Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 24m The fact the White House came quickly and strongly to deny the rumour of a 90-day delay on the tariffs ***despite*** the positive impact the chatter had on the equity markets tells you all what you need to know: for now, Trump isn't backtracking.
I think he will backtrack, but while claiming concessions from other countries. No doubt some tariffs will stay.
Meanwhile some people can make a killing on the volatility so everyone's a winner!
I think people really have to give up the idea Trump is some kind of clever negotiator.
He is clinically deluded, and he has lost contact with reality.
Standing back from the tornado and reviewing, this seems to be the case:
Sometimes Trump and Trumpians indicate that the purpose of tariffs is to get coumtries to negotiate their way to a level playing field because the global free trade thingy has got skewed.
Other times the same sources indicate that Trumpian economics is truly old style mercantilism/fixed cake size/imperialism/protectionism/isolationism/expropriation all rolled into one.
Of course both of these can be wrong - and indeed are - but they can't both be right.
Which of these obtuse concepts is going to win?
It's so obviously someone out of control, reacting irrationally to the consequences of his own actions.
We can now see what life was like in Rome under Caligula. It's a great re-enactment.
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
"Plastic surgeon guilty of trying to kill colleague
Jonathan Peter Brooks "hated" Graeme Perks, a court in Loughborough heard, due to the proceedings, which had begun three days before the stabbing on 14 January 2021. Brooks went to Mr Perks's home in Halam, Nottinghamshire, in the early hours and broke in armed with a crowbar, cans of petrol, matches and a knife.
Brooks was convicted of two counts of attempted murder, one of attempted arson with intent to endanger life and one count of possession of a bladed article. He is due to be sentenced on 3 June.
It can now be reported that Brooks was "voluntarily absent" from the trial, because he was on hunger strike.
He also sacked his lawyers before the trial and was unrepresented in the case."
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
There is a theory that since the US has to refinance trillions in Government debt soon, devaluing the US economy is a cunning plan...
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
Can someone ask David what he thinks stripping Trump of the power would do? The damage is already done and reversing things isn’t going to remove the business issues
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
Can someone ask David what he thinks stripping Trump of the power would do? The damage is already done and reversing things isn’t going to remove the business issues
We saw today how fast the market recovered on just a rumour that the tariffs were being delayed.
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
There is a theory that since the US has to refinance trillions in Government debt soon, devaluing the US economy is a cunning plan...
One of the school Dads, who works for a bank in the Futures dept, told me this was the rumour at work last week
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
So what happens if China sells all its US bonds? The US has already sold them, so I can't see what effect it will have. Presumably there will be some effect on attempts to finance future debt with bonds - increased interest rates?
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
So what happens if China sells all its US bonds? The US has already sold them, so I can't see what effect it will have. Presumably there will be some effect on attempts to finance future debt with bonds - increased interest rates?
The market would collapse, pushing yields through the roof.
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
There is a theory that since the US has to refinance trillions in Government debt soon, devaluing the US economy is a cunning plan...
One of the school Dads, who works for a bank in the Futures dept, told me this was the rumour at work last week
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
So what happens if China sells all its US bonds? The US has already sold them, so I can't see what effect it will have. Presumably there will be some effect on attempts to finance future debt with bonds - increased interest rates?
The price will drop like a stone if China floods the market with US bonds it holds.
The yield will rise in proportion (ie the effective interest rate).
"Plastic surgeon guilty of trying to kill colleague
Jonathan Peter Brooks "hated" Graeme Perks, a court in Loughborough heard, due to the proceedings, which had begun three days before the stabbing on 14 January 2021. Brooks went to Mr Perks's home in Halam, Nottinghamshire, in the early hours and broke in armed with a crowbar, cans of petrol, matches and a knife.
Brooks was convicted of two counts of attempted murder, one of attempted arson with intent to endanger life and one count of possession of a bladed article. He is due to be sentenced on 3 June.
It can now be reported that Brooks was "voluntarily absent" from the trial, because he was on hunger strike.
He also sacked his lawyers before the trial and was unrepresented in the case."
After a second unvaccinated child dies of measles as a result of the ongoing outbreak of the disease in Texas, Health Secretary RFK Jr syas: "The most effective way to prevent the spread of measles is the MMR vaccine."
Anti-vaccine influencers are disappointed and angry with Health Secretary RFK Jr and are trying to find out "what's happened to him" after he recommended the MMR vaccine to tackle the ongoing measles outbreak.
They're wondering if big pharma or the Clintons "have got him".
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
Can someone ask David what he thinks stripping Trump of the power would do? The damage is already done and reversing things isn’t going to remove the business issues
TBF, since you raise the issue, the question is not: Is Gauke's plan perfect and the finished article in every detail? but: Have you got a better one?
I think the military should conduct a coup against this USA administration to enable a return to constitutionalism and the rule of law, and I believe they have abundant justification for doing so already as governments who don't obey their own laws and courts (eg the El Salvador cases) have rejected their own legitimacy; but I am not able to suggest there are no possible downsides.
