Latest news with #CounciloftheDistrictofColumbia
The Independent
29-04-2025
- Business
- The Independent
What's next in the Commanders' process of building a new stadium in Washington
Roger Goodell acknowledged that a new, state-of-the-art Commanders stadium in Washington would drastically increase the chances of the U.S. capital hosting the Super Bowl for the first time. 'We've got to get it built first,' the NFL Commissioner said. Before shovels are even in the ground at the site of the old RFK Stadium, the nearly $4 billion project trumpeted Monday needs majority approval from the Council of the District of Columbia. That is far from a formality or a rubber stamp given the roughly $1.1 billion in proposed investment by the city, though controlling owner Josh Harris is optimistic about its prospects. "It's just an incredible project for D.C., and I think that's why I feel pretty confident it's going to happen," Harris said. 'I think that D.C., the council, will recognize what an incredible opportunity this is, as we did, and hopefully come around. Our job is to be transparent, to give them the information they need and to be supportive.' Chairman Phil Mendelson on local radio expressed his doubts about there being enough council support for the price tag, and he has in the past said he is not in favor of public money for a stadium. Councilmember Charles Allen put out a news release calling it a 'bad deal' for D.C., arguing that the stadium 'cannot be an economic engine with only eight home games and a handful of concerts.' The team and city vision is for not just Taylor Swift and Beyoncé concerts but 100-plus private events a year, with 1.4 million people going through the gates annually for everything from mixed-martial arts and wrestling cards to March Madness culminating in the Final Four and Premier League soccer and Army-Navy football games taking place in Washington. To make all that a reality, seven (out of usually 13 but currently 12 with one vacancy) councilmembers need to vote in favor of the plan. Four were in attendance at the news conference, including Wendell Felder, who represents the area the stadium would be in and said it could use an anchor like other parts of the city. 'This deal gives Ward 7 an opportunity to change that,' Felder said. 'When there's opportunities to this magnitude, (it is about) making sure we're getting in front of as many neighbors as possible across the ward so we hear their concerns, but most importantly we also want to create opportunities, whether those are business opportunities, whether those are employment opportunities for neighbors who will be impacted the most.' Bowser said no residents will be forced to move because the project is contained entirely on the 'RFK campus' land that includes the decaying ruins of the once-legendary stadium. But that does not mean there won't be folks affected by the construction and new flurry of activity. 'The good thing about this site is there was an NFL stadium there,' Bowser said, referring to Washington playing there from 1961-96 before moving to its current home in Landover, Maryland. 'What we've heard from the community is they're tired of the blight and they want the 180-acre parcel (of land) to be brought back to life. So, one advantage is that we won't just have what's there now: a sea of parking and a stadium. We're going to be able to have a wonderful mix of uses.' The plan calls for 5,000-6,000 new homes, at least 30% of which would be affordable housing, along with recreation, restaurants, stores and hotels with nearly a third of the land reserved for parks and open green space. Harris, who along with co-owners Mitch Rales and Mark Ein grew up as fans of the team, pointed out that the city's contribution for infrastructure would have needed to happen regardless of what went on the site. 'That's what they're doing, and so they get all this other stuff,' Harris said. 'I believe that this project speaks for itself. I think the (return on investment) to D.C.: the thousands of jobs, the billions of tax revenue, the events — D.C. deserves this.' The aggressive timeline to get the building opened by 2030 involves council approval this summer so planning can take place in the fall and the groundbreaking happen in the fall or winter of 2026. Citing recent approval of an $800 million overhaul renovation of downtown Capital One Arena to keep the NHL 's Capitals and NBA's Wizards in Washington that is now underway, Kenyan R. McDuffie is unbothered by the need for he and his fellow councilmembers to figure this out quickly. 'We know that we can walk and chew gum in the nation's capital,' McDuffie said. 'I don't think it takes away from the excitement of fans and people who live here understanding that this such a tremendous opportunity for the nation's capital. And it's an opportunity for us to grow our local economy and do it in a way that's smart that involves people who live here and the small businesses that are based here.' ___
New York Times
20-02-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Trump Administration Live Updates: I.R.S. May Begin Laying Off Thousands Today
