Trump's Preoccupation With Tariffs
Donald Trump's tariff announcement has baffled global leaders and forced markets to reckon with the fallout from America's dramatic shift in international trade policy. Panelists joined on Washington Week With The Atlantic to discuss what tanking financial markets could mean for the president's administration.
'Trade has not delivered the benefits that economists and politicians of both parties have been promising for decades,' David Leonhardt explained last night. While the United States economy has tended to work in favor of educated professionals, blue-collar workers have not benefited in the same ways. Adjustments to trade policy could be one way to address this, but Trump's tariffs are 'shambolic, they're extremely high,' and 'no one knows whether he's going to take them back the next day,' Leonhardt continued.
Joining the editor in chief of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, to discuss this and more: Stephen Hayes, editor of The Dispatch; David Leonhardt, an editorial director for The New York Times editorial board; Kayla Tausche, a senior White House correspondent at CNN; Nancy Youssef, a national-security correspondent for The Wall Street Journal.
Watch the full episode here.
Article originally published at The Atlantic
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
5 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Europe pushes hard to sway Trump before Alaska summit with Putin on Ukraine
BRUSSELS — European leaders are seeking to impress upon President Donald Trump one key point before he meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday: The West cannot — must not — negotiate away Ukrainian territory, especially for nothing in return. As Trump floats 'land swaps,' Kyiv's European backers have rejected a Russian proposal to trade Ukrainian land for an undefined truce. And they have issued declarations that 'international borders must not be changed by force.' European leaders are set to press their priorities in a call with Trump on Wednesday, organized by Germany Chancellor Friedrich Merz, which will include Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The call is intended to shape Trump's thinking before he sits down with Putin one-on-one in Alaska. The Europeans are insisting that Moscow agree to a ceasefire before negotiations over territory, and that Kyiv needs security guarantees. And, if such negotiations occur, a European counteroffer has pushed the idea that any retreat of Ukrainian forces from Ukrainian-controlled territory should be matched on an inch-for-inch basis by Russia's withdrawal from occupied Ukrainian territory, according to three people briefed on the discussions. European and NATO allies have often failed to sway Trump's thinking, or even to be heard by the U.S. president ahead of big policy decisions, such as to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities. And they are frequently dismayed by Trump's policy moves, for example, his unilateral imposition of tariffs. The Europeans recognize that they can only do so much to influence a president who often veers off-script and likes nothing more than to declare a deal. But on Ukraine recently they have met with some success, for example, by persuading Trump to allow them to transfer U.S. weapons to Ukraine and purchase replacements for themselves. And in recent days, especially after a meeting with Vice President JD Vance in Britain over the weekend, they have found the U.S. administration receptive to some of their red lines. After that meeting, Vance, in a television interview, endorsed at least one European position — that the current line of contact and positioning of Ukrainian and Russian troops should be the starting point of any talks — rejecting a Russian demand that Ukraine first surrender its entire eastern Donbas area. Ahead of Wednesday's call some Europeans expressed guarded optimism, especially with Trump seeming to lower expectations of securing a deal in Alaska. There appears to be 'more of an understanding from the Americans that you can't just go for land swaps which would somehow give a prize to Russia,' said one European Union official, who like others in this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomacy. Still, the official added, 'it's clear that there are sort of discrepancies, and as we've seen it in the U.S. system by now, you have one man who will decide.' But even with Trump making a more concerted effort to consult allies and keep them updated, there has been confusion over whether Putin is even willing to swap territory, officials said. The administration understood that a partial Russian retreat might be possible after U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff returned from meeting with Putin in Moscow last week. However, the Russian offer apparently calls for a Ukrainian surrender of territory that Russian forces don't even control as a precondition for a ceasefire, the people briefed on the talks said. As that mix-up has come untangled, the administration has lowered expectations for the high-stakes Trump-Putin summit, officials said. Wednesday's call with Trump caps a flurry of meetings and statements organized by the Europeans since the Alaska summit was announced, all of which have provided a strong endorsement of Kyiv's position. Wednesday's virtual summit hosted by Germany will include the leaders of France, Britain, Italy, Poland, Finland, the E.U. and NATO. The Europeans will meet first with Zelensky before Trump and Vance are expected to join the call. Trump has also promised to call Zelensky and European leaders right after talking with Putin, to relay whether 'a fair deal' is on the table. 