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
I just think it doesn’t help anybody to pronounce Trump as mad. His policies, sure.
Even then, there is a logic of sorts behind what we are experiencing, per Bessent on Tucker Carlson.
I think this arguably qualifies as "raving" ?
"Yesterday, China issued Retaliatory Tariffs of 34%, on top of their already record setting Tariffs, Non-Monetary Tariffs, Illegal Subsidization of companies, and massive long term Currency Manipulation, despite my warning that any country that Retaliates against the U.S. by issuing additional Tariffs, above and beyond their already existing long term Tariff abuse of our Nation, will be immediately met with new and substantially higher Tariffs, over and above those initially set. Therefore, if China does not withdraw its 34% increase above their already long term trading abuses by tomorrow, April 8th, 2025, the United States will impose ADDITIONAL Tariffs on China of 50%, effective April 9th. Additionally, all talks with China concerning their requested meetings with us will be terminated! Negotiations with other countries, which have also requested meetings, will begin taking place immediately. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"
And Bessent is beginning to sound as though he's away with the fairies.
I'm starting to think that he wants Congress to take away his power to set tariffs.
He realises that this can't continue, but his ego won't allow him to back down.
He wants someone else to stop him, because he is incapable to stopping himself.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
So what happens if China sells all its US bonds? The US has already sold them, so I can't see what effect it will have. Presumably there will be some effect on attempts to finance future debt with bonds - increased interest rates?
The price will drop like a stone if China floods the market with US bonds it holds.
The yield will rise in proportion (ie the effective interest rate).
Remain calm everyone. This is my video of the Almaty Opera House just now
The only negative is that about an hour before this I got utterly drenched in the fiercest storm in history. The nearby Tien Shan mountains cause insane weather
Also: food in Kazakhstan is BAD. It’s so bad even the Georgian food is bad
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
So what happens if China sells all its US bonds? The US has already sold them, so I can't see what effect it will have. Presumably there will be some effect on attempts to finance future debt with bonds - increased interest rates?
China doesn’t need to sell its bonds, remember the US has to refinance a lot of them. So it can simply wait for the ones it has to expire and refuse to bid on the new ones. Which would make supply of bonds greater than demand so increasing interest rates while China has some cash it can pull back home or invest elsewhere
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
China isn’t going to back down - I wonder when they start to sell their US treasury bonds
Selling US bonds is the problem to which Trump has no answer. Japan has already started. China would be an order of magnitude different though.
So what happens if China sells all its US bonds? The US has already sold them, so I can't see what effect it will have. Presumably there will be some effect on attempts to finance future debt with bonds - increased interest rates?
China doesn’t need to sell its bonds, remember the US has to refinance a lot of them. So it can simply wait for the ones it has to expire and refuse to bid on the new ones. Which would make supply of bonds greater than demand so increasing interest rates while China has some cash it can pull back home or invest elsewhere
Congress just voted to renew the Trump tax cut, and lift the debt ceiling by the odd $5trillion. I'm sure this will go well.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
In that case the judgment falls on those around him who are allowing all this to happen, supporting him and cheering him on. This would include GOP's in Congress, and loads of others.
Remain calm everyone. This is my video of the Almaty Opera House just now
The only negative is that about an hour before this I got utterly drenched in the fiercest storm in history. The nearby Tien Shan mountains cause insane weather
Also: food in Kazakhstan is BAD. It’s so bad even the Georgian food is bad
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
Can someone ask David what he thinks stripping Trump of the power would do? The damage is already done and reversing things isn’t going to remove the business issues
TBF, since you raise the issue, the question is not: Is Gauke's plan perfect and the finished article in every detail? but: Have you got a better one?
I think the military should conduct a coup against this USA administration to enable a return to constitutionalism and the rule of law, and I believe they have abundant justification for doing so already as governments who don't obey their own laws and courts (eg the El Salvador cases) have rejected their own legitimacy; but I am not able to suggest there are no possible downsides.
They just need to read the declaration of Independence
"Plastic surgeon guilty of trying to kill colleague
Jonathan Peter Brooks "hated" Graeme Perks, a court in Loughborough heard, due to the proceedings, which had begun three days before the stabbing on 14 January 2021. Brooks went to Mr Perks's home in Halam, Nottinghamshire, in the early hours and broke in armed with a crowbar, cans of petrol, matches and a knife.
Brooks was convicted of two counts of attempted murder, one of attempted arson with intent to endanger life and one count of possession of a bladed article. He is due to be sentenced on 3 June.
It can now be reported that Brooks was "voluntarily absent" from the trial, because he was on hunger strike.
He also sacked his lawyers before the trial and was unrepresented in the case."
