ($115 billion) special fund to modernize Germany’s armed forces — called the Bundeswehr — which had suffered from years of neglect. Germany has met the 2% target thanks to the fund, but it will be used up in 2027.

Merz has said that “the government will in the future provide all the financing the Bundeswehr needs to become the strongest conventional army in Europe.” He has endorsed a plan for all allies to aim to spend 3.5% of GDP on their defense budgets by 2032, plus an extra 1.5% on potentially defense-related things like infrastructure.

Another top priority for Merz is to get Germany’s economy, Europe’s biggest, moving again after it shrank the past two years. He wants to make it a “locomotive of growth,” but Trump’s tariff threats are a potential obstacle for a country whose exports have been a key strength. At present, the economy is forecast to stagnate in 2025.

Germany exported $160 billion worth of goods to the U.S. last year, according to the Census Bureau. That was about $85 billion more than what the U.S. sent to Germany, a trade deficit that Trump wants to erase.

“Germany is one of the very big investors in America,” Merz told reporters Thursday morning. “Only a few countries invest more than Germany in the USA. We are in third place in terms of foreign direct investment.”

The U.S. president has specifically gone after the German auto sector, which includes major brands such as Audi, BMW, Mercedes Benz, Porsche and Volkswagen. Americans bought $36 billion worth of cars, trucks and auto parts from Germany last year, while the Germans purchased $10.2 billion worth of vehicles and parts from the U.S.

Trump’s 25% tariff on autos and parts is specifically designed to increase the cost of German-made automobiles in hopes of causing them to move their factories to the U.S., even though many of the companies already have plants in the U.S. with Volkswagen in Tennessee, BMW in South Carolina and Mercedes-Benz in Alabama and South Carolina.

There’s only so much Merz can achieve on his view that tariffs “benefit no one and damage everyone” while in Washington, as trade negotiations are a matter for the European Union’s executive commission. Trump recently delayed a planned 50% tariff on goods coming from the European Union, which would have otherwise gone into effect this month.

One source of strain in recent months is a speech Vice President JD Vance gave in Munich shortly before Germany’s election in February, in which he lectured European leaders about the state of democracy on the continent and said there is no place for “firewalls.”

That term is frequently used to describe mainstream German parties’ refusal to work with the far-right Alternative for Germany, which finished second in the election and is now the biggest opposition party.

Merz criticized the comments. He told ARD television last month that it isn’t the place of a U.S. vice president “to say something like that to us in Germany; I wouldn’t do it in America, either.”

Kim, Grieshaber and Moulson write for the Associated Press. Moulson reported from Berlin. AP writer Josh Boak in Washington contributed to this report.

Source link

Trump’s agenda on Middle East trip: Lots of deals

The first time President Trump visited Riyadh in 2017, he posed with a ceremonial orb, took part in a traditional sword dance and secured an agreement by Saudi Arabia to purchase $350 billion in weaponry, the largest arms deal in U.S. history.

The sequel, coming eight years later — almost to the day — promises much the same in the way of pageantry and purchases, only more so.

Even before the trip, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman vowed he would invest about $600 billion over the four years of Trump’s presidency (Trump asked him to round it up to $1 trillion).

And although the orb will probably not make an appearance this time around, Trump is bringing with him a phalanx of business leaders for a Saudi-U.S. business summit Tuesday — the day he arrives — that will include BlackRock Chief Executive Larry Fink, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, Palantir Technologies’ Alex Karp, Tesla’s Elon Musk and Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg.

The heads of other major firms, including IBM, Boeing, Qualcomm and Alphabet, also will attend. White House artificial intelligence and crypto czar David Sacks, meanwhile, is already in Riyadh.

Trump will then attend a summit with gulf leaders on Wednesday, travel to Qatar that same day and end the trip Thursday in the United Arab Emirates. There will be more gifts: The UAE has pledged $1.4 trillion in U.S. investment packages over the next decade.

“Trump is there to solidify a very close relationship,” said Ali Shihabi, a political and economic expert who is close to the Saudi government, adding that although he did not expect a breakthrough on security matters, the deals signed would nevertheless bring “economic ties and coordination to a very high level.”

Not to be outdone by its two regional competitors, Qatar is in discussions about the “possible transfer” of a luxury Boeing 747-8 to replace Air Force One.

Before departing on the current Air Force One, Trump found himself defending plans to accept the gift, which is thought to cost hundreds of millions of dollars. He dismissed those with concerns over the ethics and constitutionality of the gift as “stupid people,” suggesting he planned to proceed with it, a topic sure to fuel questions over his visit to Doha, the Qatari capital.

