Tag: donald trump

Trump’s Reciprocal Tariffs: Fear Porn At A Fever Pitch

On April 2, 2025, President Donald Trump unveiled his reciprocal tariff policy, a bold stroke to rebalance global trade and deliver a windfall to American taxpayers. Branded “Liberation Day,” this plan promises to slash the trade deficit, boost domestic industry, and restore economic sovereignty. Predictably, the usual suspects—ivory-tower economists and free-trade purists—are gasping in horror, warning of inflation and trade wars. But with Canada and Israel already pledging to zero out tariffs on US goods, Trump’s strategy is proving its worth before it’s fully off the ground.

The congressional GOP must rally behind this policy, not just for party loyalty, but because it’s a pragmatic, taxpayer-friendly move that could redefine America’s economic future—potentially even paving the way to ditch the income tax.

American taxpayers have long shouldered the burden of a lopsided trade system. The US has boasted some of the world’s lowest tariffs—averaging 2.2%—while nations like India (12%) and China (with effective rates ballooning under non-tariff barriers) enjoy near-unfettered access to our markets. The fallout? A $1.2 trillion goods trade deficit in 2024, a gutted manufacturing base, and a tax system that squeezes workers to prop up foreign economies. Trump’s reciprocal tariffs turn this on its head.

By matching foreign tariffs—34% on China, 20% on the EU, up to 49% on outliers like Cambodia—Trump is forcing a reset.

Critics bleat about higher consumer prices, conveniently glossing over the policy’s core: incentivizing domestic production. “Build your plant here, no tariffs,” Trump declares. Companies that relocate will hire Americans, pay US taxes, and shrink the trade deficit. That’s not a tax hike—it’s a tax relief blueprint. Meanwhile, companies like Ford are establishing product discounts, calling them “From America, For America” discounts. More jobs, “Made in the USA” discounts, and higher wages mean less reliance on public assistance, easing the strain on taxpayers.

Here’s the kicker: tariffs could be the key to axing the income tax entirely.

In 2024, the federal government collected $2.2 trillion from individual income taxes. Trump’s team projects reciprocal tariffs could generate $500 billion to $1 trillion annually, depending on compliance and retaliation. Pair that with corporate tax revenue from repatriated businesses, and you’ve got a revenue stream that could replace the IRS’s chokehold on American paychecks.

Before 1913, tariffs funded nearly half the government; today, they’re a measly 1% of revenue. Trump’s plan revives that model, shifting the burden from workers to importers and foreign profiteers. Opponents who scoff at this as “unrealistic” are just scared of losing their sacred cow—complex tax codes that favor their cronies.

Keep reading

Shake Up At NSA And NSC

The Media is blaming Laura Loomer for the firings at the National Security Agency (NSA) and also the National Security Council (NSC).

From what I have seen, Laura has brought reasonable things to light that were rightly reviewed. House cleaning was in order.

Let’s address these one at a time.

On the NSC, there have been multiple firings. “Among the officials being fired, according to two people familiar with the matter, are Thomas Boodry, a senior NSC official overseeing legislative affairs who worked for Waltz when he was in Congress; David Feith, an official overseeing technology and national security; and Brian Walsh, an NSC official working on intelligence issues who previously worked for Secretary of State Marco Rubio during his time in the Senate.”

The concerning one is Alex Wong (not mentioned above).

We need to be careful about guilt by association, but these are sensitive positions. Alex’s wife had both feet in the Deep State.

If the President or Mike Waltz had any concerns, better to swap them out.

Sorry, but that is the game and life in the big leagues.

Keep reading

HERE WE GO: President Trump Reveals Vietnam Wants to Cut Their Tariffs Down to ZERO

President Trump on Friday revealed that Vietnam is willing to drop their tariffs to zero.

Trump imposed a massive 46% tariff on Vietnam in response to the country’s tariffs on exports to the US.

Chinese companies and retailers have used Vietnam as a shelter to circumvent the US’s trade war with China.

Vietnam can’t handle Trump’s tariffs so they are willing to drop their tariffs down to zero if they are able to make an agreement.

“Just had a very productive call with To Lam, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam, who told me that Vietnam wants to cut their Tariffs down to ZERO if they are able to make an agreement with the U.S. I thanked him on behalf of our Country, and said I look forward to a meeting in the near future,” Trump said on Friday.

On Thursday evening, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that every country is already calling the White House in response to his reciprocal tariffs.

