News
Here’s what happened on Wednesday.
President Trump took office 101 days ago after a campaign in which voters bought his argument that he could skillfully manage the economy and that his policy prescriptions could both bolster growth and eradicate inflation.
So the news on Wednesday that the nation’s gross domestic product had contracted in the first three months of the year was a sharp political jolt as well as a blinking economic warning.
It came at the end of a quarter in which stock prices were down sharply, Wall Street’s worst performance at the start of a new presidential term since Gerald R. Ford tried to steer the country out of scandal and inflation 51 years ago. And it only added to the widespread uncertainty among businesses and consumers about what the rest of the year might hold as Mr. Trump pursues a trade war that is already choking off supply chains and threatening to push prices up and lead to shortages of critical components and products on shelves.
It is too soon to predict where the American economy is headed for the rest of the year, and Mr. Trump remains insistent that he will produce a flurry of trade deals that will bring manufacturing back to the United States and usher in a new age of prosperity.
But the first-quarter figures brought the political risks for him into focus. For Mr. Trump, what is at stake is a question of fundamental competence on an issue that he has always used to define himself.
If the report proves to be a harbinger of an extended slowdown or recession, the situation could become the economic analog of President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s fumbled withdrawal from Afghanistan four years ago this summer. Mr. Biden’s job approval ratings never recovered from that early debacle. Nothing he did later — not the millions of jobs created, not the big legislative victories, not the rapid response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — could restore the sense among voters that he could be trusted to carry out the job with the skill they assumed he brought to it.
Mr. Trump stood in the Rose Garden on April 2, what he called “liberation day,” and rolled out a broad and punitive set of tariffs on trading partners. He has promised that other countries will come begging for a deal to roll back those levies and other tariffs he has imposed.
A substantial number of Americans appear skeptical. In a New York Times/Siena College poll last week, 55 percent disapproved of Mr. Trump’s handling of the economy, with 43 percent approving. About half of voters disapproved of Mr. Trump’s handling of trade.
Some of Mr. Trump’s economic advisers now recognize that the timing and execution of his tariff announcements could prove to be colossal mistakes, even if they applaud the underlying strategy. That is why, every few days, they are announcing new exceptions, most recently to relieve the pain for American carmakers.
“On April 2, standing in arguably the most powerful place in the world, President Trump thought he was projecting American strength,” said Matthew P. Goodman, who runs the geoeconomics center at the Council on Foreign Relations and served under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. “But he discovered that trade is complicated, that you need to be more surgical, and he has had to tack back from that ever since.”
Mr. Trump, the billionaire real estate investor, has acknowledged that his strategy will bring some temporary pain to Americans, but seemed to argue on Wednesday that it would hardly be noticed by ordinary Americans, at least at toy stores.
“Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls, you know?” he said. “And maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally.”
Whatever the cost of a Barbie, Mr. Trump is facing a fundamental timing problem. It will take years for the huge investments he predicts will flow into the United States to unfold and bring about the industrial renaissance he has promised. Building the most cutting-edge semiconductor fabrication plant, for example, can easily take five years.
“Those chips, those beautiful chips, make those suckers in the U.S.A.,” Mr. Trump said in the White House on Wednesday as he addressed executives and called out how much each had committed to spending on new facilities in the country.
It is too early to know how quickly those investments will take off, including Apple’s commitment, hailed again by Mr. Trump on Wednesday, to invest $500 billion, including a chunk of its manufacturing capability, in the United States over the next four years.
But the economic pain of the tariffs could start within months, with upward pressure on prices and shortages of both industrial and consumer products made abroad.
Much of Mr. Trump’s political problem lies in that disconnect. For many of the products Americans will be paying more for — especially Chinese-made products — there is no American alternative. And for many more, producing them in the United States may make no sense.
For all his downplaying of economic concerns, Mr. Trump is clearly sensitive to the prospect of being blamed for rising prices. When reports began to circulate this week that an Amazon subsidiary was thinking about posting the tariffs customers would be paying on every product, Mr. Trump called Jeff Bezos, Amazon’s founder, to complain.
Giving consumers a breakdown of how much tariffs are costing them, the White House said, would be a “hostile and political act.” Amazon quickly said it had never fully approved the plan, and that it would not go into effect.