Skip to contentSkip to site index President Trump speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Wednesday. Credit... Al Drago for The New York Times President Trump said on Wednesday that the federal government should take over Washington, D.C., wading into the decades-old and divisive issue of how the nation's capital is run. 'I think we should govern District of Columbia,' Mr. Trump told reporters on Air Force One. 'I think that we should run it strong, run it with law and order, make it absolutely flawlessly beautiful.' Mr. Trump's comments put him in the camp of Republicans who want to end the local government system in Washington, and in opposition to a majority of local residents and many Democrats who want the District of Columbia to become the 51st state. The people of Washington have been able to elect their mayor and a council to run local affairs since 1973, when Congress approved home rule for the district. But there are limits under the Home Rule Act. Congress reviews all legislation passed by the Council of the District of Columbia before it can become law, and has the power to amend or repeal laws. Congress also has authority over the city's budget, and the president appoints the district's judges. Washington residents got the right to vote for president and vice president in 1961 through the 23rd Amendment. But the district's 700,000 residents — more than the population of Vermont or Wyoming — in effect have no representation in Congress. They have a delegate in the House of Representatives who can participate in committees and legislative debates but cannot vote on bills with the full chamber. For Washington residents, the fact that they pay federal taxes but have no voice in Congress has long stung. In 2000, the city even added 'Taxation Without Representation' to its standard license plates. And in 2016, an overwhelming majority of residents — 86 percent — voted in favor of statehood for the District of Columbia. 'Just like you, we raise our families, pay our taxes, serve on juries, fight for our country and work together to create strong, caring communities,' reads a website on statehood run by the city's government. Some advocates of statehood have also framed it as a racial justice issue. Almost 45 percent of Washington's population is Black, according to data from the city government, which has said that if it became a state, the District of Columbia would be 'the only plurality-Black state in the country.' The idea of statehood also has strong support among Democrats, not least because Washington's voters have skewed heavily in favor of the party. Based on those electoral patterns, statehood for the District of Columbia would all but guarantee two more Democrats in the Senate. Repeated efforts over decades to put the District of Columbia on a path to statehood have failed in Congress. There has been staunch opposition from Republicans, who have introduced legislation of their own to water down or even eliminate home rule for the District of Columbia. They have also called Democrat-backed pushes for statehood unconstitutional power grabs. Republican members of Congress have often accused the city's government of incompetence and inaction, especially on crime. Some have argued that the only way to effectively run Washington is through federal governance. Mr. Trump repeated that criticism on Wednesday, saying there was 'too much crime, too much graffiti' in the city, necessitating a federal takeover. In the 1990s, Washington had one of the highest murder rates among major U.S. cities, but there has been a significant drop since then. Total violent crime in 2024 was the lowest it had been in the district in more than 30 years, according to police data. President Trump at an investment summit in Miami Beach, Fla., on Wednesday. Credit... Al Drago for The New York Times President Trump said on Wednesday evening that the newly established Department of Government Efficiency might return a portion of the savings accrued through job cuts and other budget curbs to American taxpayers. The idea of giving back 20 percent of the money saved as a result of initiatives recommended by the new department, known as DOGE, is 'under consideration,' said Mr. Trump. The potential initiative, he said, was 'a new concept' under which his administration would give '20 percent of the DOGE savings to American citizens' and '20 percent goes to paying down debt.' (He didn't mention what would be done with the other 60 percent of the money.) It was not immediately clear whether Mr. Trump was referring to paying off consumer debt or paying off the national debt, which currently stands at $36 trillion, but his comments suggested that he may have been talking about both. In January before Mr. Trump was inaugurated, Elon Musk, the entrepreneur who is leading DOGE, set expectations for cost cutting at $1 trillion. Mr. Trump provided scant details on the potential taxpayer returns, including on whether the proposal was even feasible or if he would need congressional approval. A White House spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Mr. Trump made his remarks during an international investment conference in Miami Beach, Fla., hosted by the Future Investment Initiative, a Saudi Arabian foundation that promotes the kingdom's economy and cultural priorities through a variety of annual events. The president spoke to a packed auditorium with an audience that featured Mr. Musk; Yasir al-Rumayyan, the governor of the Saudi Arabian sovereign-wealth fund; Princess Reema Bandar al-Saud, the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States; and Gianni Infantino, the president of FIFA, soccer's global governing body. Mr. Trump praised the work that DOGE was doing, promising that the department would save 'billions, hundreds of billions' of dollars in wasteful spending. And he stressed the importance of paying down debt. 