Remain calm everyone. This is my video of the Almaty Opera House just now
The only negative is that about an hour before this I got utterly drenched in the fiercest storm in history. The nearby Tien Shan mountains cause insane weather
Also: food in Kazakhstan is BAD. It’s so bad even the Georgian food is bad
Decent gin and tonics however
Friend of mine, sadly now no longer with us, was honoured shortly before his death by the Kazakstan government for services to education for the elderly. Although he spelled it Qazakstan.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
It's not unreasonable to assume though that when they voted for him, they expected him to act rationally.
At what point is the implicit pact with the electorate null and void?
Understandably, the thread header seems to have been largely ignored in the thread itself, with Trump continuing to stand astride the discourse. I don't think the government is doing much wrong in its response to the chaos, with a measured, 'wait and see' approach largely sensible.
One thing Labour/the government should be doing while it's waiting however is bring in the big guns to do whatever it takes to settle the Birmingham bin strikes. Other parties will exploit the Birmingham chaos ruthlessly in the run-up to May elections, regardless of the location of those elections. It needs sorting, quickly.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
Being up against first Biden with his decline and then Harris with her ineptitude probably flattered him a little.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
It's not unreasonable to assume though that when they voted for him, they expected him to act rationally.
At what point is the implicit pact with the electorate null and void?
Hes acting just like he always has done..stupid decisions masked by braggadico and bullshit.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IdiotPlot Originated by SF author James Blish and popularized by film critic Roger Ebert during his review of the remake of Narrow Margin, this trope is a term for a Plot that hangs together only because the main characters behave like idiots. A single intelligent move or question by any of the characters, and all problems would be resolved. It's not so bad if the characters are supposed to be acting like idiots, but it's very bad if the Idiot Plot depends on intelligent characters picking up the Idiot Ball for the plot to work.
Even worse than that is the "Second-Order Idiot Plot", in which the plot can only function if the world population suddenly loses about 50 IQ points...
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
It's not unreasonable to assume though that when they voted for him, they expected him to act rationally.
At what point is the implicit pact with the electorate null and void?
Donald Trump doubled down on his promise to levy tariffs on all imports in a bid to boost American manufacturing, a proposal that economists say would probably mean higher prices for consumers while angering US allies.
“To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariffs’,” Trump said in an often-combative conversation with John Micklethwait, editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News, at the Economic Club of Chicago on Tuesday. “It’s my favorite word.”
Trump was grilled on the potential impacts of tariffs, and often dodged questions about the tangible impacts of the levies on inflation and geopolitics. Trump is proposing an at least 10% blanket tariff on all imports, with tariffs as high as 60% on goods from China.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
It's not unreasonable to assume though that when they voted for him, they expected him to act rationally.
At what point is the implicit pact with the electorate null and void?
He is doing what he said he'd do.
If the people expected Trump to act rationally then they've not been watching him the last ten years, and particularly the last four, since he lost in 2020.
As an aside, how do we expect the World Cup to go ?
With or without a massive boycott ?
Given we didn’t boycott Qatar over LGB issue or some other shit, aren’t they daggers drawn with the Saudi’s and Iran’s buddies, it’s unlikely we will boycott this one.
I’m sure the pundits who hate Trumps America will put such mundanities aside and go anyway for the payday. As happened with Qatar.
I found this in the Guardian Police in the Brazilian state of São Paulo have uncovered that a judge spent 23 years working under a false identity – and a distinctly British one.
Born José Eduardo Franco dos Reis – a name fairly typical in a country once colonised by Portugal – he entered law school and served for over two decades as a judge using the false name Edward Albert Lancelot Dodd Canterbury Caterham Wickfield.
He's vanished, apparently. Can't be found under either identity.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
It's not unreasonable to assume though that when they voted for him, they expected him to act rationally.
At what point is the implicit pact with the electorate null and void?
He is doing what he said he'd do.
He's not though
He said the economy would be great if he was elected. He didn't say he would crash it
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
Of course he shouldn't have stood and shouldn't have been elected, but still he is not well and it's not really fair to judge him.
President Trump would veto a bill introduced by Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that would limit the president's authority to unilaterally impose tariffs, according to a White House statement seen by Axios.
Why it matters: In the midst of a potential trade war, Trump wants to ensure that the president retains full authority to tariff products entering America.
"If passed, this bill would dangerously hamper the President's authority and duty to determine our foreign policy and protect our national security," according to a statement of administration policy that was sent to congressional offices today. "If S. 1272 were presented to the President, he would veto the bill."
If I've understood it right, most of Trump's tariffs have been set at a level which is the same as tariffs in the opposite direction. Why is that such a bad thing? Isn't it slightly odd that that wasn't already the situation beforehand.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
In that case the judgment falls on those around him who are allowing all this to happen, supporting him and cheering him on. This would include GOP's in Congress, and loads of others.
Of course his Republican supporters are contemptible.
If I've understood it right, most of Trump's tariffs have been set at a level which is the same as tariffs in the opposite direction. Why is that such a bad thing? Isn't it slightly odd that that wasn't already the situation beforehand.
That's absolutely not what happened.
The tariff rate was set based on balance of trade. Existing tariffs, if they existed at all, were not used in the calculations
Lee Anderson laying into Reform when still a Conservative. Not one I have heard before.