On Wednesday President Trump signed an executive order imposing reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries.

Trump announced the implementation of a 10% baseline tariff on all imports, effective April 5, 2025.

“For too long, other nations have taken advantage of our open markets while imposing barriers to our products. Those days are over,” the President said.

The White House released a detailed chart showing how badly many countries have been ripping off American workers, charging high tariffs on U.S. goods while benefiting from America’s generosity in return.

Trump told reporters that every country has called the White House in response to his tariffs.

Keep reading

Here’s Why Trump Will Win The Tariff Standoff

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made it clear in an interview with CNN that the era of trade imbalances is over, and under President Trump, the U.S. will no longer tolerate unfair treatment. 

During a discussion with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Bessent confidently explained the administration’s position on tariffs and trade policy, signaling that Trump’s economic strategy is deliberate and well thought out.

When pressed on how the administration’s policies could impact the auto industry, particularly regarding vehicles made with foreign parts, Bessent was blunt. 

“If half the cars coming into the United States are foreign-made, that’s hard to turn around overnight, as you know,” Collins said. 

“So what would you say to people in the auto industry who are worried about that timeline and how quickly that could shift?”

“Buy American,” Bessent said bluntly. He also clarified that the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) exempts certain vehicles and parts from the new tariffs.

Collins attempted to raise concerns from U.S. allies, questioning what the administration would say to countries like South Korea and Japan, which are now facing increased tariffs. Bessent’s response was direct:

“Well, I would say they’ve been doing it to us for a long time. And, if they don’t like tariffs, then why do they have them?”

His answer underscored the administration’s stance that America has been on the losing end of trade deals for too long.

As for whether the tariffs should be considered permanent, Bessent took a wait-and-see approach.

“I think we’re gonna wait and see how this plays out,” he explained, suggesting that adjustments could be made based on how the policy unfolds.

Collins also asked about the possibility of retaliation from other countries. Some foreign leaders have hinted at potential countermeasures, while others have opted to observe before making a move. Bessent urged patience. 

“One of the messages that I’d like to get out tonight is everybody sit back, take a deep breath, don’t immediately retaliate, let’s see where this goes. Because if you retaliate, that’s how we get escalation.”

When Collins pressed him on whether such escalation could turn into a full-fledged trade war, Bessent dismissed the idea. 

“Not a trade war. Depends on the country,” he said, before explaining that history favors the United States in such disputes.

“Remember that the history of trade is, we are the deficit country. The deficit country has an advantage,” he explained.

“[The others] are the surplus countries. The surplus countries traditionally always lose any kind of a trade escalation.”

His message to foreign governments was clear: Acting hastily would be a mistake. 

“As a student of economic history or a professor of economic history, I’d advise against it,” he said. When Collins sought further clarification, he reinforced the point: “I would say that doing anything rash would be unwise.”

Keep reading

U.S. Labor Secretary: Trump Admin Will Return $1.4B In Unused COVID-Era Funding To Taxpayers

As the Trump administration pushes the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government, U.S. Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said this week that the agency will return more than $1 billion in unused COVID-era funds to U.S. taxpayers.

The Labor Department stated in a news release that it is currently taking “action” in order “to recover the remaining $2.9 billion,” but that $1.4 billion of unspent COVID funding will soon be “returned to taxpayers through the U.S. Department of Treasury’s General Fund.” However, it did not specify a date for either.

“The roughly $4.3 billion was intended for states to use for temporary unemployment insurance during the pandemic,” the press release states. “Instead, several states continued spending millions of dollars despite no longer meeting necessary requirements, which was uncovered in a 2023 audit conducted by the department’s Office of Inspector General.”

In the press release, Chavez-DeRemer clarified that the program is especially designed to offer expanded unemployment insurance to Americans who were unable to work during the pandemic and that the financing came from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act in March 2020.

The 2023 audit “found four states were allowed to access the funding ‘despite not meeting program requirements,’ totaling over $100 million in spending,” according to the department, which stated that the program was discontinued in 2021.

“There’s no reason leftover COVID unemployment funds should still be collecting dust,” DeRemer told Fox News. “I promised to look out for Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars, and we are delivering at the Department of Labor.”

“Any money still sitting around for pandemic-era unemployment funds is a clear misuse of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars,” Chavez-DeRemer said in the press release, noting that they are “rooting out waste to ensure American Workers always come First.”

Deputy Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling made a statement as well.

