web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "Trump, Donald J" (Page 119)

House Adds New Policy Restrictions Ahead of Border Funding Vote

WASHINGTON — The House pressed toward a vote Tuesday evening on an emergency $4.5 billion humanitarian aid bill to address the plight of migrants at the border, as Democratic leaders appeared confident they had quelled a rebellion in their ranks by adding new health and safety requirements for children and adults held by the government.

A group of liberals and Hispanic-American lawmakers had threatened to withhold their backing for the bill because they fear that the aid package would enable President Trump’s immigration crackdown.

But Representative Pramila Jayapal, Democrat of Washington and a co-chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said she had reached an agreement on the House floor with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others to include a provision in the bill that would require government contractors operating temporary shelters to meet strict standards of care within six months or lose their contract. Ms. Jayapal said she would wait to see the final bill language but anticipated that the agreement would bring many of her colleagues on board.

“If this final language is what we’ve agreed to, then I plan to support it,” she told reporters. “I have tremendous apprehensions about doing so. I am not doing so with a free heart. I am not doing so believing that this is going to solve the problems. I am doing so because I am willing in the name of these children to see if we can do something to improve those conditions at the border.”

The breakthrough indicated the power that the party’s liberal wing is now willing to wield. Many of them, including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, have said they will not vote to send one cent to the agencies that have carried out the president’s harsh immigration policies, even with strings attached to rein in those policies and even if the package is intended to help vulnerable women and children living in badly overcrowded, squalid shelters.

“I am not planning on voting as it is,” said Representative Ilhan Omar, Democrat of Minnesota. “We have a humanitarian crisis, and what we are trying to do does not match that crisis.”

Efforts to meet liberal demands will only bolster the White House’s opposition to a spending bill that Mr. Trump initially requested. But they could get the measure through the House — and spare Democrats an embarrassing floor defeat.

“The overwhelming majority of House Democrats, including the overwhelming majority of the Progressive Caucus, will support this legislation, because we understand the urgency of the moment,” Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the chairman of the Democratic caucus, told reporters on Monday. “This week, we have to resolve the humanitarian crisis.”

During a closed-door meeting of House Democrats at their campaign headquarters near the Capitol on Tuesday morning, Ms. Pelosi made an impassioned plea for her rank and file to support the bill, arguing that it would send a signal to the world that Democrats want to help suffering children at the border, according to a senior Democratic aide who described her private remarks on the condition of anonymity. Ms. Pelosi also warned that allowing their divisions over the measure to sink it would play into the president’s hands.

“The president would love for this bill to go down today,” Ms. Pelosi told Democrats, according to the aide. “A vote against this bill is a vote for Donald Trump and his inhumane, outside-the-circle-of-civilized attitude toward the children.”

Then the speaker, who is well known for her flair for tamping down internal rebellions in her ranks, asked a room packed with Democrats whether anyone had a problem with the legislation. Nobody spoke up, the aide said. She concluded the session by saying she expected “very few noes” and urging those thinking of opposing the bill to bring their questions to her and other House leaders.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_156998766_e4b7e211-3a03-4443-a9f2-41d0f2a9efb1-articleLarge House Adds New Policy Restrictions Ahead of Border Funding Vote United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Law and Legislation Immigration Detention Immigration and Emigration Humanitarian Aid

A demonstration against the funding of Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.CreditMichael A. McCoy for The New York Times

Later, she repeated to reporters a point she had made to lawmakers behind closed doors, saying that the bill was a spending measure, not a policy plan.

“This isn’t an immigration bill,” Ms. Pelosi said. “It’s an appropriations bill to meet the needs of the children.”

Critics of the package huddled with Ms. Pelosi in her Capitol office on Monday night to air their complaints, and some emerged saying changes would be needed to garner their support. Leaders met into the night to discuss those modifications and came up with a handful that they plan to add to the bill before it reaches the floor on Tuesday afternoon.

Democrats plan to add language that would require Customs and Border Protection to establish plans and protocols to deliver medical care, improve nutrition and hygiene, and train personnel to ensure the health and safety of children and adults in custody. Another new provision would require the secretary of health and human services to specify which requirements are being temporarily waived to deal with a sudden influx of migrants. That amendment would limit the detention-center stay of any unaccompanied child to 90 days unless written notification is submitted to Congress attesting that no other facilities are available.

Democrats also intended to add new requirements for translators at Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Citizenship and Immigration Services.

The White House has already threatened that Mr. Trump would veto the House bill because of restrictions that were included even before those new measures.

Senate Republicans and Democrats came together last week to draft a $4.6 billion version of the humanitarian aid package that also includes limitations on the use of the funds and several other conditions.

With House Republicans almost uniformly opposed to the stricter House measure, the fate of the entire effort remains uncertain. If the changes Ms. Pelosi settled on win over enough Democrats to push the package through the House on Tuesday afternoon, it would still have to be reconciled with the Senate’s bill before being sent to Mr. Trump for his signature.

Ms. Pelosi has argued that in order to give the House leverage in any such negotiation with the Senate, Democrats have to show the broadest possible support for the bill. Some lawmakers said the changes that leaders had agreed to over the last 24 hours persuaded them to support the measure.

“I was on the fence, but that makes me feel much better, so I’m leaning to supporting it,” said Representative Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Democrat of Florida. “For me, specifically, it was the time frame that we had to set for reunification.”

Lawmakers from districts along the border have been among the strongest proponents of the bill, arguing that Democrats must put aside their antipathy for Mr. Trump’s immigration policies and focus on alleviating a humanitarian debacle.

“There are legitimate concerns about trust with the administration, and there is a legitimate fear that we are funding a dysfunctional system,” said Representative Veronica Escobar, Democrat of Texas, whose El Paso district abuts the border. “But we have to meet our obligations as human beings and fund the needs for the care of these children.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Fed Chair Powell Weighs Whether Cut Will Be Needed as Risks Loom

Westlake Legal Group 25DC-POWELL-01-facebookJumbo Fed Chair Powell Weighs Whether Cut Will Be Needed as Risks Loom United States Politics and Government United States Economy Trump, Donald J Powell, Jerome H International Trade and World Market Interest Rates Federal Reserve System Customs (Tariff) Banking and Financial Institutions

Jerome H. Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve, said Tuesday that the central bank is weighing whether an interest-rate cut will be needed as trade risks stir economic uncertainty and inflation lags. But the Fed chairman made clear that the institution considers itself independent from the White House and President Trump, who continues to push publicly for a rate cut.

Mr. Powell said the case for a rate cut has strengthened somewhat given that economic “crosscurrents have re-emerged, with apparent progress on trade turning to greater uncertainty and with incoming data raising renewed concerns about the strength of the global economy.”

But he stopped short of saying a cut was guaranteed, noting that the Fed would continue to watch economic events unfold and would avoid reacting to short-term issues.

“The question my colleagues and I are grappling with is whether these uncertainties will continue to weigh on the outlook and thus call for additional policy accommodation,” Mr. Powell said at a Council on Foreign Relations event in New York.

The Fed is watching warily as global trade flows slow, manufacturing indexes sag and confidence gauges wobble amid ongoing uncertainty about Mr. Trump’s trade war. Because interest rates are already historically low, the Fed wants to take a risk-management approach to policy-setting, fending off any softening in growth before it becomes serious.

The fact that inflation has never sustainably hit the Fed’s 2 percent target, formally in place since 2012, heightens the case for moving pre-emptively — rather than waiting and risking a move that comes too late. Inflation came in at just 1.5 percent in the year through April.