But many business leaders are rattled by the environment, saying they have no way of projecting their earnings for the second quarter because the economic environment has never been more opaque.
“I keep telling them not to underestimate Donald Trump,” said David McIntosh, the president of the Club for Growth, the anti-tax advocacy group whose members almost unanimously cheered Mr. Trump’s return to office.
Mr. McIntosh said he is optimistic that Mr. Trump will be successful at negotiating down tariffs with Western-style democracies that rank among America’s biggest trading partners. “I run into a lot of executives who ask, ‘OK, how does Donald Trump do this?’ And my answer is to wrap their minds around ‘The Art of the Deal,’ that he is negotiator in chief.”
The way to calm the markets now, he said, is to “get Congress to get the tax cut bill done,” and to extend the tax cuts Mr. Trump got enacted in his first term.
Mr. McIntosh is pressing to expand that tax cut, specifically by permitting businesses to write off the cost of building new production facilities immediately, rather than depreciate those costs over decades.
Mr. Trump may score some early wins. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Tuesday that “we are very close on India.” He added that South Korea was “sending its A-team” to negotiate and that a deal was also possible soon with Japan. Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that Canada’s new prime minister, Mark Carney, had called him the day before and said “‘Let’s make a deal.’”
Perhaps so, but Mr. Carney also had this to say on Tuesday after winning the Canadian election: “Our old relationship with the United States, a relationship based on steadily increasing integration, is over. The system of open global trade anchored by the United States, a system that Canada has relied on since the Second World War, a system that, while not perfect, has helped deliver prosperity for a country for decades, is over.”
Mr. Carney has vowed to reduce Canada’s dependence on its huge neighbor, no easy assignment since bilateral trade amounts to about a fifth of the country’s economy. China, the most powerful player in Mr. Trump’s trade wars, has been pursuing a similar strategy. And its leader, Xi Jinping, has every incentive to make the next few months as politically painful for Mr. Trump as possible.
Mr. Xi has largely maintained radio silence since Mr. Trump announced an escalating set of tariffs on Chinese goods, settling at 145 percent after several angry moves and countermoves with Beijing. That rate is so high that it essentially freezes trade; already there are reports of freighters loaded with goods that are being turned around, so that importers do not have to pay those tariffs.
Mr. Trump’s bet is that Mr. Xi will blink first because the pain for the Chinese economy will be so great that he will have to strike an accommodation that will, over time, allow the United States to get back to something approaching normal. Mr. Xi is betting the opposite: that Mr. Trump has overreached, and can’t withstand bad G.D.P. numbers, rising inflation or plummeting polls.
Only one of them is right.
News
U.S. to Withdraw 5,000 Troops From Germany, Pentagon Says
Pentagon officials said on Friday that they were pulling 5,000 troops from Germany and would redeploy them to the United States and other posts overseas.
The Defense Department is also canceling a plan developed under the Biden administration to place a missile-equipped artillery unit in Europe.
The moves will return U.S. forces in Europe to the level they were in 2022, before Russia began its war in Ukraine, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the planning process. Last year, the Pentagon redeployed a brigade in Romania and did not send replacement forces.
Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement that the withdrawal would be completed over the next six to 12 months.
“This decision follows a thorough review of the department’s force posture in Europe and is in recognition of theater requirements and conditions on the ground,” he said.
The Defense Department — particularly during both of President Trump’s terms — has for several years considered decreasing the military presence in Germany. But senior defense officials privately made it clear that they wanted the move to be seen as a punishment for Germany, whose recent comments about the U.S. war in Iran have annoyed Mr. Trump.
Earlier this week, Germany’s chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said Iran had “humiliated” the United States, and he questioned how Mr. Trump planned to end the conflict.
“The Americans obviously have no strategy,” Mr. Merz said.
Mr. Trump then took to Truth Social, his social media site, to vent.
“The United States is studying and reviewing the possible reduction of Troops in Germany, with a determination to be made over the next short period of time,” he wrote on Thursday.
Later, he added: “The Chancellor of Germany should spend more time on ending the war with Russia/Ukraine (Where he has been totally ineffective!), and fixing his broken Country, especially Immigration and Energy, and less time on interfering with those that are getting rid of the Iran Nuclear threat, thereby making the World, including Germany, a safer place!”