LEAKED AUDIO OF LEE ANDERSON MERCILESSLY CRITICISING REFORM UK
"We are not taping this are we?"
The audio from November 2023 involves Lee claiming:
- Reform offered him A LOT of money to join💰 - A vote for Reform is a vote for Labour 🔴 - All Reform want is PR, they don't care about this country at all
As an aside, how do we expect the World Cup to go ?
With or without a massive boycott ?
Given we didn’t boycott Qatar over LGB issue or some other shit, aren’t they daggers drawn with the Saudi’s and Iran’s buddies, it’s unlikely we will boycott this one.
I’m sure the pundits who hate Trumps America will put such mundanities aside and go anyway for the payday. As happened with Qatar.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
Of course he shouldn't have stood and shouldn't have been elected, but still he is not well and it's not really fair to judge him.
I suspect that is the line his defence attorney will take when the time comes.
President Trump would veto a bill introduced by Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that would limit the president's authority to unilaterally impose tariffs, according to a White House statement seen by Axios.
Why it matters: In the midst of a potential trade war, Trump wants to ensure that the president retains full authority to tariff products entering America.
"If passed, this bill would dangerously hamper the President's authority and duty to determine our foreign policy and protect our national security," according to a statement of administration policy that was sent to congressional offices today. "If S. 1272 were presented to the President, he would veto the bill."
As far as I understand, the president doesn't have any authority over tariffs at all. He's had to invoke an emergency powers act to impose these tariffs. That's the basis of the legal action against the tariffs. Or at least one of the bases.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
Do you not think that a plain refusal to abide by the rule of law (eg Garcia and the El Salvador cases) delegitimises all the rest? Is there not an implied or explicit term in the deal that the POTUS acts within the constitution and the law?
That's not to defend those who voted for him. They knew or should have known what he might do, though I suspect he has surprised on the downside.
I think Trump's government has delegitimised itself, and is a proper target for a constitutionalist military rapid unscheduled disassembly.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
President Trump would veto a bill introduced by Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that would limit the president's authority to unilaterally impose tariffs, according to a White House statement seen by Axios.
Why it matters: In the midst of a potential trade war, Trump wants to ensure that the president retains full authority to tariff products entering America.
"If passed, this bill would dangerously hamper the President's authority and duty to determine our foreign policy and protect our national security," according to a statement of administration policy that was sent to congressional offices today. "If S. 1272 were presented to the President, he would veto the bill."
As far as I understand, the president doesn't have any authority over tariffs at all. He's had to invoke an emergency powers act to impose these tariffs. That's the basis of the legal action against the tariffs. Or at least one of the bases.
Congress voted to basically rubber stamp that for 12 months. So actually he now does.
It would take another vote for them to reassert their constitutional power over the matter. Which Trump could use a presidential veto on.
Isn't it the case with Trump's action here, as well as the Brexit vote in 2016, that the majority of not that well off people prefer protectionism to the free market, and that clashes with the political orthodoxy to such an extent that most politicians, and people interested in politics, think it absolutely insane?
Most poor Americans aren't long of shares, just as most poor British people had no hope of ever retiring to the EU, so the perceived downsides don't really bother them.
Quite bizarrely I was chatting with an uber driver on Saturday night, who had just moved from Scunthorpe to Tilbury; he was originally from Bangladesh I think, and was telling me how the Chinese owner of the Steelworks pulling out was going to ruin the town. I compared it to the mines closing in the 80s. Sometimes it is probably better for governments to prop up industries, if not doing so puts people on benefits and destroys communities. I think Tucker Carlson made a similar point about keeping people in driving jobs even if it were cheaper to have driverless cars
If I've understood it right, most of Trump's tariffs have been set at a level which is the same as tariffs in the opposite direction. Why is that such a bad thing? Isn't it slightly odd that that wasn't already the situation beforehand.
That's absolutely not what happened.
The tariff rate was set based on balance of trade. Existing tariffs, if they existed at all, were not used in the calculations
Nope the tariff rates were set based on balance of trade for physical goods. Which means that Britain did very well out of it as our 30% trade deficit with the US comes from us being very good at consultancy and not so good at making things where our balance of trade is roughly even.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
Do you not think that a plain refusal to abide by the rule of law (eg Garcia and the El Salvador cases) delegitimises all the rest? Is there not an implied or explicit term in the deal that the POTUS acts within the constitution and the law?
That's not to defend those who voted for him. They knew or should have known what he might do, though I suspect he has surprised on the downside.
I think Trump's government has delegitimised itself, and is a proper target for a constitutionalist military rapid unscheduled disassembly.
You seem to be suggesting that the US descends into a full blown civil war !!!!!!
If I've understood it right, most of Trump's tariffs have been set at a level which is the same as tariffs in the opposite direction. Why is that such a bad thing? Isn't it slightly odd that that wasn't already the situation beforehand.