Keep reading

Flip-Flop: Longtime Free Trade Opponent Bernie Sanders Now Calls Trump’s Tariffs ‘Unacceptable’

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is opposing President Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs after spending his career in Washington, DC, trashing the nation’s decades-long free trade policy for allowing multinational corporations to easily outsource American jobs to low-wage countries like China and Vietnam.

“As someone who helped lead the effort against disastrous unfettered free trade deals with China, Mexico, and other low-wage countries, I understand that we need trade policies that benefit American workers, not just the CEOs of large corporations,” Sanders said in a statement before using economic libertarian talking points to attack Trump’s recipricol tariffs:

And that includes targeted tariffs which can be a powerful tool in stopping corporations from outsourcing American jobs and factories abroad. Bottom line: We need a rational, well-thought-out and fair trade policy. Trump’s across-the-board tariffs are not the way to do it. We do not need a blanket and arbitrary sales tax on imported goods which will raise prices on products that the American people desperately need. We should be doing everything we can to lower prices, not make them incredibly higher. [Emphasis added]

Further, and most importantly, what Trump is doing is illegal and another step toward authoritarianism. In pushing his tariffs he is usurping the power of Congress and abrogating existing agreements under “emergency” provisions – when there are no real emergencies. In other words, he is incorporating more and more power into his own hands. That is unacceptable. [Emphasis added]

The statement is unusual for Sanders, as he has spent most of political career in Washington, DC, warning against the devastating impact that free trade has had on America’s working and middle class communities.

In 1993, then-Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) railed against the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as nothing more than a massive outsourcing giveaway to multinational corporations looking to cut labor costs by sending American jobs to the lowest-wage countries.

“The NAFTA treaty is being supported by almost every multinational corporation in America, and these corporations are spending tens and tens of billions of dollars trying to influence the members of this body to vote for it,” Sanders said at the time.

Keep reading

Trump’s shift in policy could save American farmers from climate regulations and bureaucratic red tape

  • The Trump administration directed the USDA to remove climate change references from its websites, signaling a move away from climate-focused regulations seen as burdensome to farmers.
  • USAID’s climate initiatives, like “$150 billion net-zero strategies” and projects in developing nations, are criticized for prioritizing ideology over practical agricultural productivity and food security.
  • Programs aimed at reducing carbon emissions or promoting “climate-smart” agriculture are deemed counterproductive, as CO? is essential for plant growth, and such measures often hinder farming efficiency.
  • U.S. farmers risked losing competitiveness due to restrictive climate policies (e.g., methane reduction mandates), while countries like China and India prioritized high-yield, fossil fuel-based agriculture.
  • Trump’s withdrawal from agreements like the Paris Accord is framed as a win for U.S. farmers, ending costly, impractical climate mandates and refocusing on productivity and rural economic needs.

Amid recent headlines on tariffs and fiscal overhauls, a less noticed but significant shift has quietly unfolded in agricultural policy under President Donald Trump. An executive directive mandating the removal of all climate change references from U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) websites signals a departure from the bureaucratic red tape of climate regulations that once stifled domestic farming practices and tied U.S. support for agriculture abroad with superfluous climate mandates. This change, mirroring similar actions during the previous Trump administration, promises a rebirth for American agriculture, free from the shackles of counterproductive and politicized climate orthodoxies.

For years, federal climate initiatives have prioritized “green” orthodoxy over agricultural productivity. Programs funded through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) have poured millions of dollars into climate-focused ventures that often had little impact on climate change itself. Instead, these programs imposed burdensome regulations on farmers and rural communities, promoting “$150 billion ‘whole-of-agency’ climate strategies” under the guise of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. Some of these projects have intertwined with rural agricultural communities, involving other activities. For example, USAID and the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (IDFC) jointly participated in a $55 million credit guarantee aimed at addressing the economic impact of COVID-19 by supporting farm production organizations, ag-tech companies and companies in the agricultural sector working on clean energy solutions.

Keep reading

Europe Wails And Gnashes Its Teeth Over Trump Tariffs

Europe knows it has been ripping off American citizens for years, racking up massive trade deficits. Europe also knows it has been freeloading on the American national security umbrella for decades.

Yet, this morning, Europe chooses to bad mouth the United States and the Trump administration for the President’s insistence that the dishonest relationship between the continents end, with the announcement of a global tariff regime by Washington.

Globalists leaders in Europe, fat and happy from decades of grifting off America, are not happy this morning.

