Trump blasts 'dishonest interview' during contentious debate on tariffs
By David Spector
Published May 04, 2025
President Donald Trump and "Meet the Press" host Kristen Welker sparred over tariffs and the economy Sunday, with the president blasting the "dishonest interview" to the host's face.
"This is such a dishonest interview already. Prices are down on groceries. Prices are down for oil prices are down for oil. Energy prices are down at tremendous numbers for gasoline," Trump said when pressed on his tariff policies.
When pressed by Welker about rising costs on items such as tires and strollers, he dismissed price increases on such goods as "peanuts compared to energy," which the president claimed his policies have made cheaper. Gas prices hit their peak during Biden's sole term in office at an average of $5.06 per gallon in June 2022, the highest on record. The price of gas has steadily dropped since then, and the average national price of gas today is roughly $3.16 a gallon, according to AAA.
VANCE BREAKS KEY TIE AFTER SENATE FAILS TO REJECT TRUMP'S NATIONAL EMERGENCY ON TARIFFS
"Strollers are going up. What kind of a thing? I'm saying that gasoline is going down. Gasoline is thousands of times more important than a stroller or something," Trump said.
Trump made headlines during his cabinet meeting on Wednesday when he remarked that "maybe children will have two dolls instead of thirty dolls, and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more" as a result of his tariff policies. He denied the tariffs would result in empty store shelves, but did acknowledge that some Americans may need to cut down on their purchases.
"The don't need to have 250 pencils, they can have five… I'm basically saying we don't have to waste money on a trade deficit with China for things we don't need, for junk that we don't need."
LIBERATION DAY AND TRUMP TARIFFS ARE NOT THE END OF TRADE. IT'S ONLY THE BEGINNING
Trump announced sweeping reciprocal tariffs on virtually every country America does business with on April 2, on what he refers to as "Liberation Day," in addition to a 10% global tariff. The levies applied to friend and foe alike, with Vietnam being slapped with a 46% tariff and Israel receiving 17% tariffs on goods exported to the United States.
Trump swiftly reversed course a few days later in the face of a stock market nosedive and bond market worries, pausing the reciprocal tariffs. He maintained the 10% global tariff as well as a 145% tariff on Chinese goods, however. Mexico and Canada are facing separate 25% tariffs related to the fentanyl crisis.
Trump maintained that his tariffs would "make us rich" and that the country was already profiting from them. He said that Americans were already feeling economic relief due to declining mortgage rates and energy prices.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE
"Mortgage rates are going down, despite the fact that we have a stubborn fed… I can tell you that we're making a lot of money. We're doing great. Again, we're losing more than $5 billion a day, $5 billion a day. You don't talk about that. And right now we're going to be at a point very soon where we're making money every day," Trump said.
Trump shot down Welker's claim, saying that Wall Street insiders were worried about a recession, and said he has spoken to many on Wall Street who are saying that his tariffs will be a boon for the economy.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Print Close
URL
https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-blasts-dishonest-interview-during-contentious-debate-tariffs
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
8 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Letters: The Tribune Editorial Board is hypocritical in criticizing US Rep. Delia Ramirez
The Tribune Editorial Board sees no contradiction or hypocrisy, apparently, in its statement about words that matter. Its members decided to criticize U.S. Rep. Delia Ramirez, who represents Illinois' 3rd District, for her comment that she felt a strong affiliation with her family's native Guatemala by commenting, 'I'm a proud Guatemalan before I'm an American' ('Words matter when you're elected to represent America, congresswoman Ramirez,' Aug. 6). The editorial board writes: 'But Americans expect their leaders to confirm their belief in and allegiance to this country.' In these challenging and frustratingly difficult times, I often have to search to find pride in my own American birthright. Our authoritarian president continues his daily attacks on our democracy and has made astounding progress in deconstructing our government with the active assistance of Congress and the Supreme Court. Are there Tribune editorials about Donald Trump's authoritarianism that decry his words? Should I find myself in a discussion with any French, Canadian, British or other person born outside the U.S. about America's values, I would struggle to find the words to support our domestic agenda and the government's poor treatment of other nations with the administration's threats and bullying. What is the importance of words if editorial board members make their living through the use of words but don't see the overriding importance to speak out about the downfall of our democratic institutions? Does the Tribune Editorial Board honestly believe that words matter or is the editorial on Ramirez just clickbait?I am profoundly disappointed with the editorial on U.S. Rep. Delia Ramirez's speech to the Panamerican Congress. A responsible editorial staff would have published the original Spanish transcript as well as her English remarks and given its audience a fuller context. Instead, the editorial board jumped on the right-wing narrative clearly designed to outrage people. There are competing translations that support the interpretation that she meant to say she identified as American