On Friday, while announcing the decision, a senior Pentagon official said that Germany’s failure to contribute to the Iran war effort had frustrated the United States, and that the country’s rhetoric was inappropriate and unhelpful.
The announcement, and the criticism of Germany, represents a shift for Pentagon officials, who recently had praised Germany’s efforts to increase military spending and take over more of the burden of supporting Ukraine.
Even if the Pentagon pulls 5,000 troops out of Germany, the country would still host the second-largest U.S. troop presence in the world, at more than 30,000, behind only Japan.
Defense officials say the United States depends on its bases in Germany to stage many of its operations in the Middle East, Europe and Africa.
The Iran war has made that clear. Many U.S. troops evacuated from bases in the Middle East that were targeted by Iran were moved to Germany. And many of the U.S. troops wounded in the war have been taken to Germany — to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center near Ramstein Air Base — for treatment.
The U.S. military’s Africa Command and European Command are also headquartered in Germany.
Defense officials said the reduction would not directly affect Landstuhl or other medical facilities in Germany where U.S. troops receive care.
News
Court restricts abortion access across the US by blocking the mailing of mifepristone
Mifepristone tablets sit on a table at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Ames, Iowa, on July 18, 2024.
Charlie Neibergall/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Charlie Neibergall/AP
A federal appeals court has restricted access to one of the most common means of abortion in the U.S. by blocking the mailing of mifepristone. A panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is requiring that the abortion pill be distributed only in-person at clinics. Since the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed enforcement of abortion bans, prescriptions by mail has become a major way that abortions are provided — including to states where bans are in place. The decision sets up a likely appeal to the Supreme Court.


A federal appeals court has restricted access to one of the most common means of abortion in the U.S. by blocking mailing of prescriptions of mifepristone.
A panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is requiring that the abortion pill be distributed only in person at clinics.
“Every abortion facilitated by FDA’s action cancels Louisiana’s ban on medical abortions and undermines its policy that ‘every unborn child is human being from the moment of conception and is, therefore, a legal person,’” the ruling states.
Judges have long deferred to the Food and Drug Administration’s judgments on the safety and appropriate regulation of drugs.
FDA officials under President Donald Trump have repeatedly stated the agency is conducting a new review of mifepristone’s safety, at the direction of the president.
The judges noted in their ruling that FDA “could not say when that review might be complete and admitted it was still collecting data.”
In a court filing, Louisiana’s attorney general and a woman who says she was coerced into taking abortion pills requested that the FDA rules be rolled back to when the pills were allowed to be prescribed and dispensed only in person.
A Louisiana-based federal judge last month ruled that those allowances undermined the state’s abortion ban but stopped short of undoing the regulations immediately.
Since the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed enforcement of abortion bans, prescriptions by mail have become a major way that abortions are provided — including to states where bans are in place.
“This is going to affect patients’ access to abortion and miscarriage care in every state in the nation,” said Julia Kaye, an ACLU lawyer. “When telemedicine is restricted, rural communities, people with low incomes, people with disabilities, survivors of intimate partner violence and communities of color suffer the most.”
Mifepristone was approved in 2000 as a safe and effective way to end early pregnancies. It is typically used in combination with a second drug, misoprostol.
Because of rare cases of excessive bleeding, the FDA initially imposed strict limits on who could prescribe and distribute the pill — only specially certified physicians and only after an in-person appointment where the person would receive the pill.
Both those requirements were dropped during the COVID-19 years. At the time, FDA officials under President Joe Biden said that after more than 20 years of monitoring mifepristone use, and reviewing dozens of studies involving thousands of women, it was clear that women could safely use the pill without direct supervision.
Friday’s ruling sets up a likely appeal to the Supreme Court.
The conservative-majority high court overturned abortion as a nationwide right in 2022 but unanimously preserved access to mifepristone two years later.
That 2024 decision sidestepped the core issues, however, by ruling that the anti-abortion doctors behind the case didn’t have legal standing to sue.
News
Jury Convicts Florida Ex-Rep. David Rivera in Conspiracy Trial
A federal jury convicted former Representative David Rivera of Florida on Friday, finding him guilty of conspiracy and six other crimes for secretly lobbying officials in Washington on behalf of the Venezuelan government in 2017 and 2018.