Their reactions are below:

Spain’s PM Sanchez declared Europe was already being attacked from the East by Russia, now faces trade attacks from the West. The U.S. return to 19th-century protectionism is not an intelligent move.

German Economy Minister Robert Habeck said, “Donald Trump will buckle under pressure from Germany and Europe in an escalating trade war.”

German Chancellor Scholz declared, “Even if we did nothing in response, the tariffs will cause problems for the U.S. economy. It would be a serious economic error.”

The Austrian Economic Minister declared, “To force Trump to the negotiating table, we need to impose tariffs that hit Republican states and his friends including tech firms.”

French PM Bayrou said on Trump tariffs, “This marks a catastrophe for the world economy.”

Keep reading

NATO, More Militarism No Defense Against US Expansionists

If you believe Donald Trump might invade you should be calling for Canada to withdraw from NATO. The alliance won’t defend Canada, has enabled US interference and gobbles up resources.

During a recent meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, US President Donald Trump questioned the border and Canadian sovereignty. He said, “if you look at a map, they drew an artificial line right through it, between Canada and the U.S. … somebody did it a long time ago, many many decades ago, and (it) makes no sense.” Trump also repeatedly said Canada should be a US state, noting “to be honest with you, Canada only works as a state.”

Sitting next to the US president, Rutte stayed silent. A bit later Trump suggested Rutte might assist him in taking part of NATO member Denmark, noting “I’m sitting with a man who could be very instrumental. You know Mark, we need that for international security.” Rutte replied, “when it comes to Greenland yes or not joining the U.S. I would leave that outside for me this discussion because I don’t want to drag NATO in that.”

Rutte doesn’t seem to want to commit even rhetorically to defending alliance members’ sovereignty. Even if Rutte had interrupted Trump and told the US president his comments were inappropriate the idea that NATO would defend Canada from a US invasion is ridiculous. Latvia and Estonia will not send troops to repel a US invasion. Nor will France or the UK.

Will Canada send troops to defend Greenland if Trump takes it from NATO member Denmark? Does anyone think that would that be a good idea?

Article 5 of the NATO Charter is not clear on what collective defence entails. It says an attack against one member “shall be considered an attack against them all.” But it doesn’t stipulate what the response should be, noting only that each member state must take “such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force.” Article 5 has only ever been invoked after the September 11, 2001, attacks in the US.

Keep reading

Senate passes resolution to oppose Trump’s tariffs on Canada—4 GOP vote with Dems

The Senate on Wednesday held a vote to overturn President Donald Trump’s plan to impose harsh tariffs on Canada. The resolution, which doesn’t hold the force of law, passed the Senate with a 51 to 48 vote. Four Republicans joined their Democrat colleagues in voting against the tariffs. 

Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski and Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell opposed the tariffs. The vote came after Trump made his “Liberation Day” announcements from the White House’s Rose Garden, during which he announced reciprocal tariffs on nations around the globe.

Trump had levied tariffs against Canada in a move that created rancor between the United States and her northern neighbor. Canada is in the midst of a snap election where Prime Minister Mark Carney, who recently replaced Justin Trudeau as leader of the Liberal Party and as prime minister, will face off against Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre. The trade war with the United States is a key part of the conversation in that election.

In imposing those tariffs, Trump cited border security both for human and drug smuggling. Senate Majority Leader John Thune opposed those Republicans who opposed the tariffs, telling them that their vote would be nothing more than an embarrassment to Trump. The resolution was sponsored by Virginia Senator Tim Kaine. 

“I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution and ensure that President Trump has the tools that he needs to combat the flow of fentanyl from all directions,” Thune told them.

Canada is one of America’s largest trading partners. Carney has said that Canada will impose counter measure on the US in retaliation for Trump’s tariffs. “We’re in a situation where there’s going ot be an impact on the US economy, which will build with time,” Carney said.

“In our judgement it will be a negative on the US economy. That will have an impact on us, but the series of measures will directly affect millions of Canadians.” He went on to say that they would “fight these tariffs with countermeasures. We are going to protect our workers and we are going to build the strongest economy in the G7. In a crisis, it’s important to come together and it’s essential to act with purpose and with force.”

“Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Rand Paul, also of Kentucky, will hopefully get on the Republican bandwagon, for a change, and fight the Democrats wild and flagrant push to not penalize Canada for the sale, into our Country, of large amounts of Fentanyl, by Tariffing the value of this horrible and deadly drug in order to make it more costly to distribute and buy,” Trump said ahead of the vote.

Keep reading