'If it were a real estate balance sheet, the debt is tiny, but we still want to pay it down,' he said. He added: 'We don't look at it as a piece of real estate. It's America.' News Analysis President Trump's revisionism sets the stage for a geopolitical about-face unlike any in generations. Credit... Al Drago for The New York Times When Russian forces crashed over the borders into Ukraine in 2022 determined to wipe it off the map as an independent state, the United States rushed to aid the beleaguered nation and cast its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, as a hero of resistance. Three years almost to the day later, President Trump is rewriting the history of Russia's invasion of its smaller neighbor. Ukraine, in this version, is not a victim but a villain. And Mr. Zelensky is not a latter-day Winston Churchill, but a 'dictator without elections' who somehow started the war himself and conned America into helping. Mr. Trump's revisionism sets the stage for a geopolitical about-face unlike any in generations as the president embarks on negotiations with Russia that Ukraine fears could come at its own expense. By vilifying Mr. Zelensky and shifting blame for the war from Moscow to Kyiv, Mr. Trump seems to be laying a predicate for withdrawing support for an ally under attack. The sharp exchange of words between Mr. Trump and Mr. Zelensky this week signaled how much has changed with the inauguration of a new president in Washington. Even for Mr. Trump, who has never been a fan of Ukraine and has long expressed admiration of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, the vitriol expressed toward Mr. Zelensky drew gasps of surprise on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. A day after falsely declaring that Ukraine started the war, Mr. Trump doubled down on Wednesday with a remarkable broadside against the leader of an ally, built on a lie. 'Think of it, a modestly successful comedian, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn't be won,' Mr. Trump wrote on social media. It was a striking distortion of reality. Mr. Zelensky did not talk the United States into giving him money 'to go into a war.' He and his country were attacked, and only then did the United States under President Joseph R. Biden Jr. respond with expansive financial assistance. And even then, it has been only about a third of what Mr. Trump claimed. A church damaged by Russian shelling in a residential district in Mariupol, Ukraine. When Russia mounted its full-scale invasion in 2022, Mr. Trump offered little sympathy or support for Ukraine. Credit... Evgeniy Maloletka/Associated Press But Mr. Trump went on, characterizing Mr. Zelensky not as a defender of democracy but an enemy of it. 'He refuses to have Elections, is very low in Ukrainian Polls, and the only thing he was good at was playing Biden 'like a fiddle,'' Mr. Trump wrote. 'A Dictator without Elections, Zelenskyy better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left.' While Ukraine has suspended elections during the war, Mr. Zelensky was in fact originally elected by a landslide in 2019 in a contest deemed free and fair by the international community — unlike Mr. Putin, an actual dictator who has stayed in power for a quarter-century through elections widely deemed to be farces. And Mr. Zelensky enjoys a 57 percent approval rating, according to a new poll, higher than Mr. Trump's. The president's 'dictator' jab came just hours before he referred to himself online regarding a domestic issue as 'the king,' followed up by a White House official who posted an illustration of Mr. Trump in royal garb. The president's attack on Mr. Zelensky, while sparing any harsh words for Mr. Putin, provoked outrage among European leaders, Democrats in Washington and even a few Republicans who were willing to speak out. 'Mr. President, Ukraine did not 'start' this war,' Mike Pence, his former vice president, said online. 'Russia launched an unprovoked and brutal invasion claiming hundreds of thousands of lives. The Road to Peace must be built on the Truth.' Charles M. Kupperman, who served as Mr. Trump's deputy national security adviser in his first term, compared the president's actions to the British prime minister who tried to appease Adolf Hitler by agreeing to give him part of Czechoslovakia. 'Trump's name will be remembered in history as a surrender artist just like Neville Chamberlain,' Mr. Kupperman said in an interview. Moscow, on the other hand, seemed delighted. Dmitri A. Medvedev, a senior adviser to Mr. Putin who served as caretaker president for four years, cited Mr. Trump's comments about Mr. Zelensky being a dictator without elections. 'If you'd told me just three months ago that these were the words of the US president, I would have laughed out loud,' he wrote online. Mr. Trump, he added, 'is 200 percent right. Bankrupt clown.' There is of course a long history of American presidents growing frustrated with the leaders of foreign allies they were trying to help during wartime. Franklin D. Roosevelt never liked Charles de Gaulle even as U.S. troops fought to liberate France. John F. Kennedy was so alienated by South Vietnam's Ngo Dinh Diem that his government did not discourage a coup. George W. Bush and Barack Obama both found Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq to be mercurial and unconstructive. Mr. Biden certainly grew angry with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel even as he backed his war on Hamas. For that matter, Mr. Biden's relationship with Mr. Zelensky could be prickly at times. But those presidents still supported the allies' cause, while it is not clear that Mr. Trump does. And as with so many things, Mr. Trump goes much further than his predecessors in terms of public vitriol against an ally facing an existential threat, employing the kind of language that presidents rarely use about an ostensible friend. Vice President JD Vance, who in 2022 said that 'I don't really care what happens to Ukraine,' went as far as to warn Mr. Zelensky not to fight back. After Mr. Zelensky complained on Wednesday that Mr. Trump was 'caught in a web of disinformation,' Mr. Vance told The Daily Mail that such comments would only backfire. 