Trump Administration Live Updates: Democrats Invite Fired Federal Workers to Trump’s Congress Speech

Company executives and foreign officials are scrambling to avert the consequences of another tight deadline from Mr. Trump, who has threatened to put stiff tariffs on goods coming in from China, Canada and Mexico starting just after midnight Tuesday.

The president describes this as an effort to pressure those countries to stop the flow of deadly drugs and migrants to the United States. But Mr. Trump’s game of brinkmanship with America’s three largest trading partners is creating intense uncertainty for business owners.

That includes Mr. Vanghele, 28, who runs a small company that sells lighting and equipment for aquariums, all of which is made in China. He had no idea that the shipment — one of his biggest so far — could face such fees when it left Yantian Port in southeastern China in January, just days before Mr. Trump’s inauguration. In a frantic effort to avoid paying roughly $25,000 in tariffs, Mr. Vanghele pleaded with the logistics firm last week to unload his container at a port in Norfolk, Va., where it stopped on Friday, instead of traveling on to Boston.

While it is possible that Mr. Trump’s new tariffs will include an exemption for goods that are already on the water, there is no guarantee.

“Even if I’ve got to pay an absurdly high amount for it to get trucked over, it’s not going to come close to what the tariffs are,” Mr. Vanghele said. “I’m basically in Hail Mary mode.”

The tariffs — which would add a 25 percent fee on all Mexican and Canadian exports coming across those borders and an additional 10 percent for Chinese goods — could still be pushed off.

Mr. Trump had threatened to impose them on the three countries beginning Feb. 4 but decided to pause the levies on Canada and Mexico for one month after the countries promised measures like Mexico’s sending more troops to the border and Canada’s appointing a “fentanyl czar.”

Mr. Trump did move forward with imposing a 10 percent tariff on all products from China, which triggered retaliation from that country. He is now threatening another 10 percent on all Chinese imports, which would come on top of the 10 to 25 percent tariffs he imposed on many Chinese products in his first term.

Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, said in an interview on Fox News on Sunday that Canada and Mexico had “done a lot” to meet the president’s demands and that the situation was “fluid.” Still, Mr. Lutnick implied that at least some levies would go forward, though he intimated they could be lower than the 25 percent Mr. Trump has promised.

“There are going to be tariffs on Tuesday on Mexico and Canada,” he said. “Exactly what they are, we’re going to leave that for the president and his team to negotiate.”

Canada and Mexico are both deeply dependent on exports to the United States, and Mr. Trump’s threats have whipped their governments into action. Delegations of officials have made trips to Washington in recent weeks, including to meet with Mr. Lutnick.

In contrast, Chinese officials have not rushed to Washington with new concessions. People familiar with the discussions say that Beijing is still probing what Mr. Trump wants more broadly from the relationship.

The prospect of new tariffs — in addition to a variety of other proposed levies on steel, aluminum, copper, timber and other products — have elicited anxiety and frustration from businesses selling everything from automobiles to breast pumps, who say tariffs will raise their costs as they move goods across borders.

Canada, Mexico and China account for more than 40 percent of U.S. imports. The tariffs that Mr. Trump threatened would dwarf any of the trade measures he has previously taken, raising the average U.S. tariff rates “to levels not seen since the 1940s,” said Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

For Canada and Mexico, most trade with the United States has faced zero tariff rates since the 1980s, he said, with free trade agreements for automobiles even dating back to the 1960s.

“Increasing tariffs from zero to 25 percent overnight is likely to be much more disruptive to those now highly integrated North American supply chains than anything President Trump did in his first term,” Mr. Bown said.

Of all the industries that depend on North American trade, automotive manufacturing could see the biggest impact. Canada and Mexico account for nearly half of U.S. car imports and exports, and an even greater share of the trade in motor vehicle bodies and parts.

Automakers have argued that parts and vehicles that are exempt under the current free trade treaty should continue to cross borders duty free.

“Our American automakers, who invested billions in the U.S. to meet these requirements, should not have their competitiveness undermined by tariffs that will raise the cost of building vehicles in the United States and stymie investment in the American work force,” said Matt Blunt, the president of the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis.

Automakers have petitioned the White House arguing for such an exemption, but people familiar with the deliberations say the president has not seemed amenable to the idea.

Even if tariffs are ultimately not imposed, their threat makes it difficult for automakers to plan, analysts say. It typically takes four years or more to design a new car and outfit a factory to produce it.