“That undershoot looks like it might be more persistent than we had hoped, and that is not a good thing,” Mr. Powell said in a question-and-answer session with Neil Irwin, a senior economic correspondent with The New York Times. “It’s another argument, frankly, for providing more policy accommodation.”

The Fed’s policy conversation is happening against a contentious political backdrop. Mr. Trump has been loudly criticizing the central bank for keeping rates too high, saying that they are weakening growth and putting the United States on an uneven playing field relative to trading partners with lower interest rates. Mr. Powell emphasized the central bank’s independence Tuesday.

“We are a strictlynonpolitical agency,” he said in response to a question about Mr. Trump’s ongoing attacks. “We’re human, we’ll make mistakes,” he added, but “we won’t make mistakes of integrity or character.”

Mr. Trump on Monday tweeted that the Fed “blew it” by increasing rates last year and has even toyed with the idea of demoting Mr. Powell to the role of governor. Mr. Trump has alternately implied that such a move depends on Mr. Powell’s actions and denied suggesting a demotion. He said he believes he has the legal authority to do so if he chooses, though his authority is unclear.

[Mr. Trump’s feud with the Fed is rooted in history.]

Politics aside, economic developments have prompted a growing number of Fed officials to expect rate cuts before the end of the year, according to economic projections released following their June 19-20 meeting. Investors in fed funds futures had fully priced in a rate cut next month following that meeting. Stocks indexes fell after Mr. Powell’s speech was released Tuesday, suggesting that his characterization of rate cuts as an “whether” rather than a definite plan disappointed some traders.

But Mr. Powell’s Fed colleagues are with him as he watches incoming data warily.

“The economy had solid momentum, but now it’s peddling against some pretty significant headwinds,” Mary Daly, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, said in an interview with The New York Times on Tuesday. “Let’s watch the next six weeks and see if the data reverse,” and “see how the uncertainty resolves itself as we get more information about trade negotiations, and finally, let’s see what other countries are doing to offset potential weaknesses.”

Ms. Daly, who is not currently a voting member but participates in discussions about rate policy, would not say whether she’s projected rate cuts this year. But she said she’s concerned that, with more muted growth, it might take longer to push inflation back toward the Fed’s 2 percent goal.

“The bottom line for me, is that I want to sustain the expansion so that we can also push inflation back up to our target,” Ms. Daly said.

Wage growth is showing signs of slowing, and several measures of inflation expectations are softening. That increases the risk that price growth remains permanently below the central bank’s goal, which is meant to provide a buffer to ward off economy-harming deflation.

Growth abroad has also shown signs of stalling. Manufacturing is slowing across economies in Europe and Asia, uncertainty indexes are rising and confidence is wobbling as trade drops off. That pullback owes partly to the ongoing tariff war between the United States and China, which could arrive at a turning point this week, when Mr. Trump is expected to meet with President Xi Jinping at the Group of 20 summit in Japan.

The United States has slapped tariffs on $250 billion worth of goods already, and Mr. Trump has threatened to extend them to another $300 billion of goods — practically all remaining imports from China — if the two nations can’t reach an agreement. This would be the first meeting between the two leaders since talks broke off in May.

“The amount of tariffs that are in place right now are not large enough to represent, itself, a major threat to the economy,” Mr. Powell said today. “The concern is more around a loss of confidence or financial market reaction.”

Mr. Powell also delivered a warning to Facebook, which is developing a new cryptocurrency called Libra, saying the financial product would require rigorous scrutiny. “We’re looking at it very carefully,” he said.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Names Stephanie Grisham, Aide to First Lady, as White House Press Secretary

Westlake Legal Group merlin_156824184_41d05bdf-90a9-4d51-aa05-40cbc4dba579-facebookJumbo Trump Names Stephanie Grisham, Aide to First Lady, as White House Press Secretary Trump, Melania Trump, Donald J Sanders, Sarah Huckabee Grisham, Stephanie First Ladies (US)

WASHINGTON — Stephanie Grisham, Melania Trump’s loyal and sometimes combative communications director, will replace Sarah Huckabee Sanders as White House press secretary, the first lady announced on Tuesday.

She will also take on the added role of communications director, a job that has been vacant since the departure of Bill Shine in March.

Ms. Grisham joined the Trump campaign in 2015 and is one of the last remaining aides from Mr. Trump’s campaign still serving in the White House. She became a trusted aide after the Trumps moved into the White House, known for defending Mrs. Trump and the Trump family, and for her ability to keep the East Wing relatively free of leaks.

Ms. Grisham will be President Trump’s third press secretary in less than three years.

His first press secretary, Sean Spicer, a former spokesman and strategist for the Republican National Committee, set the tone of the White House press operation in the opening days of the administration, when he stood behind the podium and declared that Mr. Trump’s inauguration drew “the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe.” Mr. Spicer, who also filled both roles for a time, had hoped to last one year in the job, but quit after six months and one day.

Ms. Sanders took a different approach to the job, slowly phasing out the daily press briefing that Mr. Trump never liked, and functioning more as an inner circle adviser to the president. Mr. Trump saw her as a “warrior,” even calling her up to the microphone at his re-election kickoff rally in front of 20,000 people as a sign of his appreciation.

With Ms. Sanders’s departure, White House officials have been debating internally whether to revive the daily news briefing as Mr. Trump heads into the thick of election season. On the day Ms. Sanders announced her resignation, it had been 94 days since she held a briefing with the press, and some officials have argued it would be a powerful tool that would help elevate Mr. Trump above his Democratic opponent in the 2020 race.

Ms. Grisham, who has earned the president’s trust, is expected to institute real changes to an office that has been in flux for two-and-a-half years. In the White House, she has emerged as a ferocious defender of Mrs. Trump, writing op-eds criticizing the news media for the way it covers her.

Ms. Grisham has waded into public spats between the White House and former aides, or ex-wives. When Ivana Trump, the president’s first wife, referred to herself as first lady, Ms. Grisham took the unusual step of releasing a statement.

When Mira Ricardel, a former adviser on the National Security Council, ran afoul of the first lady, Ms. Grisham released another.

“It is the position of the Office of the First Lady that she no longer deserves the honor of serving in this White House,” Ms. Grisham wrote.

When Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former adviser to Mrs. Trump, publicly disputed the terms of her departure, Ms. Grisham hit back, saying “I’m not going to waste my time arguing the semantics.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Names Stephanie Grisham, Aide to First Lady, as White House Press Secretary

Westlake Legal Group merlin_156824184_41d05bdf-90a9-4d51-aa05-40cbc4dba579-facebookJumbo Trump Names Stephanie Grisham, Aide to First Lady, as White House Press Secretary Trump, Melania Trump, Donald J Sanders, Sarah Huckabee Grisham, Stephanie First Ladies (US)

WASHINGTON — Stephanie Grisham, Melania Trump’s loyal and sometimes combative communications director, will replace Sarah Huckabee Sanders as White House press secretary, the first lady announced on Tuesday.

She will also take on the added role of communications director, a job that has been vacant since the departure of Bill Shine in March.

Ms. Grisham joined the Trump campaign in 2015 and is one of the last remaining aides from Mr. Trump’s campaign still serving in the White House. She became a trusted aide after the Trumps moved into the White House, known for defending Mrs. Trump and the Trump family, and for her ability to keep the East Wing relatively free of leaks.

Ms. Grisham will be President Trump’s third press secretary in less than three years.