'The idea that Zelensky is going to change the president's mind by bad-mouthing him in public media,' he said, is 'an atrocious way to deal with this administration.' Mr. Trump has never been particularly sympathetic to Ukraine even before the latest fighting. As far back as his first campaign for president in 2016, he signaled that he could accept Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea from Ukraine and expressed admiration for Mr. Putin's strength. Mr. Trump has long expressed admiration of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. Credit... Doug Mills/The New York Times His disregard for Ukraine later grew into outright animosity as he became persuaded that Ukraine had intervened in the 2016 election against him, repeating a propaganda line pushed by Russia, which actually did intervene in the election on Mr. Trump's behalf. Former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York, his ally and lawyer who was in touch with Ukrainian figures seeking influence, encouraged this line of thinking, so much so that Mr. Trump increasingly saw Ukraine as a personal adversary. 'Trump was driven in his first term by the intense desire to disprove any Russian collusion in the 2016 election,' Mr. Kupperman recalled. 'He wanted to demonstrate he won without any outside influence or interference, and it gnawed at him when it came to allegations that he won because of Russian assistance. Ukraine became one path to demonstrate he won without any such assistance.' That ultimately led to the famous phone call with Mr. Zelensky in 2019 pushing Ukraine to help tarnish Mr. Biden, then the leading Democratic candidate for president, by announcing a corruption investigation. Mr. Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine at the same time and only released it under pressure by advisers and Republican senators. Revelations about his actions led to his impeachment by the House later that year. When Russia mounted its full-scale invasion in 2022, Mr. Trump offered little sympathy or support for Ukraine, even as blue-and-yellow flags went up around the United States in solidarity. In the days leading up to the attack, in fact, Mr. Trump praised Mr. Putin's 'genius' move in putting pressure on Ukraine. In the years since, he has repeatedly questioned Mr. Biden's decision to devote so much American money to defending Ukraine, much as the commentator Tucker Carlson and others on the far right of the Republican Party have, even while more mainstream party leaders were criticizing Mr. Biden for not doing more. Mr. Trump's attack on President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine provoked outrage among European leaders, Democrats in Washington and even a few Republicans who were willing to speak out. Credit... Sarahbeth Maney/The New York Times In response to Mr. Trump's pressure, House Republicans blocked a new aid request for months, undercutting Ukrainian forces and giving Russian invaders time to regroup and stabilize their positions. Only after G.O.P. allies and foreign dignitaries lobbied him to relent did he permit House Republicans to let the aid go through. But while many Americans might understandably oppose investing taxpayer dollars in someone else's war, Mr. Trump goes further by questioning whether Ukraine is legitimately the injured party. Several times in recent days, he has expressed great distress over how many people have been killed and how much of the country has been destroyed. Yet in doing so, he points to Mr. Zelensky, rather than Mr. Putin, as the author of all that carnage. 'I love Ukraine,' he wrote on Wednesday, 'but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job, his Country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died.' Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during a visit to the U.S.-Mexico border this month. He named military operations at the border as an exception to the proposed cuts. Credit... Paul Ratje for The New York Times Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered senior military and Defense Department officials to draw up plans to cut 8 percent from the defense budget over each of the next five years, officials said on Wednesday. Mr. Hegseth said in a memo issued on Tuesday that a number of branches within the military and the Pentagon should turn in budget-cutting proposals by next Monday, two officials said. The memo listed some 17 exceptions to the proposed cuts, including military operations at the southern border. One senior official said the cuts appeared likely to be part of an effort to focus Pentagon money on programs that the Trump administration favors, instead of actually cutting the Defense Department's $850 billion annual budget. For example, the Pentagon is already spending more money on the Trump administration's efforts at the southern border, including on military flights that have taken migrants in the United States to countries as far away as India. Mr. Hegseth has vowed to use thousands of active-duty U.S. troops to help stem the flow of migrants across the border, a top priority for President Trump. But illegal crossings, which reached record levels during the Biden administration, slowed significantly before Mr. Trump took office last month. In a statement on Wednesday, Robert G. Salesses, the acting deputy defense secretary, said the president's 'charge to the department is clear: to achieve peace through strength.' He added that the Pentagon was undertaking the budget cuts with an aim of bolstering other priorities. 