Trump also visited Saudi Arabia on the first international trip of his first term, breaking a presidential tradition of visiting U.S. allies and major trade partners such as the United Kingdom and European countries. That Trump chose the gulf region as his first destination, commentators say, reflects the Mideast’s growing centrality to the U.S. in terms of political and security partners. (Technically, this is not his first overseas trip since returning to the White House because he attended the recent funeral of Pope Francis.)

“The gulf nations succeeded in positioning themselves in a way that lets them play constructive roles in several issues,” said Hasan Alhasan, senior fellow for Middle East policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Bahrain. He pointed out that Saudi Arabia has sponsored talks between Russia and Ukraine and was involved in peacemaking efforts in Sudan.

Qatar is a driving force in negotiations between Israel and Hamas and has helped to stabilize Syria. Oman, which is not on the itinerary but whose leader will take part in the summit, is hosting high-level talks between the U.S. and Iran.

“Trump is not tied to the protocols of other presidents. He sees an overlap in aims, whether political or commercial,” Alhasan said.

Israel is watching the visit with consternation on a host of fronts, expecting Trump to hear an earful from Arab governments on its continuing conflict with Hamas militants in Gaza and the role Israel is playing in the future of Syria. And Israeli officials are increasingly concerned that their voices will be drowned out as the Trump administration progresses in its negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program.

Any hint from Trump that he would tolerate the Iranians continuing with a civilian nuclear program will send reverberations throughout Washington, particularly on Capitol Hill, where Republicans have long opposed allowing Iran to continue any enrichment of uranium on its soil.

Trump also appears unconcerned with limits placed by his predecessors on what countries can receive from the U.S. He has reportedly revoked the AI diffusion rule, the U.S. policy intended to control the export of advanced semiconductor chips and AI, paving the way for gulf nations to ramp up their already considerable advanced chip holdings.

That’s especially true for the UAE, whose $1.4-trillion investment will be heavily weighted toward AI. Meanwhile, MGX, an investment fund based in the Emirati capital, Abu Dhabi, has pledged $100 billion in energy infrastructures and data centers in the U.S. to support AI.

At the same time, G42, another UAE-based AI firm, has divested from Chinese companies and partnered with Microsoft in an attempt to appease U.S. lawmakers.

There have also been reports that Trump will revive potential arms deals that were on the table from his first term but were never completed, including sales of F-35 fighter jets and Reaper drones to the UAE, and the co-production of advanced missiles with Saudi Arabia, said Prem Thakker, a partner with the global advisory firm DGA and a former official with the National Security Council under President Obama.

Another issue on the table could be nuclear power for Saudi Arabia. President Biden made supporting a civilian nuclear program for the kingdom contingent on Riyadh agreeing to a peace deal with Israel similar to the Abraham Accords, the normalization agreements forged with the UAE, Bahrain and others during Trump’s first term.

Under Trump, that condition appears to have been dropped, with negotiations that could potentially allow Saudi Arabia to capitalize on its uranium reserves and a domestic enrichment program.

“And this means that traditional nonproliferation concerns over Saudi Arabia have really subsided over the last few years,” Thakker said. “Twenty years ago no one in the U.S. would have contemplated such an agreement.”

The trip dovetails with a raft of investments involving the Trump Organization. Its real-estate development arm, which is led by Trump’s son Eric, has announced since last year construction projects across the gulf region, including a $2-billion golf course in Qatar, an 80-story hotel and residential tower in Dubai and two Trump towers in Saudi Arabia — one in Riyadh and one in Jeddah.

Though the deals appear gargantuan, experts say financial realities will cut them down to size. Many point out that Saudi Arabia’s investments during Trump’s first term did not reach the $450 billion he mentioned (the figure includes nonmilitary spending). Even the most generous of calculations would put the Saudi investments at less than $300 billion, experts say.

Though its investments in the U.S. are likely to increase during Trump’s second term, Riyadh has focused much of its spending on gigaprojects such as NEOM. And current oil prices sitting below the government’s break-even price of around $100 a barrel means that it will be running a deficit, said David Butter, a Middle East energy expert at Chatham House, a think tank in London.

He added that the Saudi government and its colossal sovereign fund, the Public Investment Fund, both of which own a part of Saudi oil giant Aramco, have not received performance-linked dividends for this year. The result, Butter said, is a looming financial crisis.

“The investment numbers are fantasy,” he said.

Bulos reported from Riyadh and Wilner from Washington.

Source link