“Automotive lead times are generally longer than political lead times,” said Brian Irwin, a managing director at the consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal who advises clients in the auto industry.

Companies cannot quickly relocate production to the United States and will have to pass the tariffs on to customers, adding thousands of dollars to car prices. “You don’t have to be an expert in autos to see how detrimental this would be,” said John Helveston, an assistant professor at George Washington University who teaches engineering management.

There may be only one or two suppliers for certain precision components, he said, and none producing in the United States. “It’s not practical to just buy from an American supplier because there isn’t one,” Mr. Helveston said.

U.S. companies that source energy from around North America had a reprieve last month when Mr. Trump lowered the planned tariff on energy imported from Canada to 10 percent, from 25 percent. But the levy will be disruptive nevertheless, particularly for companies that transform oil into fuels like gasoline and diesel. That’s because U.S. refineries were built to run on a mix of the darker, heavier oil found in Canada — and the lighter crude produced domestically.

Refineries in the Midwest are particularly dependent on Canadian oil and, if the tariff takes effect, will have to choose between paying more for oil and cutting production. Analysts generally expect Canadian oil producers and U.S. refiners will share the additional cost burden. Prices at the pump also could rise modestly.

Oil and gas companies are also beginning to feel the effects of the 25 percent tariff on imported steel that Mr. Trump announced last month, even though it will not go into effect until March 12. Prices for products like the steel pipe that companies use to line their wells are already climbing in anticipation of the tariff.

Minho Kim contributed reporting.

“What the Democrats are showing with our guests is that it’s the American people who are being hurt by the actions of Elon Musk and Donald Trump,” said Representative Brad Schneider, Democrat of Illinois. Mr. Schneider said he chose not to skip the address — other Democrats such as Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut have said they won’t attend — so that the president “didn’t get a free pass” and would see the effects his administration has had on people.

When asked for comment, a White House spokesman, Harrison Fields, said Democrats were “exploiting the American people for political points.”

Mr. Schneider’s guest, Adam Mulvey, is a 20-year Army veteran who in February was terminated from his role as an emergency management specialist at a federal health center in North Chicago that serves both veteran and active-duty personnel.

Also invited to the address is Gabriel D’Alatri, a Marine Corps veteran and former Internal Revenue Service project manager from Connecticut who was fired just five days before he completed his probationary period. Mr. D’Alatri said his termination letter indicated that he was fired for “performance issues” even though he never had a bad performance review.

“It came as a shock to me and my family,” said Mr. D’Alatri, who will attend Mr. Trump’s address as a guest of his congressman, Representative Joe Courtney, Democrat of Connecticut. As an I.R.S. project manager, Mr. D’Alatri managed the department’s facilities in Connecticut and also coordinated reasonable accommodation requests for employees with disabilities. Mr. D’Alatri said that he voted for Mr. Trump in November and that it was too early to decide whether or not he regretted his choice.

Mr. Courtney said his constituent’s story was an example of how “indiscriminate and mindless” the Trump administration’s cuts had been.

Mr. D’Alatri said he hoped that by sharing his story and attending the address, the Trump administration would sign an executive order to rehire all veterans who were on probation and fired en masse.

“I like to think that veterans are a nonpolitical issue,” Mr. D’Alatri said. “For us to be thrown to the side like that, I wasn’t expecting that to happen.”

Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, has invited Alissa Ellman, a disabled Army veteran who served in Afghanistan. Mr. Schumer said she was recently fired from her job at the Veterans Affairs Department in Buffalo.

“This is not how you treat our veterans — it’s not just unacceptable, it’s un-American,” Mr. Schumer said in a statement. “Jobs and care for our veterans in Upstate New York is not government waste.”

Representative Chrissy Houlahan, Democrat of Pennsylvania, invited Jessica Malarik Fair, a constituent who was an architect at Valley Forge National Park tasked with restoring George Washington’s office in preparation for the country’s 250th anniversary next year.

“I hope people will understand that these are actual human beings and not just numbers that we can sort of strike arbitrarily,” said Ms. Houlahan, “and that they represent work that will no longer happen on behalf of all of us.”

Ms. Malarik Fair, who also lost her job last month in the firing of probationary employees, hopes she can be one more face to humanize the federal work force for Americans.

“I’m proud of the work that I was doing there, and I’m anything but corrupt or lazy,” she said.