His first press secretary, Sean Spicer, a former spokesman and strategist for the Republican National Committee, set the tone of the White House press operation in the opening days of the administration, when he stood behind the podium and declared that Mr. Trump’s inauguration drew “the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe.” Mr. Spicer, who also filled both roles for a time, had hoped to last one year in the job, but quit after six months and one day.

Ms. Sanders took a different approach to the job, slowly phasing out the daily press briefing that Mr. Trump never liked, and functioning more as an inner circle adviser to the president. Mr. Trump saw her as a “warrior,” even calling her up to the microphone at his re-election kickoff rally in front of 20,000 people as a sign of his appreciation.

With Ms. Sanders’s departure, White House officials have been debating internally whether to revive the daily news briefing as Mr. Trump heads into the thick of election season. On the day Ms. Sanders announced her resignation, it had been 94 days since she held a briefing with the press, and some officials have argued it would be a powerful tool that would help elevate Mr. Trump above his Democratic opponent in the 2020 race.

Ms. Grisham, who has earned the president’s trust, is expected to institute real changes to an office that has been in flux for two-and-a-half years. In the White House, she has emerged as a ferocious defender of Mrs. Trump, writing op-eds criticizing the news media for the way it covers her.

Ms. Grisham has waded into public spats between the White House and former aides, or ex-wives. When Ivana Trump, the president’s first wife, referred to herself as first lady, Ms. Grisham took the unusual step of releasing a statement.

When Mira Ricardel, a former adviser on the National Security Council, ran afoul of the first lady, Ms. Grisham released another.

“It is the position of the Office of the First Lady that she no longer deserves the honor of serving in this White House,” Ms. Grisham wrote.

When Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former adviser to Mrs. Trump, publicly disputed the terms of her departure, Ms. Grisham hit back, saying “I’m not going to waste my time arguing the semantics.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Threatens ‘Obliteration’ of Iran, as Sanctions Dispute Escalates

President Hassan Rouhani of Iran said on Tuesday that the White House has a “mental handicap” and vowed that Tehran would not be intimidated by American sanctions — drawing a blistering threat of “obliteration” from President Trump.

“Any attack by Iran on anything American will be met with great and overwhelming force. In some areas, overwhelming will mean obliteration,” Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter, calling Mr. Rouhani’s comments “ignorant and insulting.”

“Iran leadership doesn’t understand the words ‘nice’ or ‘compassion,’ they never have,” Mr. Trump continued. “Sadly, the thing they do understand is Strength and Power, and the USA is by far the most powerful Military Force in the world.”

Their remarks made it clear that Washington and Tehran remained locked in a standoff despite Mr. Trump’s last-minute decision to call off a missile strike against Iran in retaliation for the downing of an American surveillance drone last week.

Mr. Trump ordered new sanctions this week that are intended to pressure Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and other senior Iranian officials this week. But on Tuesday, Mr. Rouhani dismissed the new penalties as pointless and vowed that Iran would not bow to American demands.

“Today, the Americans have become desperate and confused,” Mr. Rouhani said, speaking in a televised address. “This has made them take unusual measures and talk nonsense.”

John Bolton, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, separately accused Iran of being “a source of belligerence and aggression” across the Middle East.

ImageWestlake Legal Group 25iran2-articleLarge Trump Threatens ‘Obliteration’ of Iran, as Sanctions Dispute Escalates United States Politics and Government United States International Relations Trump, Donald J Rouhani, Hassan Nuclear Weapons Iran Embargoes and Sanctions

John Bolton, President Trump’s national security adviser, on Tuesday accused Iran of being “a source of belligerence and aggression.”CreditOded Balilty/Associated Press

Mr. Bolton, speaking at a meeting in Jerusalem with his Russian and Israeli counterparts, insisted that the Trump administration was ready to negotiate with Tehran to alleviate the tensions. But both sides appeared unwilling to bend from their demands.

The caustic tone of Mr. Rouhani’s remarks, in particular, further diminished the already remote prospects of talks to reach some accommodation.

Other Iranian officials have described the White House as mentally handicapped, but Mr. Rouhani’s slinging of insults was significant because, in the context of the Iranian political system, he has been regarded as a moderate relatively open to negotiations with Washington.

The United States wants Iran to commit to a long list of new restrictions, including limits on any potential development of a nuclear weapon. Iran is refusing to hold talks until Washington lifts the economic sanctions that have crippled the Iranian economy.

Instead, Iran has said it will take steps that will soon exceed limits set in the 2015 nuclear deal that it reached with the United States, Russia, China and several European nations.

Iran has said that all of its nuclear work is for peaceful civilian purposes, but it had accepted limits on its nuclear efforts in exchange for sanctions relief under the agreement. Then Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from the deal last year in order to start his administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign, which is intended to force Iran into a more restrictive pact.

The Trump administration tightened its sanctions six weeks ago in an effort to cut off all international sales of Iran’s oil, the lifeblood of its economy, setting off a steep escalation in tensions.

President Trump signed an executive order on Monday imposing sanctions that target Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.CreditGabriella Demczuk for The New York Times

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters in Kabul, Afghanistan, that he had not heard Mr. Rouhani’s remarks because he had been in meetings with Afghan officials all day. But he insisted that Mr. Trump would stick with the sanctions campaign.

“If your representation of what they said today is right, that’s a bit immature and childlike,” Mr. Pompeo said. “But know that the United States will remain steadfast in undertaking the actions that the president laid out in this strategy to create stability throughout the Middle East, which includes the campaign we have, the economic campaign, the pressure campaign that we have on the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

The United States has accused Iran of lashing back by using naval mines to damage six tankers in the waters of the Persian Gulf, allegations Mr. Rouhani has denied.

Iran, however, boasted last week of shooting down the American surveillance drone. The United States has said that the drone was in international air space, while Iran maintains that the aircraft was over its territory.

Nikolai Patrushev, Mr. Bolton’s Russian counterpart, supported Tehran’s account, the Russian news agency Interfax reported. “I have information from the Defense Ministry of the Russian Federation that the drone was in Iran’s airspace at the time,” Mr. Patrushev said on Tuesday in Jerusalem, where he was attending the same summit meeting as Mr. Bolton.

He did not explain how the Russian military knew the whereabouts of the drone and said he had not discussed the question with Iran. “We haven’t received any other evidence,” he added.

The sanctions added this week are intended to prevent Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, and other officials from entering the United States or using the international banking system. But the move is largely symbolic.

Shoppers in Tehran. American sanctions have bitten hard into the Iranian economy.CreditEbrahim Noroozi/Associated Press

Mr. Rouhani ridiculed the effort, noting that the supreme leader never visits the United States or does business with it.

“Tehran’s strategic patience does not mean that we are afraid,” Mr. Rouhani said, according to the Mehr news agency. “We do not fear America, and have shown restraint so far.”

Trump administration officials have insisted that the United States is prepared to reopen negotiations with Iran as soon as Tehran is willing. But Mr. Trump has often sounded notably more flexible about such talks than the officials he has appointed to advise him, like Mr. Bolton, the national security adviser, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

On Tuesday, Mr. Bolton appeared to simultaneously invite Iran into negotiations while demanding complete capitulation.

Accusing Iran of a “continued pursuit of deliverable nuclear weapons” despite the deal reached in 2015, Mr. Bolton said that Mr. Trump now sought “real negotiations to completely and verifiably eliminate Iran’s nuclear weapons program, its pursuit of ballistic missile delivery systems, its support for international terrorism and its other malign behavior worldwide.”

“All that Iran needs to do is to walk through that open door,” Mr. Bolton said.

Mr. Rouhani and other Iranians have said the mixed messages and coercive tactics from the Trump administration belie its professed desire to negotiate.