'To achieve our mandate from President Trump,' he said, 'we are guided by his priorities, including securing our borders, building the Iron Dome for America and ending radical and wasteful government D.E.I. programs and preferencing.' In the memo issued on Tuesday, which Bloomberg reported earlier, Mr. Hegseth repeated a phrase he uses often about the need for the military to focus on 'the warrior ethos.' He called for a rejection of 'excessive bureaucracy' and unnecessary spending. Any cuts to the defense budget may face opposition in Congress, where lawmakers often focus on budget cuts that could affect their districts. The Pentagon is also bracing for proposed cuts to its work force, and has already been asked to hand over to the Trump administration lists of probationary employees who could be laid off. A senior military official said on Wednesday that Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency had expressed interest in moving full-time Pentagon employees to contract positions so that they would be easier to fire. On social media on Tuesday, Mr. Hegseth shared a post from Mr. Musk's team saying that it was looking forward to eliminating 'waste, fraud and abuse.' 'DOGE the waste; Double-Down on warriors,' Mr. Hegseth wrote. The cuts follow firings of probationary employees across the federal government. Credit... Kent Nishimura/Reuters The Internal Revenue Service will begin laying off roughly 6,000 employees on Thursday as part of the Trump administration's push to downsize the federal work force, three people familiar with the agency's plans said. The terminations will target relatively recent hires at the I.R.S., which the Biden administration had attempted to revitalize with a surge of funding and new staff, the people said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The Trump administration has begun laying off probationary employees — who do not enjoy as much job protection as their more tenured colleagues — across the federal government in recent days. I.R.S. managers on Wednesday began asking employees to report to the office in the coming days and bring with them their government-issued equipment, according to messages viewed by The New York Times. The I.R.S. employs roughly 100,000 accountants, lawyers and other staff across the country. 'Under an executive order, I.R.S. has been directed to terminate probationary employees who were not deemed critical to filing season,' one such email reads. 'We don't have many details that we are permitted to share, but this is all tied to compliance with the executive order.' The layoffs come in the middle of tax filing season. Former I.R.S. officials and Democrats have warned that losing such a large number of employees could still disrupt the ability of millions of Americans' to easily file their taxes this year, even if the layoffs are not supposed to affect those deemed 'critical.' Representatives for the I.R.S. and the Treasury Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Republicans have long pushed for cuts at the I.R.S., accusing the agency of taking politically-motivated steps against conservatives. Some lawmakers, including President Trump's nominee to run the agency, have called for abolishing the tax collector. Mr. Trump chose Billy Long, a former Republican congressman, to lead the I.R.S., taking the unusual step of replacing the former commissioner, Daniel Werfel. Mr. Trump has already targeted the I.R.S. for an extended hiring freeze, and the Department of Homeland Security has asked for I.R.S. agents to help with immigration enforcement efforts. A member of Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency has also sought broad access to the tax agency's sensitive taxpayer records. 'There's a flood of résumés from people at the I.R.S. looking for jobs throughout the tax community,' said Dave Kautter, who led the agency on an acting basis and served in the Treasury Department during Mr. Trump's first term. 'Law firms are getting a fair number of résumés, accounting firms are getting a fair number of résumés.' President Trump at his Mar-a-Lago private club and residence in Palm Beach, Fla., on Tuesday. Credit... Al Drago for The New York Times President Trump is famous for his love of everything gold and other trappings that connote royalty, whether it be large military parades or extravagant inaugural balls. But in a post on his social media platform Truth Social on Wednesday, Mr. Trump went a step further, likening himself to a king as he celebrated his administration's move to kill New York City's congestion pricing program. 'CONGESTION PRICING IS DEAD. Manhattan, and all of New York, is SAVED,' he wrote. 