'It's not up to me to make a deal,' he told reporters Monday — seemingly echoing a European refrain that a truce cannot be sealed without them or Ukraine. 'I have many fears and a lot of hope,' Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said this week. Tusk said recent comments indicate Trump is increasingly understanding of Ukrainian and European views on the war, but that he was not so sure that would hold. 'I guess everyone's afraid Putin will play Trump's ego again like he has in the past,' said a second European official. 'Who knows, maybe he comes there with another noble-sounding offer or maybe they give [Trump] some state award.' Trump has repeatedly balked after threatening to pressure Russia into a ceasefire. As recently as last week, the president's mounting frustrations with Russia stalling on a ceasefire, and his threats of fresh U.S. sanctions, gave way to his invitation to Putin to meet on U.S. soil. While there has been speculation that Trump may yet try to involve Zelensky in the Alaska talks, European leaders are definitely not invited — giving them little sway over the diplomatic spectacle, even as they have become Ukraine's chief military and financial backer. Most proposals for a truce also envision a role for European nations in enforcing any deal that could reshape the continent's future security. In the scramble to sway Trump, European officials have also stressed that any deal must give Ukraine a bulwark against future attacks, especially because Putin is insisting that Ukraine be barred from joining NATO. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has suggested a deal could involve acknowledging de facto Russian control of some of Ukraine's regions, without Kyiv officially ceding them. If Trump's meeting with Putin advances to 'full-scale negotiations,' Rutte said Sunday, territory would 'have to be on the table,' as would security guarantees for Ukraine. Rutte said talks should recognize 'that Ukraine decides on its own future,' with 'no limitations' on its military or on NATO's posture in Eastern Europe. Freezing the current front lines would leave about one-fifth of Ukraine's territory in Russian hands. Ukraine, meanwhile, has little leverage for a land swap, holding a small toehold in Russia's western Kursk region since a faltering offensive last year. 'Europeans can say what they want, but in the end, Ukraine and Russia will have to agree,' said a third European official. 'It's unlikely there's a peace deal now where Putin says, okay, I'm going to withdraw from all of Ukraine.' The chief diplomat for the 27-nation European Union, Kaja Kallas, told the bloc's foreign ministers in recent days that the initial contours of a deal between Washington and Moscow seemed to 'focus on territory only' and that 'the Ukrainians are very worried,' according to a copy of a written note seen by The Washington Post. Kallas warned against a 'fragile ceasefire' that would solidify Russia's gains in more than three years of war. On Monday, Kallas held a four-hour virtual meeting of E.U. foreign ministers to deliberate on Ukraine ahead of the Trump-Putin meeting and on Israel's war in Gaza. The E.U. official said they didn't see 'willingness' from Kyiv or many of its staunch European allies for trading territory within Ukraine, citing distrust with Russia, which is pressing its advances in the east and attacks on Ukrainian cities. 'We have to understand the Ukrainian position, they have a million men who've been fighting for years now, so it's also something that President Zelensky wouldn't be able to have domestically accepted,' the official said. Though polls show war-weary Ukrainians increasingly favor a settlement to end the fighting, it would be tough to sell ceding territory — home to hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and where forces built up defensive lines over years — for a ceasefire that can't be guaranteed. But even as Europe insists that Ukraine must receive security guarantees, its own ideas of what those guarantees would look like remain fuzzy. Ukraine's chief backers say guarantees should start with pledges of more weapons and training for its army, and that they will reject any Russian demand to limit Ukraine's military. Kyiv's top aspiration — NATO membership — seems far-fetched without U.S. buy-in, and a plan for European troops in Ukraine remains on a back burner. Carl Bildt, a former prime minister of Sweden, said European governments can shape the talks as Ukraine's chief suppliers of arms and cash. 'That blocks the possibility for Trump to make any concessions to Putin on what I think is among the most important of his demands,' to halt the flow of Western weapons to Ukraine, Bildt said. European leaders also still control billions in Russian frozen assets that will factor into negotiations, as well as the battery of sanctions that Russia wants lifted. Camille Grand, a former NATO and French defense official, said there was a disconnect between Europe's financial and political investment in the Ukraine war and its role in the upcoming talks. 'The Europeans today provide the bulk of humanitarian, economic and military aid, and have now accepted to pay for American weapons,' Grand told French public radio, 'while in the negotiations, they can at best hope to influence the American position or to support Ukraine.' Catherine Belton in London contributed to this report.