Still, the history of the Trump administration’s foreign policy suggests that a sudden reversal remains a possibility, even after caustic barbs from a relative moderate like Mr. Rouhani.

Mr. Trump has at times shown a remarkable willingness to move past an exchange of insults. After President Trump threatened to destroy North Korea with “fire and fury,” the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un, responded by calling Mr. Trump “mentally deranged” and a “dotard.” Months later, the two leaders met for face-to-face talks.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Plan to Mine the Minnesota Wilderness Hit a Dead End. Then Trump Became President.

ELY, Minn. — In the waning months of the Obama administration, a Chilean conglomerate was losing a fight with the United States government over a copper mine that it wanted to build near a pristine wilderness area in Minnesota.

The election of President Trump, with his business-friendly bent, turned out to be a game-changer for the project.

Beginning in the early weeks of Mr. Trump’s presidency, the administration worked at a high level to remove roadblocks to the proposed mine, government emails and calendars show, overruling concerns that it could harm the Boundary Waters, a vast landscape of federally protected lakes and forests along the border with Canada.

Executives with the mining company, Antofagasta, discussed the project with senior administration officials, including the White House’s top energy adviser, the emails show. Even before an interior secretary was appointed to the new administration, the department moved to re-examine leases critical to the mine, eventually restoring those that the Obama administration had declined to renew. And the Forest Service called off an environmental review that could have restricted mining, even though the agriculture secretary had told Congress that the review would proceed.

An Interior Department spokesman said it simply worked to rectify “a flawed decision rushed out the door” before Mr. Trump took office. Several senior department officials with previous administrations, however, said they were surprised by the swift change of course for the little-known Minnesota project, which was not a focal point of Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign.

For the family of the billionaire Andrónico Luksic, which controls the Chilean conglomerate, the policy reversals could provide a big boost to its mining business. Since the change in administration, the Antofagasta subsidiary Twin Metals Minnesota has significantly ramped up its lobbying in Washington, according to federal disclosures, spending $900,000.

ImageWestlake Legal Group 00CLI-HOUSE-luksic-articleLarge A Plan to Mine the Minnesota Wilderness Hit a Dead End. Then Trump Became President. Zinke, Ryan (1961- ) Wilderness Areas Wetlands washington dc United States Politics and Government Trump, Ivanka Trump, Donald J Tidwell, Thomas L Renting and Leasing (Real Estate) Minnesota Mines and Mining Lobbying and Lobbyists Kushner, Jared Kushner, Charles Interior Department Greenhouse Gas Emissions Global Warming Forests and Forestry Forest Service environment Chile Carbon Dioxide Banco de Chile Bachelet, Michelle Appointments and Executive Changes

Andrónico Luksic’s plan for a copper mine in Minnesota was blocked by President Barack Obama. His fortunes have since shifted.CreditMartin Bernetti/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Ivanka Trump, left, and Jared Kushner, second from left, two of the president’s closest advisers.CreditAlex Wong/Getty Images

But the mining project’s breakthrough, already unpopular with environmentalists, has drawn additional scrutiny and criticism because of an unusual connection between Mr. Luksic and two of Mr. Trump’s family members.

Just before Mr. Trump took office, Mr. Luksic added a personal investment to his portfolio: a $5.5 million house in Washington. Mr. Luksic bought the house with the intention of renting it to a wealthy new arrival to Mr. Trump’s Washington, according to Rodrigo Terré, chairman of Mr. Luksic’s family investment office, which handled the purchase.

The idea worked. Even before the purchase was final, real estate agents had lined up renters: Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump.

The rental arrangement has been a point of concern for ethics experts and groups opposed to mining near the Boundary Waters, and has focused national attention, particularly among some Democrats in Congress, on an otherwise local debate.

The Wall Street Journal first reported about the house in March 2017. At that time, Twin Metals was suing the federal government over the mining leases, but the Trump administration’s direction on the mine since then had only begun to take shape.

In recent months, the scrutiny has grown. In March, Representative Raúl M. Grijalva, the Arizona Democrat who is chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, wrote a letter with other lawmakers to the interior and agriculture secretaries raising significant concerns about the proposed mine.

The letter said the two departments’ actions “blatantly ignored scientific and economic evidence.” It also mentioned the “interesting coincidence” surrounding the rental of the Luksic house to Mr. Trump’s relatives. Separately, a group in Minnesota opposed to the mining, Save the Boundary Waters, has called the rental arrangement “deeply troubling” and has seized on it to cast doubt on the administration’s actions.

The White House and representatives for the couple declined to answer questions about whether the rental deal had been reviewed by ethics officials. “Both Mr. Kushner and Ms. Trump follow the ethics advice they received when they entered government service,” said Peter Mirijanian, a spokesman for Mr. Kushner’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell.

Mr. Terré called the lease a simple real estate transaction that happened to involve the incoming president’s family. “I do not believe there was anything unethical or inappropriate about this business transaction,” he said.

Both Mr. Mirijanian and Mr. Terré said the rental was not related to the Minnesota mine. “There is no correlation in any way,” Mr. Mirijanian said. They were “two entirely unrelated matters” and tying them together was “based on unfounded rumors and speculation,” Mr. Terré said.

An Interior Department spokeswoman said that neither Mr. Kushner nor Ms. Trump been involved in discussions about the mine.

Nonetheless, several ethics experts said they would have cautioned Mr. Kushner and Ms. Trump against renting the home, given the Luksic family’s business before the administration.

“There may be nothing wrong,” said Arthur Andrew Lopez, a federal government ethics official for two decades who is now a professor at Indiana University’s Kelley School of Business. “But it doesn’t look good.”

Antofagasta hopes to mine on the edge of the Boundary Waters, which encompasses more than a million acres of lakes and forest.CreditTim Gruber for The New York Times

The Boundary Waters hold a special place in American geography: More than a million acres of lakes and forests provide a rich habitat for thousands of species, including the gray wolf and Canada lynx. But below the surface and beyond lies richness of another sort, an estimated four billion tons of copper and nickel ore — believed to be one of the world’s largest undeveloped mineral deposits.

The mining giant controlled by the Luksic family, Antofagasta, took full control of the project in 2015, and its executives have called it the company’s “most advanced international opportunity.” Antofagasta, which is publicly traded in London, is poised to benefit from the growing use of copper in renewable-energy technologies like wind and solar. It lists Mr. Luksic as a board member, and his younger brother, Jean-Paul Luksic, as chairman.

The company has spent more than $450 million so far on the project, run by the subsidiary, Twin Metals Minnesota. It says the project will generate hundreds of mining jobs.

The promise of employment resonates in Minnesota’s Iron Range, which has lost a quarter of its mining jobs since 2000. “The mining industry brings a tsunami effect for the community with regard to jobs, schools, everything,” said Andrea Zupancich, the mayor of Babbitt, a town of 1,500 near the proposed mine.

Antofagasta’s environmental record, however, has raised concerns. In Chile, the company’s Los Pelambres copper mine has suffered toxic spills, according to environmental groups. The company said the mine had experienced only “minor incidents involving limited spills” which were not toxic, and said it was proud of its environmental record.

In a 2016 analysis, Thomas Tidwell, who was then chief of the United States Forest Service, warned of risks to the Boundary Waters from the proposed Twin Metals mine, including the leaching of harmful metals. Mining, he concluded, risked “serious and irreplaceable harm to this unique, iconic, and irreplaceable wilderness.”

Twin Metals called the analysis “riddled with errors” and said “environmental risks will be properly managed.”