State Department officials told the two congressional committees in the House and Senate that review foreign weapons sales about the emergency declaration on Friday. At least one congressional official privately expressed alarm at the bypassing of the review.

Several of the cases of munitions to be sent to Israel were undergoing review in Congress. But one large case worth about $2 billion had not been sent by the State Department to Congress for review, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk candidly about sensitive weapons deals.

The Pentagon announced details of that sale to Israel on Friday. The announcement lists several possible mixes of bombs that would be delivered, including more than 35,000 2,000-pound bombs.

Israel has been dropping 2,000-pound bombs in Gaza, a densely populated strip of 2 million people that is about the size of Las Vegas. U.S. military officers have said the bombs are unsuitable for urban combat.

President Joseph R. Biden Jr. sent several orders of the bombs to Israel, then withheld one shipment last summer as Israel prepared to attack Rafah, a shelter point for many displaced Palestinians. Israel destroyed much of Rafah anyway, and the Trump White House released the shipment days after President Trump took office in late January.

Israel announced on Sunday that it was halting all goods and humanitarian aid into Gaza in a pressure campaign to get Hamas to accept a temporary extension to a cease-fire that had just expired. Most of the aid is from groups and governments outside of Israel, and some legal experts said Israel’s halt violated international law.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said the proposal for a cease-fire extension had been the idea of Steve Witkoff, President Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East. Hamas had insisted that Israel seriously take part in talks for a permanent truce during the just-expired cease-fire, which Israel did not do.

Hamas still holds dozens of Israeli hostages who were abducted in October 2023, when about 1,200 Israelis were killed in a Hamas-led assault in southern Israel. The Israeli military then attacked Gaza, killing nearly 50,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza Health Ministry estimates. Most of the people killed on both sides have been civilians.

Besides the case of bombs worth $2 billion, the other military equipment to be sent to Israel under the emergency authorization includes bulldozers, more bombs and GPS-guidance kits to be fitted onto unguided or “dumb” bombs.

The two relevant congressional committees — the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee — had been doing an informal review of the equipment. During that process, aides and lawmakers can ask the State Department questions about the orders before giving approval. The department usually expects the informal review process of arms for Israel to last no longer than 20 days.

In early February, the State Department bypassed the congressional informal review process to announce that it was sending $8 billion in arms to Israel that the Biden administration had approved.

The State Department under Mr. Biden, led by Antony J. Blinken, told the committees about that package in early January. Three of the four top Republican and Democratic officials on the committees approved the package during the normal 20-day informal review period. But one Democratic representative, Gregory W. Meeks of New York, wanted to continue the review, prompting the Trump administration to bypass full approval days after Mr. Trump and Mr. Netanyahu met in the White House.

The Saturday statement from Mr. Rubio claimed that the Trump administration had approved the $8 billion in arms to Israel, when in fact the package had originated with the Biden administration.

The statement also falsely asserted that Mr. Rubio’s decision on the new $4 billion in weapons and equipment reversed a Biden administration “partial arms embargo” on Israel. In fact, Mr. Biden and Mr. Blinken approved almost all of Israel’s orders for weapons.

The State Department would not comment about either assertion.

Mr. Blinken did withhold issuing licenses for Israel to buy 24,000 U.S.-made assault rifles from American companies for fear of helping to escalate violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank. This year, the department under Mr. Rubio submitted to Congress for review at least one request from Israel for a license to buy 5,000 rifles.

During Mr. Trump’s first term, the administration invoked an emergency declaration to bypass Congress to send arms to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

The precise scope and duration of the Defense Department order is not clear, as the line between offensive and defensive cyberoperations is often a blurry one.

Still, retaining access to major Russian networks for espionage purposes is critical to understanding Mr. Putin’s intentions as he enters negotiations, and to tracking the arguments within Russia about what conditions to insist upon and what could be given up.

Former officials said it was common for civilian leaders to order pauses in military operations during sensitive diplomatic negotiations, to avoid derailing them. Still, for President Trump and Mr. Hegseth, the retreat from offensive cyberoperations against Russian targets represents a huge gamble.

It essentially counts on Mr. Putin to reciprocate by letting up on what many call the “shadow war” underway against the United States and its traditional allies in Europe. The leading European powers continue to say their support of Ukraine is undiminished even as Mr. Trump, who has sought to portray himself as a neutral arbiter in seeking to end the war in Ukraine, has at times sided openly with Mr. Putin.