That was what was planned. Reportedly the administration spent weeks preparing the details, and Trump changed his mind the night before the announcement.
Isn't it the case with Trump's action here, as well as the Brexit vote in 2016, that the majority of not that well off people prefer protectionism to the free market, and that clashes with the political orthodoxy to such an extent that most politicians, and people interested in politics, think it absolutely insane?
Most poor Americans aren't long of shares, just as most poor British people had no hope of ever retiring to the EU, so the perceived downsides don't really bother them.
Quite bizarrely I was chatting with an uber driver on Saturday night, who had just moved from Scunthorpe to Tilbury; he was originally from Bangladesh I think, and was telling me how the Chinese owner of the Steelworks pulling out was going to ruin the town. I compared it to the mines closing in the 80s. Sometimes it is probably better for governments to prop up industries, if not doing so puts people on benefits and destroys communities. I think Tucker Carlson made a similar point about keeping people in driving jobs even if it were cheaper to have driverless cars
Scunthorpe is different to even the mines - we need a certain amount of steel manufacturing going forward and the last place standing is Scunthorpe - I don't think we have any choice other than trying to keep it open..
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
China has been on a decades long mission to undermine our economy as well as America's. To do this they have employed every tactic from sharp business practice to outright theft. It is high time they were faced down, and I am glad that someone has come in with the balls to do it.
The UK actually trades very little with China, but as Malmesbury was explaining, our tariff relationship is completely unbalanced due to the Foreign Office's fear of 'upsetting' them. Well, bugger them.
Laurence D. Fink, chief executive of the giant asset manager BlackRock: Most Americans don’t understand the extent of how the tariffs will affect them.
Isn't it the case with Trump's action here, as well as the Brexit vote in 2016, that the majority of not that well off people prefer protectionism to the free market, and that clashes with the political orthodoxy to such an extent that most politicians, and people interested in politics, think it absolutely insane?
Most poor Americans aren't long of shares, just as most poor British people had no hope of ever retiring to the EU, so the perceived downsides don't really bother them.
Quite bizarrely I was chatting with an uber driver on Saturday night, who had just moved from Scunthorpe to Tilbury; he was originally from Bangladesh I think, and was telling me how the Chinese owner of the Steelworks pulling out was going to ruin the town. I compared it to the mines closing in the 80s. Sometimes it is probably better for governments to prop up industries, if not doing so puts people on benefits and destroys communities. I think Tucker Carlson made a similar point about keeping people in driving jobs even if it were cheaper to have driverless cars
Scunthorpe is different to even the mines - we need a certain amount of steel manufacturing going forward and the last place standing is Scunthorpe - I don't think we have any choice other than trying to keep it open..
We are supposed to be rearming. It would be utter madness to allow the last steel production plant to close.
If I've understood it right, most of Trump's tariffs have been set at a level which is the same as tariffs in the opposite direction. Why is that such a bad thing? Isn't it slightly odd that that wasn't already the situation beforehand.
It is done on trade gap not tariffs.
Take Madagascar. It produces loads of vanilla*, enough for 80% of the world. The USA buys its share, the Madagascans don't have the wealth to buy the same amount of US goods back. So vanilla exported to the USA gets hit with massive tariffs. There is nothing Madagascar can offer in return, so US consumers will have to pay more for vanilla.
Isn't it the case with Trump's action here, as well as the Brexit vote in 2016, that the majority of not that well off people prefer protectionism to the free market, and that clashes with the political orthodoxy to such an extent that most politicians, and people interested in politics, think it absolutely insane?
Most poor Americans aren't long of shares, just as most poor British people had no hope of ever retiring to the EU, so the perceived downsides don't really bother them.
Quite bizarrely I was chatting with an uber driver on Saturday night, who had just moved from Scunthorpe to Tilbury; he was originally from Bangladesh I think, and was telling me how the Chinese owner of the Steelworks pulling out was going to ruin the town. I compared it to the mines closing in the 80s. Sometimes it is probably better for governments to prop up industries, if not doing so puts people on benefits and destroys communities. I think Tucker Carlson made a similar point about keeping people in driving jobs even if it were cheaper to have driverless cars
Scunthorpe is different to even the mines - we need a certain amount of steel manufacturing going forward and the last place standing is Scunthorpe - I don't think we have any choice other than trying to keep it open..
We are supposed to be rearming. It would be utter madness to allow the last steel production plant to close.
I've 'liked' this, although I suppose if one is Chinese......
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
China has been on a decades long mission to undermine our economy as well as America's. To do this they have employed every tactic from sharp business practice to outright theft. It is high time they were faced down, and I am glad that someone has come in with the balls to do it.
You're joking.
If the Chinese are trying to undermine the West, they must be down on their knees thanking Heaven for Trump.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
Do you not think that a plain refusal to abide by the rule of law (eg Garcia and the El Salvador cases) delegitimises all the rest? Is there not an implied or explicit term in the deal that the POTUS acts within the constitution and the law?
