Trump praises Liberian leader on English
U.S. President Donald Trump complimented the president of Liberia Wednesday on his English-speaking skills - despite English being the official language of the West African nation.
Trump was hosting a White House lunch with African leaders Wednesday, and -- after brief remarks from President Joseph Boakai - asked the business graduate where he had picked up his linguistic know-how.
'Thank you, and such good English... Where did you learn to speak so beautifully? Where were you educated?' Trump said.
Boakai - who, like most Liberians, speaks English as a first language - indicated he had been educated in his native country.
He was facing away from the media, making his countenance hard to gauge - but his laconic, mumbled response hinted at awkwardness.
Trump, who was surrounded by French-speaking presidents from other West African nations, kept digging.
'It's beautiful English. I have people at this table can't speak nearly as well,' he said.
US engagement in Liberia began in the 1820s when the Congress- and slaveholder-funded American Colonization Society began sending freed slaves to its shores.
Thousands of 'Americo-Liberian' settlers followed, declaring themselves independent in 1847 and setting up a government to rule over a native African majority.
The country has a diverse array of indigenous languages and a number of creolized dialects, while Kpelle-speakers are the largest single linguistic group.
Boakai himself can read and write in Mendi and Kissi but converses in Liberia's official tongue and lingua franca -- English.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canada News.Net
13 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
Economic Watch: Trump's sweeping new tariffs spark extensive criticism
U.S. President Donald Trump imposed sweeping new tariffs on 69 trading partners, sparking global criticism over economic disruption and sovereignty concerns. WASHINGTON, Aug. 2 (Xinhua) -- U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order that further modified tariff rates with 69 trading partners, drawing criticism across the world. The order, set to be implemented on Aug. 7, imposes "additional ad valorem duties on goods of certain trading partners," with rates ranging from 10 percent to 40 percent. SWEEPING TARIFFS Under the new executive order, the "universal" tariff for goods entering the United States will remain at 10 percent, the same rate implemented on April 2. However, the 10-percent rate will only apply to countries with which the United States has a trade surplus, CNN reported, citing a senior official. For countries with which the United States has a trade deficit, a 15-percent rate will serve as the new tariff floor. Still, for more than a dozen other countries, the tariff rates are higher than 15 percent, either because they agreed to a trade framework with the United States or because Trump sent their leaders a letter requiring a higher tariff, it added. On Thursday, Trump signed an executive order increasing the tariff on Canada from 25 percent to 35 percent, with the higher tariff taking effect on Aug. 1. Goods qualifying for preferential tariff treatment under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement will continue to remain exempt from the new tariffs. Goods transshipped to evade the 35-percent tariff will be subject, instead, to a transshipment tariff of 40 percent. On Wednesday, Trump signed an executive order implementing an additional 40-percent tariff on Brazilian goods, bringing the total tariff amount to 50 percent. On the same day, Trump announced that Washington had reached a "full and complete" trade deal with South Korea, setting 15-percent tariffs on its exports. South Korea has also agreed to invest 350 billion U.S. dollars in projects "owned and controlled by the United States," and selected by himself, Trump said. Trump said on Wednesday that the United States would impose a 25-percent tariff on imports from India, starting on Aug. 1. On July 27, Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced that they had reached a trade deal under which the United States would impose a baseline tariff of 15 percent on EU goods. The deal allows the United States to impose a broad 15-percent tariff on EU goods while securing zero-tariff access for a range of strategic American exports. In contrast, the EU has pledged to purchase 750 billion U.S. dollars' worth of American energy and commit an additional 600 billion U.S. dollars in investments in the United States. WIDE CRITICISM The higher tariffs continue Trump's reversal of the decades of globalization that made America's massive services economy the envy of the world but contributed to its long decline in manufacturing, CNN commented. "Our businesses ... need some degree of certainty, and all they're getting is chaos and inflation. So the Trump tariff trade war is a trade war on the American people. We've seen this week the chaos and uncertainty," said Chuck Schumer, Senate Democratic leader. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said in a statement on Friday that his government is disappointed by Trump's decision to increase the tariff on Canadian goods to 35 percent. According to the statement, the sectors of lumber, steel, aluminum and automobiles are heavily impacted by U.S. duties and tariffs. The Canadian government will act to protect Canadian jobs, invest in industrial competitiveness, buy Canadian and diversify export markets, said Carney. Brazilian Finance Minister Fernando Haddad said his government will soon announce a response plan focused on providing financing assistance, deferring tax payments, accelerating export tax refunds, and reactivating labor protection policies. Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade, slammed the U.S.-EU deal as "significantly imbalanced." In a statement following the announcement of the agreement, he said that "concessions have been made that are difficult to bear." The trade agreement is "a political, economic and moral fiasco," Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Rally party in the French parliament, said in an X post. "Hundreds of billions of euros of gas, as well as weapons, will have to be imported each year from the United States. This is a complete capitulation for French industry, and for our energy and military sovereignty," she said. "I don't think Trump wants a trade deal. He wants these countries to surrender their economic sovereignty," said Sizo Nkala, senior research fellow at the Center for Africa-China Studies, University of Johannesburg. "More than anything, the tariff rates represent an assault on and a violation of a rules-based multilateral trading system administered by the World Trade Organization," Nkala said.