U.S. officials have said Russia has continued to try to penetrate U.S. networks, including in the first weeks of the Trump administration. But that is only part of a broader Russian campaign.

Over the past year, ransomware attacks on American hospitals, infrastructure and cities have ramped up, many emanating from Russia in what intelligence officials have said are largely criminal acts that have been sanctioned, or ignored, by Russian intelligence agencies.

Sabotage efforts in Europe — including suspected Russian attempts to cut communications cables, mysterious explosions and Russian-directed assassination plots, including against the chief executive of Germany’s largest arms maker — have accelerated in the past year. The United States has, until now, been central in helping European nations fight back, often in covert cyberoperations, but that cooperation could now be in jeopardy.

Many of those operations are run out of Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters — the storied intelligence agency that broke the Enigma codes in World War II — and to some extent by Canada. It is possible they will continue that work, while the United States focuses on China, its most sophisticated adversary in cyberspace.

Russia also ran an aggressive influence campaign during the last presidential campaign, according to reports by U.S. intelligence agencies during the Biden administration. In recent election cycles, U.S. Cyber Command has conducted secret operations to hamper or curtail those influence efforts.

But the Trump administration has already begun to dismantle efforts by the F.B.I. and other agencies to warn about Russian propaganda, and the order by the Pentagon would halt, at least for now, any further Cyber Command efforts to interrupt future Russian influence campaigns.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday described the urgency of getting Russia to the negotiating table over Ukraine, even while acknowledging that it was unclear whether Mr. Putin was ready to make a deal.

“You’re not going to bring them to the table if you’re calling them names, if you’re being antagonistic,” Mr. Rubio said on ABC’s “This Week.” “That’s just the president’s instincts from years and years and years of putting together deals as someone who’s in business.”

Mr. Rubio was not asked about the decision to stop the offensive cyberoperations, but he grew defensive when pressed on why the United States was letting up on pressure on Moscow, to the point of removing language from a United Nations resolution that described Russia as the aggressor in the war in Ukraine. Almost all of the United States’ traditional allies voted against the resolution, leaving the Trump administration siding with Russia, North Korea, Iran and Belarus, and a handful of other authoritarian states.

“If this was a Democrat that was doing this, everyone would be saying, well, he’s on his way to the Nobel Peace Prize,” Mr. Rubio said. “This is absurd. We are trying to end a war. You cannot end a war unless both sides come to the table, starting with the Russians, and that is the point the president has made. And we have to do whatever we can to try to bring them to the table to see if it’s even possible.”

The order from Mr. Hegseth was first reported by The Record, a cybersecurity publication from Recorded Future, which tracks cyberoperations. The Pentagon and U.S. Cyber Command declined to comment on the record, but a senior defense official, declining to allow use of her name, said that Mr. Hegseth had “no greater priority” than the safety of military members, including in cyberoperations.

After the publication of this article, Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said in a statement that Mr. Trump appeared to be giving Mr. Putin “a free pass as Russia continues to launch cyberoperations and ransomware attacks against critical American infrastructure.” He called the administration’s move “a critical strategic mistake.”

As the Trump administration prepared to take office, departing Biden administration officials urged Mr. Trump’s appointees to keep the pressure on Russia, including by continuing to arm Ukraine and push back on the GRU and the SVR, two Russian intelligence agencies that have been behind some of the most aggressive Russian cyberattacks and espionage operations.

They specifically briefed the Trump officials on suspected Russian efforts to cut communications cables undersea, and the U.S. effort last year to get a message to Mr. Putin about the consequences if an effort to put explosives on cargo planes resulted in an air disaster. American intelligence agencies concluded that Russia’s ultimate goal was to send those packages to the United States.

During Mr. Trump’s first term, American cyberoperations against Russia were, if anything, ramped up. The National Security Agency created a “Russia Small Group” after the Russian interference in the 2017 election

Mr. Trump gave Cyber Command new authorities in his first term to conduct offensive cyberoperations without direct presidential approval in a classified document known as National Security Presidential Memorandum 13.

One of those operations was a stepped-up effort to probe Russia’s electric power grid, an effort first disclosed by The New York Times and one likely meant as a warning to Russia not to interfere with American critical infrastructure. Mr. Trump denounced that reporting as “a virtual act of Treason,” but his former aides later said he was concerned the revelation would affect his relationship with Mr. Putin.