That's not to defend those who voted for him. They knew or should have known what he might do, though I suspect he has surprised on the downside.
I think Trump's government has delegitimised itself, and is a proper target for a constitutionalist military rapid unscheduled disassembly.
You seem to be suggesting that the US descends into a full blown civil war !!!!!!
It could already be described as in a cold civil war perhaps.
I loathe the man based on his attitudes and actions in the past, but seriously he is not well mentally, and it's not really fair to judge him on what he is doing now.
He was elected five months ago and sworn in less than three months ago. If he wasn't well - and he's not deteriorated that far that fast - he shouldn't have stood, or shouldn't have been elected. But he did and he was. The man in office is the man the American people chose to govern them, character, attitude and all.
It's not unreasonable to assume though that when they voted for him, they expected him to act rationally.
At what point is the implicit pact with the electorate null and void?
Wrong. He is doing what he said. His supporters are happy..for now.
Anyone who voted for Trump owns this. I’m sorry, but they do. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. The man was clearly on a grievance-fuelled power trip with little care for who he hurt along the way.
Isn't it the case with Trump's action here, as well as the Brexit vote in 2016, that the majority of not that well off people prefer protectionism to the free market, and that clashes with the political orthodoxy to such an extent that most politicians, and people interested in politics, think it absolutely insane?
Most poor Americans aren't long of shares, just as most poor British people had no hope of ever retiring to the EU, so the perceived downsides don't really bother them.
Quite bizarrely I was chatting with an uber driver on Saturday night, who had just moved from Scunthorpe to Tilbury; he was originally from Bangladesh I think, and was telling me how the Chinese owner of the Steelworks pulling out was going to ruin the town. I compared it to the mines closing in the 80s. Sometimes it is probably better for governments to prop up industries, if not doing so puts people on benefits and destroys communities. I think Tucker Carlson made a similar point about keeping people in driving jobs even if it were cheaper to have driverless cars
The problem is going for protectionist solutions (Brexit, Trump) often ends up hurting the working class more than the liberal, middle class in the end (e.g. lawyers, bankers etc. have been less impacted by Brexit than SMEs who export products to the EU).
President Trump would veto a bill introduced by Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that would limit the president's authority to unilaterally impose tariffs, according to a White House statement seen by Axios.
Why it matters: In the midst of a potential trade war, Trump wants to ensure that the president retains full authority to tariff products entering America.
"If passed, this bill would dangerously hamper the President's authority and duty to determine our foreign policy and protect our national security," according to a statement of administration policy that was sent to congressional offices today. "If S. 1272 were presented to the President, he would veto the bill."
As far as I understand, the president doesn't have any authority over tariffs at all. He's had to invoke an emergency powers act to impose these tariffs. That's the basis of the legal action against the tariffs. Or at least one of the bases.
Congress voted to basically rubber stamp that for 12 months. So actually he now does.
It would take another vote for them to reassert their constitutional power over the matter. Which Trump could use a presidential veto on.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
China has been on a decades long mission to undermine our economy as well as America's. To do this they have employed every tactic from sharp business practice to outright theft. It is high time they were faced down, and I am glad that someone has come in with the balls to do it.
The UK actually trades very little with China, but as Malmesbury was explaining, our tariff relationship is completely unbalanced due to the Foreign Office's fear of 'upsetting' them. Well, bugger them.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
China has been on a decades long mission to undermine our economy as well as America's. To do this they have employed every tactic from sharp business practice to outright theft. It is high time they were faced down, and I am glad that someone has come in with the balls to do it.
The UK actually trades very little with China, but as Malmesbury was explaining, our tariff relationship is completely unbalanced due to the Foreign Office's fear of 'upsetting' them. Well, bugger them.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
China has been on a decades long mission to undermine our economy as well as America's. To do this they have employed every tactic from sharp business practice to outright theft. It is high time they were faced down, and I am glad that someone has come in with the balls to do it.
The UK actually trades very little with China, but as Malmesbury was explaining, our tariff relationship is completely unbalanced due to the Foreign Office's fear of 'upsetting' them. Well, bugger them.
Some evocative words. Surely though China is simply doing what's best for its people. (Perhaps perceived through an odd glass)
There are countless examples of China not really playing by the rules, but many where they have.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
China has been on a decades long mission to undermine our economy as well as America's. To do this they have employed every tactic from sharp business practice to outright theft. It is high time they were faced down, and I am glad that someone has come in with the balls to do it.
The UK actually trades very little with China, but as Malmesbury was explaining, our tariff relationship is completely unbalanced due to the Foreign Office's fear of 'upsetting' them. Well, bugger them.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
China has been on a decades long mission to undermine our economy as well as America's. To do this they have employed every tactic from sharp business practice to outright theft. It is high time they were faced down, and I am glad that someone has come in with the balls to do it.
The UK actually trades very little with China, but as Malmesbury was explaining, our tariff relationship is completely unbalanced due to the Foreign Office's fear of 'upsetting' them. Well, bugger them.