Canada News.Net
13 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
Trump cites new tariffs on India for buying Russian oil
WASHINGTON, D.C.: U.S. President Donald Trump declared on July 30 that his administration will impose a 25 percent tariff on imports from India, along with an additional levy targeting the country's continued purchases of Russian oil. Posting on his Truth Social platform, Trump acknowledged India as "a friend," but criticized what he called "excessively high" Indian tariffs on American exports. In justifying the penalties, Trump pointed to India's ongoing defense and energy ties with Russia. He argued that India's purchases of Russian military hardware and crude oil were indirectly sustaining Moscow's war in Ukraine. "If we are serious about ending the war, we must stop enabling it," Trump said, announcing the start of what he called a "Russia-related penalty" tariff, set to take effect on August 1. The move is part of a broader overhaul of Trump's trade policy, which includes renegotiated frameworks with the European Union, Japan, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Trump said those deals would open new markets for American products while giving the U.S. the authority to raise import taxes to support domestic industries and reduce the federal deficit, which has grown following his administration's income tax cuts. Trump has long used tariffs as leverage to reshape global trade dynamics. While supporters argue the strategy has helped U.S. manufacturing, critics, including many economists, warn that rising import costs often hit American consumers and businesses, fueling inflation and dampening economic growth. India, now the world's most populous nation, is seen as a key partner in Washington's long-term strategy to counterbalance China's global influence. However, India has maintained a neutral stance on the Ukraine war and has not joined Western sanctions against Russia. Its energy deals with Moscow, including purchases of discounted Russian crude, have drawn repeated concern from U.S. officials. During a February meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Trump expressed optimism about a budding energy partnership, claiming that India had agreed to buy American oil and liquefied natural gas. Yet on the flight back from a recent visit to Scotland, Trump told reporters that a comprehensive U.S.-India trade agreement remained unfinished. When asked whether a 25 percent tariff was imminent, he replied cryptically, "We're going to see." With the new tariff measures set to launch in August, India now joins a growing list of U.S. trading partners facing heightened duties under Trump's revised trade regime — a campaign he says is aimed at protecting American jobs and correcting global imbalances.
Winnipeg Free Press
3 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A federal appeals court ruled Friday night to uphold a lower court's temporary order blocking the Trump administration from conducting indiscriminate immigration stops and arrests in Southern California. A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held a hearing Monday afternoon at which the federal government asked the court to overturn a temporary restraining order issued July 12 by Judge Maame E. Frimpong, arguing it hindered their enforcement of immigration law. Immigrant advocacy groups filed suit last month accusing President Donald Trump's administration of systematically targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California during the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration. The lawsuit included three detained immigrants and two U.S. citizens as plaintiffs. In her order, Frimpong said there was a 'mountain of evidence' that federal immigration enforcement tactics were violating the Constitution. She wrote the government cannot use factors such as apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a location such as a tow yard or car wash, or someone's occupation as the only basis for reasonable suspicion to detain someone. The Los Angeles region has been a battleground with the Trump administration over its aggressive immigration strategy that spurred protests and the deployment of the National Guards and Marines for several weeks. Federal agents have rounded up immigrants without legal status to be in the U.S. from Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms, many who have lived in the country for decades. Among the plaintiffs is Los Angeles resident Brian Gavidia, who was shown in a video taken by a friend June 13 being seized by federal agents as he yells, 'I was born here in the states, East LA bro!' They want to 'send us back to a world where a U.S. citizen … can be grabbed, slammed against a fence and have his phone and ID taken from him just because he was working at a tow yard in a Latino neighborhood,' American Civil Liberties Union attorney Mohammad Tajsar told the court. The federal government argued that it hadn't been given enough time to collect and present evidence in the lawsuit, given that it was filed shortly before the July 4 holiday and a hearing was held the following week. 'It's a very serious thing to say that multiple federal government agencies have a policy of violating the Constitution,' attorney Jacob Roth said. He also argued that the lower court's order was too broad, and that immigrant advocates did not present enough evidence to prove that the government had an official policy of stopping people without reasonable suspicion. He referred to the four factors of race, language, presence at a location, and occupation that were listed in the temporary restraining order, saying the court should not be able to ban the government from using them at all. He also argued that the order was unclear on what exactly is permissible under law. 'Legally, I think it's appropriate to use the factors for reasonable suspicion,' Roth said The judges sharply questioned the government over their arguments. 'No one has suggested that you cannot consider these factors at all,' Judge Jennifer Sung said. However, those factors alone only form a 'broad profile' and don't satisfy the reasonable suspicion standard to stop someone, she said. Sung, a Biden appointee, said that in an area like Los Angeles, where Latinos make up as much as half the population, those factors 'cannot possibly weed out those who have undocumented status and those who have documented legal status.' She also asked: 'What is the harm to being told not to do something that you claim you're already not doing?'