first. Has the editorial board even bothered to consult with Spanish speakers? With so many Spanish speakers in Chicagoland, it is incredible that the editorial board could botch a simple assignment. How is this contributing to the civil discourse that is severely stressed under this current regime?The editorial on U.S. Rep. Delia Ramirez takes out of context a statement in which Ramirez declares her pride in her ethnicity, twisting it to sound like she is unpatriotic. Does this editorial writer know of anyone of Irish or Mexican or Indian descent who is proud of their ethnic origin? I wonder if the Tribune writer spoke to Ramirez to ascertain what she said or look at her record as a U.S. representative. Her record is as patriotic as any and more courageous than most. She speaks truth to power, risking her political career.I can say that I'm a proud Italian before I'm an American since my father emigrated from Italy and I was born in America, but I would blemish the pride he exhibited as a U.S. citizen who assimilated in his adopted country. He had no formal education and always followed the direction offered by the local Democratic precinct captain who visited our home with instructions on pulling the lever at the polling machine to vote straight Democrat. Recently, Democratic U.S. Rep. Delia Ramirez of Illinois made a controversial comment in saying 'I'm a proud Guatemalan before I'm an American.' She was born in Chicago to immigrant parents and became a birthright citizen. I'm not attacking Ramirez, but her choice of words in the public domain casts doubt on her loyalty as a federal official taking an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Will she represent all Illinoisans?For the millionth time, the issue is not immigrants. The issue is unbridled immigration in which we don't know who is coming in. And then on top of that, our government now feels responsible to take care of these migrants when our federal, state and local governments are deeply in debt. , 'out of many, one,' is one our nation's mottos. Immigrants of the past assimilated to our American culture to become full Americans. Now we are ashamed of America and its culture, and we encourage our immigrants to be diverse. Not all assimilate. And that is a weakness. Our country is no longer united. There are very few things that we are united on. Congress is split down the middle. Our country is split down the middle. Our modern immigration policies encourage only more division, not on The Associated Press article 'Many Dems not happy with party' (in print Aug. 4), the Democratic Party is perceived as 'weak' and 'ineffective' at thwarting the growing power and influence of the current White House administration. Conversely, I would like to offer a different perspective and a blueprint for the Democratic Party. Protesting, holding rallies, conducting filibusters in the Senate or expressing unrelenting criticism of the current president is not a formula for sustained, future success. It further divides disillusioned Democratic voters while alienating moderates, independents and Republicans not enamored with the current administration. Instead, the Democratic Party needs to promote a political, economic and social platform that appeals to both its loyal core and disillusioned voters. The Democratic Party needs to focus on issues that unequivocally resonate with its base, such as a robust economy that prioritizes the middle class while providing aid and economic opportunities for the poor. Democrats need to reprioritize clean energy (solar and wind) while providing job training for coal miners and other workers whose jobs will eventually become obsolete. They need to focus on rebuilding and modernizing our nation's infrastructure and aggressively promote mass transportation to curtail traffic gridlock. They need to promote an objective and fair immigration policy that encourages immigrants to immigrate to America legally while humanely addressing immigrants in the country illegally. They need to promote a foreign policy that proactively reaches out to and works collaboratively with our allies in addressing unprovoked aggression. They need to embrace a trade policy based on laissez faire principles and eradicate punitive and erratically enacted tariffs. Most importantly, the Democratic Party needs to actively reach out to and listen to its constituents and disillusioned former supporters. The upcoming 2026 congressional elections are a golden opportunity for the Democratic Party to sway the current political climate toward an empathetic, kinder atmosphere. The American people are seeking solace and inspiration from its leaders, not pettiness and skullduggery. The time to act is now. The world is was with great interest and gratitude that I read Heidi Stevens' column 'President not owed quiet subservience' (Aug. 3). At a time when too many universities, law firms and politicians are rolling over and capitulating to this president's threats, it is a relief to see articles, such as Stevens', appearing in our local newspaper. But perhaps we are already witnessing a shift in attitude as President Donald Trump's actions become more and more dictatorial and erratic. Economists and others are voicing concerns over his blustering, threatening use of tariffs as a weapon in international affairs. A few Republican members of Congress have spoken out about his threats and denials regarding the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics employment report. Some law firms and universities are standing firm against intimidation. And, of course, there are the rallies and demonstrations where thousands of ordinary citizens are coming out in defense of democracy. I hope the 'quiet subservience' is actually coming to an end, because a Hungarian-style of government will not appeal to many Americans if it should come to pass.