So Trumps allowed to hammer China but they’re not allowed to respond . If the Chinese don’t back down or some agreement is reached then the markets are going to completely implode .
I never thought I would be on the side of China, but I hope they fuck Trumpistan until the blood runs out of Trump’s arse.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thank goodness there is one country willing & able to face the bully down. I'm cheering them on (for the time being at least).
China has been on a decades long mission to undermine our economy as well as America's. To do this they have employed every tactic from sharp business practice to outright theft. It is high time they were faced down, and I am glad that someone has come in with the balls to do it.
The UK actually trades very little with China, but as Malmesbury was explaining, our tariff relationship is completely unbalanced due to the Foreign Office's fear of 'upsetting' them. Well, bugger them.
Some evocative words. Surely though China is simply doing what's best for its people. (Perhaps perceived through an odd glass)
There are countless examples of China not really playing by the rules, but many where they have.
China may or may not be doing what is best for its own people (though perhaps the advancement of its own state power would be a more accurate phrase), but it is clearly not doing what is best for our people, or for Americans.
Therefore, whilst its own aggressive posture may be understandable, our pathetic, servile, demoralised acquiescence is not.
"One of the Conservatives’ biggest donors has stopped funding the party in a move insiders believe will result in the closure of its northern HQ, the Guardian can reveal.
Richard Harpin, the founder of home repairs business HomeServe, has ended his donations to the Conservatives, according to two Tory sources."
Comments
Congress needs to step in and strip the President of his powers over tariffs. Will require political courage from Republicans but when your leader is intent on a mad policy that will have a devastating impact on the prosperity of your people you have to do what you have to do.
Twenty one of us did it in 2019 over Brexit and I don’t think any of us regret it.
https://x.com/DavidGauke/status/1909270021852782776
The U.S. has essentially declared a kind of war on China, and the C-in-C is in control of overall strategy.
Jonathan Peter Brooks "hated" Graeme Perks, a court in Loughborough heard, due to the proceedings, which had begun three days before the stabbing on 14 January 2021. Brooks went to Mr Perks's home in Halam, Nottinghamshire, in the early hours and broke in armed with a crowbar, cans of petrol, matches and a knife.
Brooks was convicted of two counts of attempted murder, one of attempted arson with intent to endanger life and one count of possession of a bladed article. He is due to be sentenced on 3 June.
It can now be reported that Brooks was "voluntarily absent" from the trial, because he was on hunger strike.
He also sacked his lawyers before the trial and was unrepresented in the case."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly12gxxd1qo
Trump refuses to introduce Senators Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla.
No man has ever been this small.
https://bsky.app/profile/newseye.bsky.social/post/3lmacrthpo22e
There'll be a lot more, as the market carnage continues.
stocks briefly rallied on Monday after CNBC ran a Citigroup ad featuring a purple haired lesbian and investors speculated that Woke is being restored
https://bsky.app/profile/lauren.rotatingsandwiches.com/post/3lmac7gothk2r
Pronouns and unisex bathrooms were the only thing keeping Wall Street afloat
The yield will rise in proportion (ie the effective interest rate).
Makes refinancing US deficit harder.
@Shayan86
After a second unvaccinated child dies of measles as a result of the ongoing outbreak of the disease in Texas, Health Secretary RFK Jr syas: "The most effective way to prevent the spread of measles is the MMR vaccine."
https://x.com/Shayan86/status/1909061876366917702
Good news, right?
@Shayan86
Anti-vaccine influencers are disappointed and angry with Health Secretary RFK Jr and are trying to find out "what's happened to him" after he recommended the MMR vaccine to tackle the ongoing measles outbreak.
They're wondering if big pharma or the Clintons "have got him".
https://x.com/Shayan86/status/1909254701478015413
I think the military should conduct a coup against this USA administration to enable a return to constitutionalism and the rule of law, and I believe they have abundant justification for doing so already as governments who don't obey their own laws and courts (eg the El Salvador cases) have rejected their own legitimacy; but I am not able to suggest there are no possible downsides.
He realises that this can't continue, but his ego won't allow him to back down.
He wants someone else to stop him, because he is incapable to stopping himself.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/apr/07/southend-united-evan-johnston-national-league-wrong-boat-sutton
The only negative is that about an hour before this I got utterly drenched in the fiercest storm in history. The nearby Tien Shan mountains cause insane weather
Also: food in Kazakhstan is BAD. It’s so bad even the Georgian food is bad
Decent gin and tonics however
I'm sure this will go well.
https://x.com/TheOmniLiberal/status/1908270028073341379
Although he spelled it Qazakstan.
At what point is the implicit pact with the electorate null and void?
Not that, even allowing the Heard Islands to enter, would I be likely to play. Ever!
One thing Labour/the government should be doing while it's waiting however is bring in the big guns to do whatever it takes to settle the Birmingham bin strikes. Other parties will exploit the Birmingham chaos ruthlessly in the run-up to May elections, regardless of the location of those elections. It needs sorting, quickly.