Prosecutors presented evidence during the five-week trial in Miami showing that Venezuela’s state-run oil company had secretly hired Mr. Rivera’s consulting firm for $50 million to lobby members of Congress and the White House for a thaw in U.S.-Venezuela relations.
The revelation ran contrary to how Mr. Rivera, a Republican, had portrayed himself in public. He made a political career, first as a state lawmaker and later as a congressman, as a strident anti-Communist. Mr. Rivera served in Congress from 2011 to 2013.
He had previously been the subject of several state and federal investigations into improper campaign dealings. He was also found guilty in the criminal case of failing to register as a foreign agent and money laundering, and faces about 10 years in prison.
His defense lawyers in the criminal case had argued that Mr. Rivera was not working for Nicolás Maduro’s government but rather surreptitiously trying to oust him. They also said that Mr. Rivera did not need to register as a foreign agent because his firm’s contract was with an American company, PDV USA, a U.S. subsidiary of the Venezuelan state-run oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, and not with the state-run company itself.
The 12-member jury also convicted one of Mr. Rivera’s associates, Esther Nuhfer, on four charges. Prosecutors said that Mr. Rivera, 60, split the secret contract earnings, which ultimately amounted to about $20 million after the company terminated the contract, with Ms. Nuhfer and two people who were not charged in the case. Ms. Nuhfer, 52, is a political consultant based in Miami.
Roger Cruz, an assistant U.S. attorney and the lead prosecutor, said in his closing argument on Tuesday that Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer decided to keep the contract secret because of “greed.”
“Without their keeping it secret, they would not have got a single penny,” he said. “If anyone found out, their careers would be over.”
The trial drew widespread attention when it began because prosecutors called Secretary of State Marco Rubio to testify against Mr. Rivera, his longtime friend and former housemate in Tallahassee when they both served in the Florida Legislature.
Mr. Rubio, who has not been implicated in any wrongdoing, was a Republican U.S. senator from Florida in the years that Mr. Rivera was secretly lobbying for Venezuela. Mr. Rubio held two meetings with Mr. Rivera at that time and testified in court that he had no idea about Mr. Rivera’s secret contract.
Other prosecution witnesses included Brian Ballard, a major lobbyist and top fund-raiser for President Trump, and Hugo Perera, one of the other two men who admitted to taking part in the conspiracy. Mr. Perera was not charged because he agreed to testify against Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer.
Mr. Perera testified that Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer had kept the contract secret because they knew it would create a political scandal if it became public. Defense lawyers noted that Mr. Perera, a developer who had served prison time for cocaine trafficking and tax fraud in the 1990s, was allowed to keep the roughly $5 million he made from the Venezuela deal.
One of the defense witnesses was Representative Pete Sessions of Texas, a Republican, who testified that he worked with Mr. Rivera in 2017 to try to persuade Mr. Maduro to step down and hold presidential elections. Mr. Sessions also said that he did not know at the time about Mr. Rivera’s secret Venezuela contract.
Edward R. Shohat, one of Mr. Rivera’s defense lawyers, told jurors in his closing argument that prosecutors had tried to confuse them. “All that he was about was removing Mr. Maduro,” Mr. Shohat said of Mr. Rivera.
David O. Markus, a defense lawyer for Ms. Nuhfer, said she had signed onto the contract “in good faith,” believing it was with a U.S. subsidiary. She would never “in a billion years” have tried to help the Maduro government, Mr. Markus said.
-
Detroit, MI15 minutes agoDetroit getting pro women’s hockey team? What we know about the rumors
-
San Francisco, CA27 minutes agoAfter attempts to report vandalism, San Francisco homeowner gets graffiti notice from city
-
Dallas, TX33 minutes agoCowboys passed on 3 stud prospects in NFL Draft who could make them pay
-
Miami, FL39 minutes agoAdjusted 2026 F1 Miami Grand Prix Sprint starting grid after bizarre penalty
-
Boston, MA45 minutes agoBoston May Fair 2026 opening times as ‘iconic’ attraction returns
-
Denver, CO51 minutes agoAvalanche vs. Wild NHL playoff schedule
-
Seattle, WA57 minutes agoSporting Kansas City vs Seattle Sounders FC: TV channel, live stream, and kick-off time | Goal.com US
-
San Diego, CA1 hour agoNew audit breaks down the City of San Diego’s response on homeless encampment clean-ups