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Advocates fear Trump's plans after directive for transparent college admission data
Some higher education advocates have long sought transparency in college admissions data, but President Trump's latest actions to bring that dream to reality comes with trepidation in how the administration will use the information. In a memorandum signed Thursday, the president moved to require universities to give the Department of Education more admissions data. Education Secretary Linda McMahon is then instructed to build it into a database easily accessible to parents and students. While the information could be eye-opening into how institutions are choosing students, it comes with a backdrop of fear the president will target universities that produce unfavorable data in his view. 'I'll say lots of folks in the space, researchers and think tanks alike, have wanted more transparency on the black box that is college admissions. So, I think that from that perspective, lots of folks would be interested in seeing this data. What I question with this administration is the intention around the collection of the data,' said Wil Del Pilar, senior vice president of EdTrust. McMahon has 120 days to expand the scope of reporting requirements, leaving universities with the options to submit or fight in the legal the system. The move was made over the administration's concern universities are using 'race proxies' such as diversity statements, to circumvent the 2023 Supreme Court ruling that stated race cannot be considered in college admissions. 'American students and taxpayers deserve confidence in the fairness and integrity of our Nation's institutions of higher education, including confidence that they are recruiting and training capable future doctors, engineers, scientists, and other critical workers vital to the next generations of American prosperity. Race-based admissions practices are not only unfair, but also threaten our national security and well-being,' the order reads. Universities that accept federal money are already required to share some data with the Education Department, such as enrollment numbers and graduation rates. However, admissions data has largely been kept under wraps for various reasons. One reason is due to the complexities of compiling the data into an accurate spreadsheet. College admissions offices consider not only GPA and test scores, but extracurricular activities and personal essays that are hard to quantify. Universities may also fear what the public will think regarding whom they do and do not admit. 'I think one of the things that people are going to see is the amount of legacy admissions that have been taking place for a long, long time, and those admissions are typically white people,' said Marybeth Gasman, executive director for Rutgers University's Center for Minority Serving Institutions. After the affirmative action ruling, attention turned to legacy admissions, the practice of admitting applicants with connections to alumni or wealthy donors. Experts argue this practice largely favors applicants who are rich and/or white. The practice has been decried along partisan lines, and some schools have voluntarily banned it. Schools could also receive flack if it is discovered they admit fewer Pell Grant recipients or other types of applicants compared to rival institutions. 'I think that — that information — institutions have guarded that because they don't want narratives around them being closed to access for certain populations of students due to increased numbers of denied students. They don't want that narrative out,' Pilar said. Whatever the outcome, advocates fear the Trump administration will use this as another avenue to strip schools of their funding. The president has collectively paused billions of dollars to universities for alleged antisemitism, diversity, equity and inclusion practices, and transgender athletes in women's sports. While the focus of the Trump administration is returning to 'merit-based' admissions — a concept the federal government made Columbia and Brown agree to in their deals to release federal funding — some say the administration's moves WILL? have the opposite effect. Timothy Welbeck, director of the Center of Anti-Racism at Temple University, said this memorandum doesn't address 'legacy. They don't do anything about whether your family has the ability to donate large amounts of money to your desired institution. But they go after some of these other measures that they say are discriminatory and ignore these, which is why I believe that merit isn't really the intended outcome of these conversations to begin with.' 'This particular fight around the numbers is seeking to give another line of argument to people who are arguing that post-secondary institutions are discriminating against white people. That's ultimately a claim that's implicit in some of these arguments, and what I would say to that is that the facts typically do not bear out,' he added.