Originated by SF author James Blish and popularized by film critic Roger Ebert during his review of the remake of Narrow Margin, this trope is a term for a Plot that hangs together only because the main characters behave like idiots. A single intelligent move or question by any of the characters, and all problems would be resolved. It's not so bad if the characters are supposed to be acting like idiots, but it's very bad if the Idiot Plot depends on intelligent characters picking up the Idiot Ball for the plot to work.
Even worse than that is the "Second-Order Idiot Plot", in which the plot can only function if the world population suddenly loses about 50 IQ points...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/15/trump-tariffs-price-hikes-warnings
Donald Trump doubled down on his promise to levy tariffs on all imports in a bid to boost American manufacturing, a proposal that economists say would probably mean higher prices for consumers while angering US allies.
“To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariffs’,” Trump said in an often-combative conversation with John Micklethwait, editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News, at the Economic Club of Chicago on Tuesday. “It’s my favorite word.”
Trump was grilled on the potential impacts of tariffs, and often dodged questions about the tangible impacts of the levies on inflation and geopolitics. Trump is proposing an at least 10% blanket tariff on all imports, with tariffs as high as 60% on goods from China.
If the people expected Trump to act rationally then they've not been watching him the last ten years, and particularly the last four, since he lost in 2020.
I’m sure the pundits who hate Trumps America will put such mundanities aside and go anyway for the payday. As happened with Qatar.
Police in the Brazilian state of São Paulo have uncovered that a judge spent 23 years working under a false identity – and a distinctly British one.
Born José Eduardo Franco dos Reis – a name fairly typical in a country once colonised by Portugal – he entered law school and served for over two decades as a judge using the false name Edward Albert Lancelot Dodd Canterbury Caterham Wickfield.
He's vanished, apparently. Can't be found under either identity.
He said the economy would be great if he was elected. He didn't say he would crash it
Why it matters: In the midst of a potential trade war, Trump wants to ensure that the president retains full authority to tariff products entering America.
"If passed, this bill would dangerously hamper the President's authority and duty to determine our foreign policy and protect our national security," according to a statement of administration policy that was sent to congressional offices today.
"If S. 1272 were presented to the President, he would veto the bill."
https://www.axios.com/2025/04/07/trump-veto-tariff-bill-grassley
The tariff rate was set based on balance of trade. Existing tariffs, if they existed at all, were not used in the calculations
LEAKED AUDIO OF LEE ANDERSON MERCILESSLY CRITICISING REFORM UK
"We are not taping this are we?"
The audio from November 2023 involves Lee claiming:
- Reform offered him A LOT of money to join💰
- A vote for Reform is a vote for Labour 🔴
- All Reform want is PR, they don't care about this country at all
Lee later went on to stand for Reform UK at the 2024 general election
https://x.com/Basil_TGMD/status/1908965133688394150
That's not to defend those who voted for him. They knew or should have known what he might do, though I suspect he has surprised on the downside.
I think Trump's government has delegitimised itself, and is a proper target for a constitutionalist military rapid unscheduled disassembly.
It would take another vote for them to reassert their constitutional power over the matter. Which Trump could use a presidential veto on.
That's what I mean by his GOP "enablers".
Most poor Americans aren't long of shares, just as most poor British people had no hope of ever retiring to the EU, so the perceived downsides don't really bother them.
Quite bizarrely I was chatting with an uber driver on Saturday night, who had just moved from Scunthorpe to Tilbury; he was originally from Bangladesh I think, and was telling me how the Chinese owner of the Steelworks pulling out was going to ruin the town. I compared it to the mines closing in the 80s. Sometimes it is probably better for governments to prop up industries, if not doing so puts people on benefits and destroys communities. I think Tucker Carlson made a similar point about keeping people in driving jobs even if it were cheaper to have driverless cars
Reportedly the administration spent weeks preparing the details, and Trump changed his mind the night before the announcement.
The UK actually trades very little with China, but as Malmesbury was explaining, our tariff relationship is completely unbalanced due to the Foreign Office's fear of 'upsetting' them. Well, bugger them.
They are soon gonna find out though.
Take Madagascar. It produces loads of vanilla*, enough for 80% of the world. The USA buys its share, the Madagascans don't have the wealth to buy the same amount of US goods back. So vanilla exported to the USA gets hit with massive tariffs. There is nothing Madagascar can offer in return, so US consumers will have to pay more for vanilla.
It makes no sense whatsoever.
* The spice not the web hosting platform....
If the Chinese are trying to undermine the West, they must be down on their knees thanking Heaven for Trump.
You really are quite unbelievably clueless.
Would serve to distract
There are countless examples of China not really playing by the rules, but many where they have.
It is classic Trump: how to we divert the TV shows onto something else?
Therefore, whilst its own aggressive posture may be understandable, our pathetic, servile, demoralised acquiescence is not.
Richard Harpin, the founder of home repairs business HomeServe, has ended his donations to the Conservatives, according to two Tory sources."
Guardian