Jeffrey Goldberg may be one of the last journalists the Trump administration would want to inadvertently include on a private text thread discussing war plans. But according to Mr. Goldberg’s stunning revelation on Monday, that is exactly what happened.

Mr. Goldberg, 59, was a well-known national security reporter before he took over as editor in chief of The Atlantic in 2016. He was born in Brooklyn and studied at the University of Pennsylvania before dropping out and moving to Israel to serve in the Israel Defense Forces. He wrote about his time as a prison guard in 1990, during the First Intifada, for a 2006 book, “Prisoners: A Muslim and a Jew Across the Middle East Divide.” He also began a career in journalism while in Israel as a columnist for The Jerusalem Post.

Mr. Goldberg returned to the United States and worked as a police reporter at The Washington Post. He wrote for New York magazine and The New York Times Magazine, and became the New York bureau chief of the Jewish newspaper The Forward. In 2000, The New Yorker hired him as its Middle East correspondent, a role he held for five years before becoming the Washington correspondent.

In 2007, he was lured to The Atlantic after its owner, David Bradley, sent ponies to Mr. Goldberg’s Washington home for his three young children. He took over as its editor in chief nine years later.

Under Mr. Goldberg’s editorship, The Atlantic won its first Pulitzer Prize, in 2021, and also won one in 2022 and another in 2023. The magazine won the National Magazine Award for General Excellence in 2022 and 2023. Mr. Goldberg is also the moderator of PBS’s “Washington Week With The Atlantic.”

The magazine has been controlled by the Emerson Collective, an organization run by Laurene Powell Jobs, since it acquired a majority stake in 2017. Last year, The Atlantic announced that it was profitable and had more than one million subscriptions. It increased the number of print magazines it publishes to 12 a year, up from 10.

Recently, Mr. Goldberg has been beefing up political coverage at The Atlantic, hiring several top journalists from The Washington Post. The Atlantic also announced that the MSNBC “Morning Joe” co-host Jonathan Lemire and the programmer Alex Reisner would be contributing writers.

Mr. Goldberg has frequently been an antagonist to President Trump. In 2020, he reported that Mr. Trump had disparaged American military members who died during service as “losers.” In 2024, he wrote that Mr. Trump continued to have disdain for the U.S. military and had said he needed “the kind of generals that Hitler had.”

Before the election, Toyota Motor and other Japanese automakers thought a second Trump administration could be good for them.

President Trump had campaigned on dismantling policies aimed at swiftly accelerating the U.S. auto industry’s shift away from fossil fuels and to electric vehicles — directives that Toyota and other leading manufacturers of gasoline and hybrid gasoline-electric cars had also long opposed.

Toyota donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inauguration in January, and attendees at the company’s dealership meeting in Dallas that month said it was brimming with Trump cheer.

But as Mr. Trump’s agenda has taken shape, much of that optimism has turned to alarm.

In February, the administration signed an executive order imposing 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada, where Toyota and other Japanese companies assemble many of the cars they sell in the United States.

The administration has said that on April 2 it will announce “reciprocal tariffs” on countries that run large trade surpluses with the United States — a move widely expected to affect Japan and its cars.

Japan is one of the world’s largest automobile exporters, and the United States is the biggest market for companies like Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mazda and Subaru. So, as the tariff deadline approaches, Japan is now preparing for a blow that could be devastating not only to the profits of the nation’s automakers but to its overall economy.

With Japan’s economy already stifled by inflation, some economists estimate that if Mr. Trump’s automotive tariffs take effect as threatened, they could wipe out 40 percent of potential economic growth this year.

Mr. Trump has long had a combative relationship with Japanese car companies. In the 1980s, when he floated the possibility of a presidential run, Mr. Trump railed against auto giants from Japan, once telling Oprah Winfrey that they come to the United States and “knock the hell out of” local manufacturers.

Shortly after Mr. Trump was first elected in 2016, Toyota came forward with plans to invest $10 billion in the United States. Japan’s former prime minister Shinzo Abe — who was considered a skilled Trump whisperer — leveraged the president’s love of adulation and secured a promise not to impose additional duties on Japanese cars.