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Miami-Dade is red, but Democrats aren't giving up on Florida
MIAMI — When Miami-Dade County helped elect President Trump in November, effectively taking on a conservative bent after nearly three decades of being solid blue, political operatives here had their worst fears realized: Florida was in fact a red state. The signs of a big political change in southern Florida had been seen for several cycles, including Gov. Ron DeSantis's (R) 2022 win, when he flipped the metropolitan county for the first time in more than 20 years. 'There is nothing more maddening to me than the self-inflicted wounds in Dade,' said Democratic strategist Steve Schale, who is based in Florida and ran former President Obama's 2008 operation in the state. 'Too many in my party — particularly those outside of Florida — thought the Obama '12 and [Hillary] Clinton '16 numbers in Miami were signs the county had become a progressive bastion.' 'But we are talking about a place where most people came here to escape socialist authoritarian governments and crime — so when people on the extreme left tried to justify things like 'Democratic socialism,' imagine how that sounds to the ears of a family that left everything behind — or a family who came here seeking safety to hear things like 'defund the police,' Schale added. Another longtime Democratic operative in Florida said losing Miami-Dade was a 'gut punch' for Democrats. 'We could see the trainwreck coming before the crash happened, but that was a particularly painful moment for any Democrat who cares about this state,' the operative said. Florida Democrats see their problems in Florida as the result of years of neglect following Obama's win in 2012. But they say they haven't given up on trying to move the Sunshine State back into purple state territory. In fact, they say, they're doubling down on their efforts. 'We're still rebuilding, but we've had a lot of success,' said Nikki Fried, chair of the Florida Democratic Party, in an interview with The Hill. Fried pointed to an 8 percent increase in Democratic voter turnout from the 2020 election to the 2024 election. She also credited work the state party has done to generate gains on school boards and county commissions. Miami-Dade Mayor Daniella Levine Cava (D) was also able to win reelection by a wide margin even as the county went in the other direction in 2024. Still, Fried acknowledged there is 'a lot of work to be done and resources we've brought into the state to do that work.' Democrats' voter affiliation in Florida has declined rapidly since 2020. Republican affiliation in the state has also increased, surpassing Democrats by a hair in 2021 and booming to almost 1,500,000 more as of late June. Political observers attribute the drastic changes in party affiliation to a number of factors, including a massive migration of Republican voters to the state during the COVID-19 pandemic. President Trump — who lives in Palm Beach — also has attracted top Republican operatives and donors during his rise to party stardom. Some Democrats don't seem convinced that there's been much movement in their direction at all. 'On the organizational, operational side of things, I don't think things are any better or any worse,' Schale said. He added there's 'still a lot of donor skepticism and donor fatigue' about the most recent cycles in the state. But Democrats can move incrementally with key wins in the next cycle, Schale said. 'Success in 2026 is showing gains and showing improvement, and if you do that you can make the case to donors that there's a trajectory you can invest in,' he said, pointing to David Jolly, the gubernatorial candidate and former Republican congressman who switched parties, and Jose Javier Rodriguez, a former state senator who is a Democratic candidate for Florida attorney general. 'You build back by fixing what you can fix and getting success,' he added, referencing work that Democrats can do to improve their standing with Hispanic voters, among other efforts. And as Trump has stumbled recently in polls and messaging, strategists say now is a good time for Democrats to pounce and try to regain momentum in the state. 'If [Republicans] continue to push for these policies that now have Trump at the lowest approval rating of any president at this point in his second term, I think it would create an environment where, for the first time in decades, Florida voters may say, 'Look, it's time for a change, and the only change now is to give the Democrats a shot at governing,' said Democratic strategist Fernand Amandi, who is based in Miami. He added that the desire for change in Florida is exacerbated by an 'unprecedented affordability crisis that is the sole responsibility' of Republicans, who have had 'total control of state government for almost three decades.' Despite the ripe moment, strategists say it will still be a heavy lift for Democrats to recapture voters — at least right away. 'I live here. I have to be an optimist … but I'm also a realist. It's f‑‑‑ing hard, and there's a lot of work to be done,' Schale said. But the efforts are underway, including the Florida Democratic Party's Pendulum initiative, a year-round organizing program that Fried said has already contributed to significant gains in two deep-red congressional districts where there were off-cycle elections. Fried also pointed to the party's Front Porch Swing initiative, which aims to listen to voters in rural Florida and meet them where they are. Even with small wins in 2024, Fried said there were lessons to be learned from the overall loss in 2024, including how to best connect with voters. While Democrats had more than $1 billion of earned media nationally, 'At the end of the cycle, most voters said, 'What is the message?' from the party,' Fried said. 'We missed the mark on breaking through to everyday Floridians that aren't watching us on the traditional news stations,' she said. Strategists say connecting with voters is especially key right now as Democrats have struggled with getting their base to the ballot boxes in recent election cycles. '[Democrats] have got to field candidates and rally around a disciplined, focused message of where the voters are, and where the voters are right now is they want solutions to this Republican politician-created affordability crisis,' Amandi said. 'If they can do those two things, then they can position themselves to surprise a lot of people next November.' Strategists say that Democrats — from operatives to donors — will have to invest time and money back into Florida if they want to see their party in power once again. 'Democrats don't have the luxury of writing off Florida because Florida is only going to continue to play a critically important role in the Electoral College math as they're only going to gain electoral seats going forward,' Amandi said. 'If you cede states like Florida and Texas, you're in essence saying you're ceding any pathway to win the White House as a Democrat.'