Newsweek
7 minutes ago
- Newsweek
White House Launches Smithsonian Review To 'Ensure Alignment'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The White House has announced a review of some Smithsonian Institution museums to "ensure alignment" with President Donald Trump's goals. Newsweek has contacted the Smithsonian for comment via email outside regular working hours. Why It Matters In March, Trump signed an executive order, titled "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History," to eliminate what his administration described as "improper ideology" across all branches of the Smithsonian—including its museums, research centers, educational initiatives and the National Zoo. The move sparked backlash online and from museum volunteers. In July, the Smithsonian National Museum of American History removed references to Trump's two impeachments from its exhibit on presidential impeachments, prompting a debate about historical accuracy and political influence on public institutions. A Smithsonian Institution sign on the National Air and Space Museum on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on March 28. A Smithsonian Institution sign on the National Air and Space Museum on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on March To Know A letter dated August 12 and addressed to Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie Bunch said the White House would be leading "a comprehensive internal review of selected Smithsonian museums and exhibitions." According to the letter, the review is timed to coincide with next year's celebrations of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence being signed. The letter described the review as a "constructive and collaborative effort," adding that it would focus on key areas such as public-facing content, the curatorial process, exhibition planning, collection use and narrative standards. The letter also said the initial review would focus on the following museums: National Museum of American History, National Museum of Natural History, National Museum of African American History and Culture, National Museum of the American Indian, National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian American Art Museum, National Portrait Gallery, and Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden. These are not the only museums being reviewed. The letter said additional museums would be reviewed in "Phase II." While the Smithsonian is independent of the government, it receives funding from Congress. As with Trump's March executive order, the review has received backlash online. Some social media users have raised concerns about the level of government intervention with the museums. What People Are Saying The White House's letter to the Smithsonian said: "This initiative aims to ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions." President Donald Trump wrote in his March executive order: "Museums in our Nation's capital should be places where individuals go to learn—not to be subjected to ideological indoctrination or divisive narratives that distort our shared history. To advance this policy, we will restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness." Karly Kingsley, a media personality, wrote on X in a post viewed more than 200,000 times: "We're suspending the jobs report so you don't see how bad the numbers are, auditing the Smithsonian to match Trump's politics, fighting over gerrymandering the map, and deploying the military into cities. This isn't governance anymore. It's authoritarianism in plain sight." Journalist Dan Friedman wrote on X in a post viewed more than 40,000 times: "The White House pressuring the Smithsonian to 'eliminate political influence' from its presentation of history is some freaky Orwellian s***." What Happens Next The letter includes a 30-, 75- and 120-day implementation timeline. By the 120-day mark, "museums should begin implementing content corrections where necessary, replacing divisive or ideologically driven language with unifying, historically accurate, and constructive descriptions across placards, wall didactics, digital displays, and other public-facing materials."
Business Insider
7 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Stocks are at record highs, but there's an area of the market where investors can still get a great deal, BofA says
The stock market is a hair away from record highs — but there's an area of the market that should stick for investors looking for a deal, Bank of America analysts said. In a note on Tuesday, researchers said they saw opportunity brewing in small-cap and mid-cap stocks, an area of the market that the bank is bullish on going forward. The outlook comes as some market pros see valuations in the S&P 500 as stretched to extreme levels. Major indexes are at or hovering near record highs, despite uncertainty around the US economy, the outlook for Fed rate cuts, and the impact of President Donald Trump's tariffs. The tailwinds for small-caps haven't boosted the sector so far in 2025. The Russell 2000 is up 1.5% year-to-date, lagging behind the S&P 500's 9.6% gain. But the risk profile going forward looks different for small- and mid-cap stocks. Here are the reasons Bank of America remains particularly optimistic on those two areas: Small-caps BofA has previously said it sees small-cap stocks poised to outperform the broader market over the next decade, boosted by a handful of bullish catalysts: The sector remains historically undervalued. Small-cap stocks have been lagging behind large-cap stocks for about a decade, and are still trading at a "steep discount," strategists said. A handful of bullish themes. The sector is likely to benefit from a handful of tailwinds brewing in the broader economy. Strategists pointed to trends like reshoring, the economy reaching "peak globalization," and talk of a new capex cycle in the US, with firms pouring money into new investments that could benefit smaller companies. Profits are coming out of a recession. Earnings for small-cap stocks look like they're finally coming out of a downturn, with the second quarter containing "green shoots" for some small-cap companies in the Russell 2000, the bank said. Earnings growth in the S&P 600, meanwhile, also looks on track to inflect positively in the second quarter. The bank said was cautious in the near-term on the Russell 2000 index due to risks that the Fed may not cut rates as aggressively as expected this year. The small-caps sector is also still struggling from weak fundamentals and faces lingering risks from tariffs, despite underlying bullish trends, they added. Mid-Caps Mid-caps are also shaping up to be a promising area of the market, BofA strategists suggested. The sector is also heavily discounted. Relative to large-cap stocks, mid-caps are trading at a forward price-to-earnings ratio of around 0.75. That's the lowest premium on mid-caps relative to large-caps since 2001, the bank said. More attractive than small-cap stocks. The bank said it favored mid-cap stocks over small-cap stocks. Companies in the mid-cap sector have better fundamentals, "cleaner" balance sheets, and face fewer risks from tariffs. The bank added it was particularly bullish on one sector across small- and mid-cap companies: financials. "Financials continues to rank #1 in our small & mid-cap quant work, based on relative valuations, revisions, technicals, and BofA analyst upgrades vs. downgrades," strategists wrote. "Most mid-cap banks raised net interest income guidance in 2Q and beat loan growth expectations, which may limit deposit cost pressures near-term." Others on Wall Street have been paying closer attention to smaller companies on the stock market, in part due to lofty valuations among large-cap firms. According to some valuation metrics, the S&P 500 now looks as or more expensive than stocks did during the dot-com bubble, some strategists say.