Japan’s success in fending off tariffs the first time around was part of the reason many leaders in the automotive industry were sanguine — and even hopeful — about another Trump term. The other reason, especially for Toyota, involved electric vehicles, which Mr. Trump had mostly ridiculed before recently declaring himself a fan of Tesla, the company run by his close adviser Elon Musk.

In the early 2020s, when many of its competitors rushed into electric vehicles, Toyota held firm to the hybrid gas-electric cars it had pioneered decades earlier. The company argued that the world was not fully ready for electric vehicles. They were expensive for consumers and the infrastructure needed to charge their batteries remained incomplete.

Automakers were also mostly selling electric vehicles at a loss. The prospect of Mr. Trump’s rolling back initiatives intended to rapidly spur the transition to electric cars was seen as a way for Toyota to buy time, given that it had only one mass-market electric vehicle available in the United States.

Toyota lobbied against stricter Biden-era tailpipe pollution limits and supported politicians in the United States who were against what it viewed as “mandates” to sell more electric vehicles. Much of this lobbying came via Toyota’s network of car dealerships, some of which, after being prompted by Toyota, conveyed their concerns about a swift transition to electric vehicles to elected officials, according to correspondence viewed by The New York Times.

A spokesman for Toyota said providing customers with affordable vehicles and a variety of options was the best way to reduce emissions as soon as possible, which is the company’s goal. “A consumer-driven market will bring more stability and healthy competition to the auto industry,” he said.

At the January dealership meeting in Texas, leaders of Toyota’s North America business said that they believed the company had held firm during the presidency of Joseph R. Biden Jr., and that they were now hopeful they had more “like-minded politicians” in positions of power, according to two people who attended the event who were not authorized to talk publicly.

The next month, Mr. Trump outlined plans for tariffs that could hit exports of cars from Canada, Mexico and likely Japan.

The Trump administration’s plans for tariffs have shifted often. But the prospect of new taxes on foreign-made cars is already weighing on Japanese auto companies and some of their dealerships in the United States.

In Maine, Adam Lee is the chairman of Lee Auto Malls, one of the state’s largest auto dealership groups. Lee Auto Malls sells brands including Toyota, and last month it had its worst February in terms of net profit since 2009.

As Mr. Trump has unveiled his tariff agenda over the past two months, “faith in the economy has seemed to be the lowest it has been in a long time,” Mr. Lee said. “People don’t buy cars when the world is in chaos,” he added.

Analysts expect Japan and South Korea, because of their large presence in the United States and tendency to import many of the cars they sell there, to be the automaking countries most exposed to Mr. Trump’s proposed tariffs.

Toyota made about one million of the 2.3 million cars it sold in the United States last year outside the country. Executives at Nissan and Honda have warned that Mr. Trump’s tariff plans would carve deeply into their earnings.

For Japan, whose top export is cars, a 25 percent tariff on automobile exports to the United States could reduce the country’s gross domestic product by around 0.2 percent this year, according to estimates from Japan’s Nomura Research Institute.

Given that Japan’s economy has a potential growth rate of only around 0.5 percent this year, a 0.2 percent hit to G.D.P. would represent a “considerable blow,” according to the research institute.

For now, some Japanese car companies are trying to accelerate shipments to the United States before April 2. They are also beginning preparations to ramp up production to the extent they can at the 24 manufacturing plants they operate inside the United States.

Over the past seven decades, Toyota has invested more than $50 billion in the United States, and it will continue to deepen those investments, a spokesman for the company said. Including in the United States, where it directly employs more than 49,000 people, Toyota’s philosophy has always been to “build where it sells and buy where it builds,” he said. Toyota is also fully compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement, he added.

Groups representing the automakers in Washington have also been working their contacts on Capitol Hill. They are hoping lawmakers can help make the case for how much Japanese auto manufacturers invest in the United States and how tariffs could hurt American consumers by raising prices.

So far, Japanese officials have failed to gain promises of exemptions from tariffs.

Three people involved in the lobbying efforts, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations, say they are repeatedly asked: Are there any new investments they can commit to or ones in the pipeline they can repackage as inspired by the new president?