'LONG LIVE THE KING!' The White House then reinforced the message, recirculating it on Instagram and X with an illustration of Mr. Trump wearing a crown on a magazine cover resembling Time, but called Trump. Mr. Trump's expansive views of his power have been evident in his words and deeds. He has liberally dispensed executive orders that have gone beyond what is considered to be legally permissible. He has fired officials, run roughshod over federal agencies in ways that go beyond his authority and frozen funds that Congress had already appropriated. And just last week, the president made clear that he believed he had broad leeway to reshape the government in any way he saw fit. 'He who saves his Country does not violate any Law,' Mr. Trump wrote on social media, apparently referencing a version of something Napoleon Bonaparte may have said. The origin though is unclear. By killing congestion pricing, Mr. Trump suggested he was saving New York. He vowed during the election to halt the program, which charges most drivers $9 to enter Manhattan below 60th Street, when he entered office. In an interview with The New York Post this month, he characterized the toll as being 'destructive' to New York. 'If I decide to do it, I will be able to kill it off in Washington through the Department of Transportation,' Mr. Trump said in the interview. On Wednesday, the transportation secretary, Sean Duffy, made good on the president's wishes. He laid out Mr. Trump's objections to the program in a letter sent to Gov. Kathy Hochul and said that federal officials would contact the state to 'discuss the orderly cessation of toll operations.' 'I share the president's concerns about the impacts to working-class Americans who now have an additional financial burden to account for in their daily lives,' Mr. Duffy wrote. Mr. Trump's first month back in the White House has been full of moments where he has invoked almost monarchical power. In his Inaugural Address, he said God had saved him when a would-be assassin made an attempt on his life in order 'to make America great again.' Some of his policy moves have rested on a far more expansive legal theory — known as the unitary executive theory — of presidential power. Part of the theory would interpret some of what Mr. Trump has been doing as lawful under the belief that it is not illegal to disregard an unconstitutional statute. But even if the prevailing laws were valid, the president seems to be suggesting that he is entitled to break them if his motive is to save the country. An avalanche of lawsuits have been filed to contest many of the executive actions and in some cases delayed them from being implemented. Ms. Hochul explicitly pushed back on Mr. Trump's presentation of himself as a monarch in her statement about the revoking of congestion pricing. In recent weeks, she spoke with him multiple times to try to convince him of the program's benefits, only to see the plug pulled. 'We are a nation of laws, not ruled by a king,' Ms. Hochul said. 'The M.T.A. has initiated legal proceedings in the Southern District of New York to preserve this critical program. We'll see you in court.' In his second term, President Trump has used Truth Social to broadcast his views. He is the largest shareholder in the company that owns the platform. Credit... Al Drago for The New York Times Anyone who wants to keep up with President Trump's views knows to go to his Truth Social account. There, one finds his reasoning on a panoply of issues, including military strikes in Somalia, tariffs on Canada and Mexico, relations with Russia, the causes of a deadly aircraft collision, American ownership of the Gaza Strip and a budget bill now before Congress. On Wednesday, for instance, after initial cease-fire talks between the United States and Russia over the war in Ukraine, he employed the account to attack Ukraine's leader. 'Think of it, a modestly successful comedian, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn't be won, that never had to start,' the president's post said. 'Zelenskyy better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left.' In some ways, such statements are akin to how Mr. Trump turned Twitter, now called X, into his megaphone in his first term, when administration officials declared his posts to be official White House communications. But one major difference stands out: Mr. Trump is the biggest shareholder in Trump Media & Technology Group, the company that owns Truth Social, and so stands to benefit directly if his posts drive traffic to the site. Even though he has put his Trump Media shares in a trust controlled by his oldest son, the president remains the main draw to the platform that is the company's signature product. His Truth Social posts are only one example of the intersection of Mr. Trump's official role and Trump Media. On Wednesday, in an extraordinary move, Trump Media sued a Brazilian Supreme Court justice who is overseeing multiple criminal investigations of Jair Bolsonaro, the former Brazilian president whom Mr. Trump has described as a one of his 'great friends.' The lawsuit, which accused the judge of illegally censoring right-wing voices on social media, appeared to be an effort to pressure the foreign judge as he considered whether to arrest Mr. Bolsonaro. Trump Media sued a judge overseeing a criminal investigation of Jair Bolsonaro, the former Brazilian president. Credit... Victor Moriyama for The New York Times Trump Media also plans to expand from social media into financial services, opening up another realm for conflicts of interest. That venture would involve investment vehicles that industry experts predicted would need approval by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Mr. Trump has nominated Paul Atkins, a longtime Republican commissioner, to be the agency's chair. He is awaiting confirmation by the Senate. In yet another apparent commingling of interests, Mr. Trump picked Devin Nunes, Trump Media's chief executive, to serve as head of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board and Scott Glabe, the company's general counsel, as a board member. All of this fits a pattern of far bolder violations of the norms that once governed conflicts of interest than occurred in Mr. Trump's first term, when foreign officials and others seeking his favor flocked to Mar-a-Lago, his Florida resort, and to the luxury Trump hotel near the White House, ethics lawyers and experts say. 