Still, the fears have divided nearby residents. “In the summer, we drink out of this water,” said Susan Schurke, who runs Wintergreen Northern Wear, an outdoor clothing company. “Once that’s tainted, it’s over. How can we risk that?”

When the Obama administration moved to block the project in 2016, Twin Metals sued. The company said in a statement then that the administration’s move threatened jobs and would “hinder access to one of the world’s largest sources of copper, nickel and platinum — resources of strategic importance to the U.S. economy and national defense.”

Just as the mining company’s hopes appeared to be on the ropes, it got a welcome surprise: Mr. Trump’s election, and the promise of a pro-industry agenda.

“In 100 years, this water is going to be far more valuable a resource here than copper,” Sullen Sack, a wilderness educator, said.CreditTim Gruber for The New York Times
A map of the Boundary Waters at Ely Outfitting Company in Ely, Minn.CreditTim Gruber for The New York Times The region has lost a quarter of its mining jobs since 2000.CreditTim Gruber for The New York Times

With a new administration on its way to Washington, Mr. Luksic contacted a real estate broker he knew for help with an investment idea: buying residential properties in Washington, including a luxury home, to rent out.

With the help of the broker, Rodrigo Valderrama, Mr. Luksic’s family investment office, which through corporate entities owns a portfolio of real estate in the United States, bought two condominiums in the capital. One was never rented and the other was later sold at a loss.

As for the luxury home, Mr. Valderrama spent weeks touring homes and alerting brokers that he had an interested client. One house he saw was on Tracy Place, in the Kalorama neighborhood, being handled by the real estate firm Washington Fine Properties.

Ms. Trump and Mr. Kushner were using the same firm for their hunt for a house to rent. With Mr. Kushner’s parents tagging along, they saw the six-bedroom, 7,000-square-foot Kalorama home as well.

In the space of a week, Mr. Luksic’s representatives agreed to buy the house and closed on the all-cash transaction, while their would-be tenants waited for the purchase to be complete.

The two sides, working through brokers, agreed on rent of $15,000 per month. Mr. Terré described it as being in the “high range” for the area, which some real estate agents confirmed. Still, that rent was significantly lower than what the couple had discussed paying for another more expensive house, according to interviews.

The home rented by Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump in the Kalorama neighborhood of Washington.CreditTom Brenner for The New York Times

Mr. Terré said both sides were aware of each others’ identities before the rental deal was finalized. “We disclosed our name and the name of my boss,” he said in a telephone interview. Mr. Mirijanian said the couple had decided to lease the home before knowing the landlord’s identity. He did not directly respond to questions about whether they learned of that identity before signing the lease.

Mr. Luksic has written on Twitter that he does not know Mr. Trump or any member of his family, and only met Mr. Trump briefly at a New England Patriots football game years ago. Mr. Terré said Mr. Luksic “has not had any interactions with the Trump White House.”

Critics of the Luksic family say they were suspicious of the Washington investments because of Mr. Luksic’s past in Chile, where he has faced claims of attempts to win favor with the family of a former Chilean president. The Luksic family, one of the world’s wealthiest, has interests spanning banking, manufacturing, energy, shipping and beer.

Mr. Luksic came under fire for meeting with the son and daughter-in-law of Michelle Bachelet, who was running to be president of Chile at the time, as they sought a $10 million loan for their company from Banco de Chile, which is controlled by the Luksic family conglomerate. After Ms. Bachelet’s 2013 election, the bank approved the loan.

A spokesman for Ms. Bachelet said an investigation into the meeting didn’t lead to any charges. Representatives for Mr. Luksic said that he never discussed the loan with Ms. Bachelet, and that regulators found “there was absolutely nothing irregular about the bank’s approval of the loan.”

The Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for Antofagasta’s mining ambitions began less than two weeks after the inauguration, when Interior Department officials began re-examining the leases, the government emails show.

The message from an early meeting, according to an attendee who spoke on condition of anonymity, was that officials should prepare for a change in direction.

Officials also made sure the incoming interior secretary, Ryan Zinke, not yet in the job, was briefed. In an email, one Interior Department official described that effort as a “fire drill.”

The administration’s efforts are documented in part in thousands of pages of government emails and calendars, many obtained through records requests by Louis V. Galdieri, a documentary filmmaker, and the Sierra Club, an environmental organization.

A key meeting occurred in early May, when Antofagasta’s chief executive, along with other executives and lobbyists, discussed the issue with the White House’s top adviser on domestic energy and the environment, Michael Catanzaro. The company said it wanted to reverse the Obama-era decisions, which it said were illegal and inflicted “undue damage.”

Rock core samples taken by Twin Metals as part of preparations for mining.CreditTim Gruber for The New York Times
Near the Wintergreen Dogsled Lodge outside Ely. Dogsledding in the Boundary Waters wilderness is popular in winter.CreditTim Gruber for The New York Times A slab of taconite iron ore, a major local industry in decades past, on display in Babbitt, Minn.CreditTim Gruber for The New York Times

The next month, Interior Department officials learned that the White House had “expressed interest in the Twin Metals matter,” according to an email sent by a department lawyer marked “TIME SENSITIVE.” Soon after, top interior appointees traveled to the Minnesota site.

That December, the department reversed course on denying the company’s leases, and Twin Metals withdrew its lawsuit. The Interior Department formally renewed the leases last month, with some restrictions.

Twin Metals scored another victory in September when the Forest Service cut short its mining-ban review. An agency spokesman said it had determined that neither the study nor a ban was needed.

A Twin Metals spokesman, David Ulrich, said the company’s outreach was part of a long-running effort to share its views with the federal government. Obama administration officials had also visited the mining site, he said.

Want climate news in your inbox? Sign up here for Climate Fwd:, our email newsletter.

“We are confident that this world-class mineral resource can be developed safely and with a minimal impact to the environment,” he said in a statement.

The mine still faces a yearslong permitting and approval process. Engineers have been drilling boreholes and wells to study the region’s geology and water, and the company is preparing an operating plan.

“The last administration created some challenges,” Mr. Ulrich said during a tour of the site on the Boundary Waters’ edge. “But it was never not moving forward.”

On a trip to Minnesota in April, Mr. Trump was jubilant about the restoration of mining.

“Under the previous administration,” he said at a truck factory, “America’s rich natural resources were put under lock and key.” The changes since then, he said, were “really pretty amazing.”

Moonrise over Garden Lake, on the edge of the Boundary Waters in Minnesota.CreditTim Gruber for The New York Times

Reporting was contributed by Lisa Friedman in Washington, Jesse Drucker and Kate Kelly in New York, and Pascale Bonnefoy in Santiago, Chile. Kitty Bennett and Alain Delaquérière contributed research.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

‘She’s Not My Type’: Accused Again of Sexual Assault, Trump Resorts to Old Insult

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Monday again denied assaulting a columnist for Elle magazine in the dressing room of a high-end clothing store more than 20 years ago, countering her explosive accusation by asserting that he would not have assaulted her because “she’s not my type.”

Mr. Trump said that E. Jean Carroll, who wrote for years for Elle magazine, was “lying” when she said that he threw her up against a wall and forced himself on her in the mid-1990s, and he insisted that he did not know her.

“I’ll say it with great respect,” he said in an interview with The Hill, a Capitol Hill news organization. “No. 1, she’s not my type. No. 2, it never happened. It never happened, O.K.?”