At the moment, the people said, they do not have new large projects to show.

Most Japanese automakers do not have excess production capacity in the United States, according to Michael Robinet, a vice president at the automotive intelligence provider S&P Global Mobility. That means that if they want to manufacture more vehicles, they would have to build new factories.

But factories would take years to build and demand significant investments from companies currently facing a “highly unstable trade environment,” Mr. Robinet said. “Automakers are not going to make decisions that have lots of zeros behind them unless they know that they have a solid business case,” he said. “And right now they don’t.”

President Trump said on Monday that he would crack down on countries that bought Venezuela’s oil by imposing tariffs on goods those nations sent into the United States, claiming that Venezuela has “purposefully and deceitfully” sent criminals and murderers into America.

In a post on Truth Social, the president said countries that purchased oil or gas from Venezuela would be forced to pay a tariff of 25 percent on any exports they sent to the United States, starting April 2.

This unconventional use of tariffs could further disrupt the global oil trade as buyers of Venezuelan oil and gas seek alternatives. The United States and China have been the top buyers of Venezuelan oil in recent months, according to Rystad Energy, a research and consulting firm. India and Spain also buy a small amount of crude from the South American country.

But in the case of China, Venezuela’s oil makes up such a small portion of the country’s imports that the threat of higher tariffs will probably cause China to look elsewhere for oil, said Jorge León, a Rystad Energy analyst.

American purchases of Venezuelan oil are poised to wind down after the Trump administration said it would revoke a license that allowed Chevron to produce oil there.

But as Mr. Trump threatened steeper tariffs on other countries, his administration on Monday gave Chevron, the second largest U.S. oil company, another two months to produce oil in Venezuela and sell it to the United States. The administration had earlier ordered Chevron to wind down its operations by April 3.

The U.S. and Venezuelan governments have been sparring over Mr. Trump’s plans to deport migrants from the United States. Venezuela announced on Saturday that it had reached an agreement with the Trump administration to resume accepting deportation flights of migrants who were in the United States illegally.

“Venezuela has been very hostile to the United States and the Freedoms which we espouse,” the president wrote. “Therefore, any Country that purchases Oil and/or Gas from Venezuela will be forced to pay a Tariff of 25% to the United States on any Trade they do with our Country.”

Mr. Trump is planning to impose new tariffs globally on April 2, when he will introduce what he is calling “reciprocal tariffs.” He has said the United States will raise the tariffs it charges on other countries to match their levies, while also taking into consideration other behaviors that affect trade, like taxes and currency manipulation. The president has taken to calling this “liberation day,” a label he repeated on Monday.

Mr. Trump called the new levies he threatened on buyers of Venezuelan oil “secondary tariffs.” They would be an unusual use of tariffs, and it’s not entirely clear how they would work. Some trade and sanctions experts said existing secondary sanctions associated with countries such as Russia and Iran already weren’t well enforced, and questioned whether the United States would have the capacity to pull off new tariff-based penalties.

“Given the limited enforcement of existing secondary sanctions, where we have a precedent, I’m not sure how realistic effective deployment of this strategy is,” said Daniel Tannebaum, a partner at the consulting firm Oliver Wyman and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank.

But the strategy could help the United States to avoid putting financial sanctions on foreign banks that could threaten financial stability. Using tariffs could help the United States to be seen as taking tough action without incurring those risks.

With typical secondary sanctions, individuals or companies cannot buy oil or other products under sanctions from a blacklisted country. Otherwise, businesses could be subjected to U.S. sanctions themselves, facing fines or being cut off from the U.S. financial system.

But Mr. Trump and his advisers have said they think such sanctions can threaten the pre-eminence of the dollar if they are overused, by encouraging other countries to find alternative currencies. They have talked about using tariffs instead.

In his confirmation hearing in January, Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, said tariffs, in addition to raising revenue and rerouting supply chains, could provide an alternative to traditional financial sanctions.

Mr. Trump “believes that we’ve probably gotten over our skis a bit on sanctions and that sanctions may be driving countries out of the use of the U.S. dollar.” Tariffs could be used instead, Mr. Bessent said.