'The potential for conflicts of interest has broadened and deepened relative even to the president's first term because he has stakes in a much wider range of businesses than he did when he was last in the White House,' said Daniel I. Weiner, a government expert at the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan think tank focused on democracy issues. Even the appearance that the president's personal interests are intertwined with the public interest 'is very very corrosive to our political system,' he said. Harrison Fields, a White House spokesman, said in response to questions from The New York Times about the president's possible conflicts of interest that 'President Trump is committed to using every direct line of communication to the American people. Alongside his consistent interactions with the press corps, this cements his legacy as the most transparent president in history.' When asked to comment, a spokeswoman for Trump Media criticized The Times, saying it was making false insinuations, but did not address questions related to his company. Trump Media makes no bones about its heavy reliance on Mr. Trump's fame and popularity. In a filing last week with the S.E.C., the company noted that Mr. Trump has the discretion to minimize his Truth Social posts, 'which could have a material adverse effect on the business.' But that is exactly what he should do to avoid mixing his private financial interests and his official role, said John Pelissero, a government ethics expert at Santa Clara University. 'He should, as other presidents have done in the past, use just official White House communications when he's talking about the government and not the company he owns.' Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth showing a printed copy of a post on Truth Social by President Trump in Brussels last week. Trump's communications also serve to boost X, which is owned by Elon Musk, now a top adviser to Mr. Trump and a special government employee. Mr. Trump's Truth Social messages of presidential import are routinely reposted on Mr. Musk's social media platform, typically after an interval of several hours, in an apparent effort to bolster traffic on Truth Social. Mr. Trump has about 101 million followers on X, compared to nearly nine million on Truth Social, a number that has been growing since his election in November. 'Whether through Truth, X, Instagram or any other social media platform, the president and the White House will continue to speak directly to the American people — a long-overdue change from the last four years,' Mr. Fields said in response to questions including about the president's reposts on X. While social media companies are only loosely federally regulated, Trump Media's plans to expand into financial services and products will put it more squarely under the purview of federal regulators. Trump Media said earlier this month that it planned to invest up to $250 million in the venture to offer financial products that will be developed with Charles Schwab, one of the country's biggest brokerage firms, and a small New Jersey investment firm, Yorkville Advisors. Industry experts said that federal regulators could feel pressured to grant favorable treatment to those products. As of now, the commissioners can be fired only for cause, but the Trump administration is mounting a legal challenge to the independence of the S.E.C. and various other regulatory agencies. An executive order signed Tuesday requires White House review of their proposed regulations, asserts a power to block spending on efforts that conflict with presidential priorities and declares that the agencies must accept the president's and the Justice Department's interpretation of the law as binding. The financial services industry is also overseen by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a federal watchdog agency that the White House is now trying to shut down. Mr. Trump has called the agency a hotbed of 'waste, fraud and abuse' run by a 'vicious group' whose only purpose is to 'destroy people.' Supporters point to the fact that the bureau has returned about $21 billion to consumers through its enforcement actions. Earlier this month, Russell T. Vought, who runs the Office of Management and Budget and was named as the consumer agency's new acting director, ordered the bureau's staff and contractors to stop work. A federal judge ordered a temporary halt to mass layoffs, data erasures and funding cutoffs at the bureau on Friday, but the agency's future is deeply in doubt. Without that watchdog in place, it will be easier for financial services firms to run roughshod over consumers, said Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis who specializes in government ethics. In light of Trump Media's plans, 'no wonder he wants to destroy it,' she said. Ethics experts also warned during the presidential campaign that if Mr. Trump was elected, Truth Social could be a straightforward avenue to try to influence him. Foreigners, corporations and others seeking to sway him could buy shares in the companies or advertisements on Truth Social in efforts to push up stock values and enrich the Trump family. 