Earlier Monday, Ms. Carroll spoke about an excerpt from her new book — “What Do We Need Men For?” — that was published in New York magazine. She said in an interview on CNN that Mr. Trump threw her up against a wall so hard that “I hit my head really hard: boom.” She said that she tried to fight back against Mr. Trump’s violent advances in a fitting room of Bergdorf Goodman in Manhattan.

In the Hill interview, Mr. Trump said Ms. Carroll was making up the story. “Totally lying. I don’t know anything about her,” he said. “I know nothing about this woman. I know nothing about her. She is — it’s just a terrible thing that people can make statements like that.”

Mr. Trump in the past has rejected other sexual assault accusations by asserting that the women who accused him of taking advantage of them were not attractive enough to engage in such behavior.

“Believe me, she would not be my first choice, that I can tell you,” Trump told supporters at a campaign event in 2016 after a woman accused him of putting his hand up her skirt while on an airplane. “You don’t know. That would not be my first choice.” As the crowd laughed, he said, “Check out her Facebook, you’ll understand.”

The fitting room episode took place in late 1995 or early 1996, according to Ms. Carroll, who said Monday that Mr. Trump asked her to model lingerie that he was looking to purchase. At the time, Mr. Trump was married to Marla Maples.

“The minute he closed that door, I was banged up against the wall,” Ms. Carroll said during an appearance on “New Day” with Alisyn Camerota. “I want women to know that I did not stand there. I did not freeze. I was not paralyzed, which is a reaction I could have had because it was so shocking. No, I fought.”

Ms. Carroll said the release in October 2016 of the “Access Hollywood” video in which Mr. Trump boasted of sexual assault to the television host Billy Bush was validation for her. CNN played the 2005 clip during Ms. Carroll’s appearance on Monday.

“It knocked me back; I felt relief,” Ms. Carroll said. “We have to change this culture of sexual violence.”

More than a dozen women have accused Mr. Trump of sexual misconduct that they said took place before he was elected president.

“It’s the same,” Ms. Carroll said. “He denies it. He turns it around. He attacks and then he threatens. I am sick of it. Think how many women have come forward. Nothing happens.”

Ms. Carroll, 75, stopped short of using the word “rape” on Monday to characterize the episode, which she said in the New York magazine excerpt that she disclosed to two friends at the time. One urged her to report it to the police, while a journalist friend warned her to keep quiet because Mr. Trump would “bury you.” The New York Times spoke to the two friends, who confirmed that Ms. Carroll had spoken about it with them but said they did not want to be identified.

“I have difficulty with the word,” Ms. Carroll, the author of “Ask E. Jean” in Elle, said Monday. “I see it as a fight. He pulled down my tights. It was over very quickly. It was against my will 100 percent.”

Ms. Carroll rejected the president’s contention that she was motivated by publicity for her book.

“Male authors never get this question,” Ms. Carroll said. “It was not about selling a book about Donald Trump.”

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_156791481_19e78a40-d9e1-4cc5-aecb-fe286cd2bde7-articleLarge ‘She’s Not My Type’: Accused Again of Sexual Assault, Trump Resorts to Old Insult What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal (Book) Trump, Donald J Sex Crimes Carroll, E Jean Books and Literature #MeToo Movement

“What Do We Need Men For?” By E. Jean CarrollCreditMacmillan

In a statement on Friday, the president said he had never met Ms. Carroll, but the two were photographed together at a party in 1987 with Ms. Carroll’s former husband, John Johnson. Mr. Trump said on Saturday that the image was misleading.

“Standing with my coat on in a line?” Mr. Trump said. “Give me a break — with my back to the camera? I have no idea who she is.”

Peter Baker reported from Washington, and Neil Vigdor from New York.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Iran Disparages U.S. Over Sanctions

Westlake Legal Group 25rouhani-facebookJumbo Iran Disparages U.S. Over Sanctions United States Politics and Government United States International Relations Trump, Donald J Rouhani, Hassan Nuclear Weapons Iran Embargoes and Sanctions

President Hassan Rouhani of Iran on Tuesday called the White House “mentally retarded,” dismissing the Trump administration’s latest round of economic sanctions as pointless and declaring that Iran would not be intimidated.

The remarks, which Mr. Rouhani made in a televised address, made it more clear than ever that Washington and Tehran remain locked in a standoff despite President Trump’s last-minute decision to call off a missile strike against Iran in retaliation for its shooting down of an American surveillance drone.

“Today, the Americans have become desperate and confused,” he added. “This has made them take unusual measures and talk nonsense.”

Mr. Rouhani’s personal attacks on Mr. Trump are especially significant. In the context of the Iranian political system, Mr. Rouhani is regarded as a moderate who is relatively open to negotiations with Washington, and the insults from Mr. Rouhani further diminish the already-remote prospects of talks between the two sides.

The Trump administration is continuing to punish Iran with crippling economic sanctions that American officials say are intended to force Tehran to agree to new limits on any efforts to develop nuclear weapons, on its arsenal of ballistic missiles, and on its support for allied militias around the region.

Iran, in response, has said it will take steps that would bring it closer to building a nuclear weapon after four-year lull. It had suspended that work in exchange for sanctions relief under a 2015 agreement with the United States and other international powers, but Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from the deal last year in order to start his administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign, which is intended to force Iran into a more restrictive pact.

Tensions have risen sharply over the past six weeks, ever since the Trump administration tightened its sanctions enforcement in an effort to cut off all international sales of Iran’s oil, the lifeblood of its economy. Iranian officials have denounced those sanctions as “economic warfare.”

The United States has accused Iran of lashing back by using naval mines to damage six tankers in the waters of the Persian Gulf, allegations Mr. Rouhani has denied.

Iran, however, boasted last week of shooting down an American surveillance drone. The United States has said the drone was in international air space, while Iran maintains that the aircraft was over Iranian territory.

The Trump administration on Monday added new sanctions targeting Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and some senior military figures. The sanctions block them from entering the United States or using its financial institutions.

Mr. Rouhani ridiculed the effort, noting that the supreme leader never visits the United States or does business with it.

“Tehran’s strategic patience does not mean that we are afraid,” Mr. Rouhani said, according to the Mehr news agency. “We do not fear America, and have shown restraint so far.”

Trump administration officials have insisted that the United States is prepared to reopen negotiations with Iran as soon as Tehran is willing, and Mr. Trump has often sounded notably more flexible about such talks than the hawkish officials he has appointed to advise him, like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and John Bolton, the national security adviser.

Mr. Rouhani and other Iranians have said the mixed messages and coercive tactics from the Trump administration belie its professed desire to negotiate. Although such language is new for Mr. Rouhani, Tuesday was not the first time senior Iranian officials have referred to the White House as “mentally retarded.”

Mr. Trump, however, has at times shown a remarkable willingness to move past an exchange of insults. It was only a short time after the North Korean leader called Mr. Trump a “dotard” that the president plunged eagerly into one-on-one talks with that leader, Kim Jong Un.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Emergency Aid for Migrants Badly Divides Democrats

WASHINGTON — Congress is trying to rush $4.5 billion in emergency humanitarian aid to the southwestern border while placing new restrictions on President Trump’s immigration crackdown, spurred on by disturbing images of suffering migrant families and of children living in squalor in overcrowded detention facilities.

But with a House vote on the package planned for Tuesday, some Democrats fear that the aid will be used to carry out Mr. Trump’s aggressive tactics, including deportation raids that he has promised will begin within two weeks. Republicans are objecting to restrictions in the measure that are meant to dictate better standards for facilities that hold migrant children and to bar the money from being used for enforcing immigration law.

Those twin challenges have left the fate of the measure up in the air, even as evidence of deplorable conditions at the border underscores both the urgent need for the money and the bitter rift over Mr. Trump’s policies.

“Democrats distrust this president because we have seen his cruel immigration policies and lawless behavior terrorize our constituents,” Representative Nita M. Lowey of New York, the chairwoman of the House Appropriations Committee, said on Monday evening as she pleaded with fellow Democrats to support the package. “That is why we have language to stop transfers of money for immigration raids and detention beds. But we cannot allow our anger at this president to blind us to the horrific conditions at facilities along the border as the agencies run out of money.”

The aid package poses a difficult dilemma for Democrats, who are torn between their desire to champion humanitarian help for migrants and their concern that any money they approve will be used by the Trump administration to advance what they consider to be a fundamentally inhumane set of policies. They are also loath to be seen as the ones holding up soap, diapers and food for babies, keenly aware that Mr. Trump and his team are eager to blame Democrats for the dire conditions.

“The administration chooses to direct the vast majority of funding toward enforcement, and then cries poverty when it comes to diapers and food,” said Heidi Altman, the policy director at the liberal National Immigrant Justice Center. “It’s a hostage-taking way of engaging in policy.”

Hispanic-American lawmakers are particularly split; some are arguing that it is crucial to get the aid to agencies and outside groups assisting migrants at the border, while others say they will not be complicit in sending any money to agencies that have carried out Mr. Trump’s harsh initiatives against immigrants.

Several members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus are pushing to attach stricter conditions to the money, including higher humanitarian standards for facilities that hold migrant children, according to a senior Democratic official familiar with the talks.

The behind-the-scenes dispute comes as the Trump administration on Monday transferred hundreds of migrant children who were being detained in filthy conditions at a border station in Texas into a shelter system maintained by the Department of Health and Human Services.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_156797106_f55312e5-3016-449e-9bcc-443a70a63337-articleLarge Emergency Aid for Migrants Badly Divides Democrats United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Immigration Detention Immigration and Emigration Humanitarian Aid Human Rights and Human Rights Violations Deportation Democratic Party

A Border Patrol station in Clint, Tex., where hundreds of children were held for weeks without access to soap, clean clothes or adequate food.CreditCedar Attanasio/Associated Press

Concern about the funding bill swelled over the weekend, after Mr. Trump tweeted on Sunday that he was suspending the raids for two weeks to provide time for a bipartisan compromise on changing asylum laws and closing immigration “loopholes.” His abrupt reversal came after Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, telephoned Mr. Trump to ask for a delay.

Ms. Pelosi praised the postponement, and in a strongly worded statement later on Sunday she called for passage of the emergency aid package, saying that it protects families and “does not fund the administration’s failed mass detention policy.” It would also do nothing to change asylum laws to meet Mr. Trump’s demands.

“As members of Congress and as Americans, we have a sacred moral responsibility to protect the human rights and the lives of vulnerable children and families,” she said. “To do anything less would be an outrageous and unacceptable violation of our oath and our morality.”

But even as the speaker was pressing to advance the bill, dozens of House Democrats were in revolt over it. In an emergency conference call on Sunday, more than 30 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus aired their concerns, many of them arguing that the legislation did not set high enough standards for migrant shelters or do enough to block money from going toward enforcement.

“We all want to address the problems at the border, but we don’t know that there are enough sticks in this bill to make sure that the Trump administration actually spends the money the way they’re supposed to,” said Representative Pramila Jayapal, Democrat of Washington and the co-chairwoman of the Progressive Caucus. “He’s creating these crises and then trying to point a finger at Democrats to give him more money, which he then uses for his own purposes.”

Ms. Jayapal said there was no reason to believe that the Trump administration would abide by any restrictions included in the legislation or standards dictated by the measure, given its “lawless” behavior when it came to immigrants.

Ms. Pelosi was to huddle on Monday night with Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard of California, the chairwoman of the panel in charge of the aid package, and members of the Hispanic and progressive caucuses, according to an aide.

The conflict in the House stands in contrast to the Senate, where Republicans and Democrats on a key committee came together last week to approve a $4.6 billion border aid package that contained some limitations to bar the administration from using the resources for enforcement. It would, for instance, prohibit the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that houses unaccompanied migrant children, from sharing information with immigration officials about people who take custody of the children.

The House bill goes further than the Senate legislation in placing restrictions on the money. Facilities that house unaccompanied children would have a slightly shorter time frame — 12 months instead of 14 months — to meet existing legal standards for healthy, sanitary and humane conditions; they would have to allow oversight visits from members of Congress without warning; and the Department of Health and Human Services would have to report a child’s death in its custody to Congress within 24 hours.

Representative Chuck Fleischmann of Tennessee, the senior Republican on the panel overseeing the bill, said he opposed the measure as written by House Democrats. “You will see just about every Republican in the House vote against the Democratic supplemental bill,” Mr. Fleischmann said, citing the added restrictions and the lack of funding for back pay for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Representative Pramila Jayapal said there was no reason to believe that the Trump administration would abide by any restrictions included in the legislation or standards dictated by it.CreditErin Schaff/The New York Times

And even if they are able to muscle it through, he added, doing so sets up a negotiation to resolve differences with the Senate that will only delay the aid. “The enemy right now is time,” said Mr. Fleischmann, who supports the Senate bill.

“It is agreeable to the White House,” he said, “so we have two-thirds of the puzzle complete there.”

The White House on Monday issued a statement threatening that Mr. Trump would veto the House measure because it “does not provide adequate funding to meet the current crisis” and “contains partisan provisions designed to hamstring the administration’s border enforcement efforts.”

Ms. Pelosi has told colleagues that while she understands their concerns about the aid measure, its demise in the House would essentially cede the issue to the Senate and its weaker bill, according to people familiar with the conversations who described them on the condition of anonymity.

Among some Democrats, the argument is starting to stick. “It’s either the status quo, the Senate bill or the House bill,” said Representative Veronica Escobar, a Texas Democrat whose El Paso district abuts the border. “If the House bill could be improved, that would be wonderful. But this is an emergency supplemental.”

“In my view, if we don’t get the money right away,” she added, “my fear is we’re going to see more children die.”

But many Democrats are pressing for more. They want to give the administration less time to comply with existing standards for facilities that house children, and to include higher health, nutritional, hygiene and sanitation standards for Customs and Border Protection facilities.

They would ban for-profit companies from running migrant shelters and would scrap funding for the United States Marshals that is specifically geared toward referring people who entered or re-entered the country illegally for criminal prosecution. And they want stronger prohibitions against sharing the immigration records of people who come forward to take custody of unaccompanied migrant children.

The measure has also exposed a rift among immigrant advocacy groups, with some of the most liberal organizations actively calling on lawmakers to oppose it and others privately saying the aid, however imperfect, is desperately needed. The grass-roots group Indivisible began a social media campaign to urge members of Congress to vote against the legislation as a way of starving “Trump’s deportation machine,” in a tweet with the hashtag #notonedollar.

For some lawmakers, no amount of restrictions could make the measure acceptable.

In a statement on Friday before Mr. Trump called off the raids, a group of progressive congresswomen announced their opposition to the funding bill, saying they could not “in good conscience” back legislation that sent money to Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement to “support a fundamentally cruel and broken immigration system.”