'A foreign nation no longer has to rent out the floor of a hotel in order to line President Trump's pocket,' Ms. Clark said. Since Mr. Trump created Trump Media in 2021, the company has incurred hefty losses and struggled to generate revenues from advertising on Truth Social or through video streaming. Last year it reported $3.6 million in revenue — 12 percent less than the year before — and $130 million in expenses. Much of the costs apparently related to a merger and its advent as a public company. While Mr. Trump is not an officer or director of Trump Media, he owns 53 percent of the company's shares, a stake now valued at about $3.5 billion. Credit... Frank Franklin Ii/Associated Press Nonetheless, it has $777 million in cash, apparently generated through the merger and sale of stock, mainly to Yorkville. Its market value of $6.6 billion is nearly 2,000 times its 2024 revenue. While Mr. Trump is not an officer or director of Trump Media, he owns 53 percent of the company's shares, a stake now valued at about $3.5 billion. He transferred those shares in December to a trust solely controlled by Donald Trump Jr., his oldest son who is a company board member. But multiple legal experts said that action does nothing to address the links between his personal financial interests and his role as president. 'Whether it is in a trust is completely irrelevant,' Ms. Clark said, 'because ultimately the money ends up in Trump's pocket.' Julie Tate contributed research. © 2025 The New York Times Company Manage Privacy Preferences
New York Times
20-02-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Federal Takeover or 51st State? Trump Weighs In on D.C. Debate.
President Trump said on Wednesday that the federal government should take over Washington, D.C., wading into the decades-old and divisive issue of how the nation's capital is run. 'I think we should govern District of Columbia,' Mr. Trump told reporters on Air Force One. 'I think that we should run it strong, run it with law and order, make it absolutely flawlessly beautiful.' Mr. Trump's comments put him in the camp of Republicans who want to end the local government system in Washington, and in opposition to a majority of local residents and many Democrats who want the District of Columbia to become the 51st state. Home rule, with a catch The people of Washington have been able to elect their mayor and a council to run local affairs since 1973, when Congress approved home rule for the district. But there are limits under the Home Rule Act. Congress reviews all legislation passed by the Council of the District of Columbia before it can become law, and has the power to amend or repeal laws. Congress also has authority over the city's budget, and the president appoints the district's judges. Washington residents got the right to vote for president and vice president in 1961 through the 23rd Amendment. But the district's 700,000 residents — more than the population of Vermont or Wyoming — effectively have no representation in Congress. They have a delegate in the House of Representatives who can participate in committees and legislative debates but cannot vote on bills with the full chamber. 'Taxation without representation' For Washington residents, the fact that they pay federal taxes but have no voice in Congress has long stung. In 2000, the city even added 'Taxation Without Representation' to its standard license plates. And in 2016, an overwhelming majority of residents — 86 percent — voted in favor of statehood for the District of Columbia. 'Just like you, we raise our families, pay our taxes, serve on juries, fight for our country and work together to create strong, caring communities,' reads a website on statehood run by the city's government. Some advocates of statehood have also framed it as a racial justice issue. Almost 45 percent of Washington's population is Black, according to data from the city government, which has said that if it became a state, the District of Columbia would be 'the only plurality-Black state in the country.' The idea of statehood also has strong support among Democrats, not least because Washington's voters have skewed heavily in favor of the party. Based on those electoral patterns, statehood for the District of Columbia would effectively guarantee two more Democrats in the Senate. A no-go for Republicans Repeated efforts over decades to put the District of Columbia on a path to statehood have failed in Congress. There has been staunch opposition from Republicans, who have introduced legislation of their own to water down or even eliminate home rule for the District of Columbia. They have also called Democrat-backed pushes for statehood unconstitutional power grabs. Republican members of Congress have often accused the city's government of incompetence and inaction, especially on crime. Some have argued that the only way to effectively run Washington is through federal governance. Mr. Trump repeated that criticism on Wednesday, saying there was 'too much crime, too much graffiti' in the city, necessitating a federal takeover. In the 1990s, Washington had one of the highest murder rates among major U.S. cities, but there has been a significant drop since then. Total violent crime in 2024 was the lowest it had been in the district in more than 30 years, according to police data.