“These radicalized, criminal agencies are destroying families and killing innocent children,” said a statement by four freshman representatives, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. “It is absolutely unconscionable to even consider giving one more dollar to support this president’s deportation force that openly commits human rights abuses and refuses to be held accountable to the American people.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Imposes New Sanctions on Iran, Adding to Tensions

WASHINGTON — President Trump announced on Monday that he was imposing new sanctions on Iran, stepping up a policy of pressuring the nation’s leaders and further squeezing the Iranian economy in retaliation for what the United States says are recent aggressive acts by Tehran.

The move came on top of actions taken by the administration this spring to cut off all revenues from Iranian oil exports, the lifeblood of the nation’s economy.

The new sanctions are aimed at preventing some top Iranian officials from using the international banking system or any financial vehicles set up by European nations or other countries. But the Iranian officials most likely do not keep substantial assets in international banks, if any at all, or use those institutions for transactions, and any additional pressure from the new sanctions is likely to be minimal.

The largely symbolic nature of this round of sanctions indicates that the Trump administration is running low on arrows in its economic quiver. It now finds itself in a waiting game, as it watches for whether the latest clampdown on oil exports, which was announced in late April, will force the Iranian leaders to surrender to American demands in exchange for economic relief.

Speaking in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump said the new sanctions order would bar Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, and his office from access to the international financial system. The Treasury Department said it was also imposing sanctions on eight Iranian military commanders, including the head of a unit that the Americans say was responsible for shooting down an American drone last Thursday.

Mr. Trump acted at a time of rising concerns over Iran. Those have been prompted in part by declarations from Tehran that it is amassing more nuclear fuel, the latest evidence that Mr. Trump’s withdrawal last year from a nuclear containment deal is pushing Iranian leaders to violate terms they had been abiding by until now.

“We will continue to increase pressure on Tehran,” Mr. Trump said as he sat at his desk in the Oval Office preparing to sign an executive order. “Never can Iran have a nuclear weapon.”

While he warned on Monday that his restraint has limits, Mr. Trump has signaled that he prefers tightening sanctions to launching an immediate military strike to try to alter Iran’s behavior and force political change in Tehran.

But critics said the new sanctions would have little substantive effect and could further inflame tensions.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_156948135_f3045d89-f378-4add-8295-a7a51cd9d9ee-articleLarge Trump Imposes New Sanctions on Iran, Adding to Tensions Trump, Donald J Pompeo, Mike Persian Gulf Khamenei, Ali Iran Gulf of Oman Embargoes and Sanctions Cyberwarfare and Defense Bolton, John R

Iranians at the old grand bazaar on Monday. The inflation rate in Iran has risen to about 50 percent.CreditAbedin Taherkenareh/EPA, via Shutterstock

“Symbolic politics at its worst,” said Robert Malley, the president and chief executive of the International Crisis Group and a former senior Obama administration official on the Middle East. “At every level it is illogical, counterproductive or useless.”

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said the administration would add Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister and its top negotiator on the nuclear deal, to the sanctions list this week. (In his announcement about the sanctions on the supreme leader, Mr. Trump misspoke and said “Ayatollah Khomeini,” who died in 1989, rather than “Khamenei.”)

The inflation rate in Iran has risen to about 50 percent and many Iranians are dissatisfied with the economy, but authoritarian leaders have historically shown they can withstand stress from sanctions for many years. Some Iranian citizens also blame the United States government for the devastation of their economy, and they point to the shortage of critical medicine, even though Trump administration officials say they do not intend to limit humanitarian aid.

Iranian officials could choose to carry out nonfatal attacks on United States or international interests, as they did with the downing of the drone, to try to get the Trump administration to ease sanctions. Iran’s naval commander, Rear Adm. Hossein Khanzadi, said on Monday that the military was capable of shooting down other drones that violate Iranian airspace.

Mr. Trump said on Monday that he was willing to negotiate with Iran — “I think Iran, potentially, has a phenomenal future” — but insisted Iranian leaders would have to end their pursuit of nuclear weapons, as well as halt uranium enrichment, “fueling of foreign conflicts” and “belligerent acts directed against the United States and its allies.”

Mr. Trump always emphasizes the need to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, while his hawkish top foreign policy aides, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and John R. Bolton, the national security adviser, say Iran must also make wholesale changes to its policies in the Middle East.

International nuclear experts say Iran does not have an active nuclear weapons program and has been adhering to the terms of a landmark nuclear agreement that it reached in 2015 with world powers.

Mr. Trump withdrew from the deal in May 2018 and reimposed harsh sanctions. Iran said last week it would soon breach some limits on low-grade uranium in the deal, a type of fissile material used in civilian reactors. Iran would still be far from being able to make a nuclear weapon; its announcement appeared intended to pressure European nations to find ways to resume trade with Iran in order to alleviate the impact of American sanctions.

Mr. Trump’s rollout of sanctions and the effort to end all oil exports, along with an insistence by Mr. Pompeo that Tehran meet 12 expansive demands mostly unrelated to the nuclear program, “set a spark to the escalatory cycle we’re seeing today,” said Dalia Dassa Kaye, a Middle East expert at RAND Corporation, a research group in California.

“The administration argued maximum pressure would bring Iran to the negotiating table, but instead it brought provocative Iranian actions that are not likely to end without Iran getting something concrete on sanctions relief,” she said. “Talk about wanting to talk is not likely to be enough.”

Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps’ aerospace division, speaking to the news media next to debris from a downed American drone on Friday.CreditMeghdad Madadi/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

China and Russia, who also signed the nuclear deal, have joined European nations in opposing the sanctions. European officials are trying to persuade Iran to stay in the agreement and are expected to speak with Mr. Trump about his Iran policy at the Group of 20 summit meeting this week in Japan.

Mr. Trump and his top foreign policy aides say further squeezing Iran will compel its leaders to buckle to demands to limit their nuclear program in ways that go beyond the terms of the 2015 deal, which was negotiated by the Obama administration and opposed by many Republicans, Israel and Arab nations in the Persian Gulf.

Hesameddin Ashena, an adviser to President Hassan Rouhani of Iran, said on Twitter that the “U.S.’s claim that it wants negotiations without preconditions while it increases sanctions and pressure is not acceptable.”

If the United States wants more than the 2015 nuclear deal, he said, “it must offer us more than the deal with international guarantees.”

On Monday afternoon, the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, Majid Takht Ravanchi, told reporters that he had been barred from a closed-door meeting of the Security Council called by the United States. He also said there was no way Iran and the United States could have a dialogue right now.

The imposition of more sanctions could provoke further actions by Iran to add to the crisis that has unfolded since early May in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, analysts say.

American officials have blamed Iran for two separate sets of explosions on six oil tankers around the Strait of Hormuz, saying Iran is trying to increase global oil prices in retaliation for the administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign. Iranian officials have denied responsibility.

The downing of the drone prompted Mr. Trump to order a missile strike on Iranian military sites last Thursday, but he pulled back at the last minute after hours of debate, and instead opted for a cyberattack.

On Monday, Mr. Pompeo met at a palace in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, with King Salman, then had lunch with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, whom the administration has supported despite his suspected role in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, a Washington Post journalist, and in overseeing an air war that has killed thousands of civilians in Yemen. The State Department said Mr. Pompeo talked with the king and the prince about “heightened tensions in the region and the need for stronger maritime security to promote freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.”

Mr. Pompeo then flew to Abu Dhabi to meet with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed over dinner. Mr. Pompeo told the prince that his nation should contribute money and military resources to a maritime security program for ships around the Strait of Hormuz. The Americans are calling it the Sentinel program, and Mr. Pompeo said it was supposed to involve 20 nations in addition to Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E.

“The president is keen that the United States doesn’t bear the cost of this,” Mr. Pompeo told the prince.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com