Trump calls reporter who questioned absence of tariffs in 1st term a 'lunatic'; Watch video
US President Donald Trump publicly clashed with a reporter during a White House press conference on Thursday, calling him a 'lunatic' when questioned about the timing of his decision to invoke the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs in his second term.
The exchange came hours after a federal appellate court held a 99-minute hearing examining whether Trump exceeded his legal authority under IEEPA by unilaterally introducing wide-ranging tariffs on imports.
'As you know, a federal appellate court today heard oral arguments about whether or not you had the authority to unilaterally impose those tariffs,' the reporter asked. 'I'm not going to get you to weigh in on the legal arguments, but you're weighing your decision to do that, your authority to do that, based on a 1977 law… Why didn't you invoke this law in your first term?'Trump began to answer, 'Well, we've been winning all along,' but the reporter pressed again: 'You could've collected billions upon billions of dollars back then, but instead, you waited until your second term.'Visibly agitated, Trump fired back and said, 'In my first term, I was busy fighting lunatics like you who were trying to do things incorrectly and inappropriately to a duly elected president.'
— libsoftiktok (@libsoftiktok) He went on to defend his tariff record from his first term, saying, 'We took in hundreds of billions from China. We took in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs.' Before concluding the exchange, he added, 'You people didn't cover it very well.'The courtroom scrutiny of Trump's legal approach comes after his April 2 'Liberation Day' tariffs, which slapped new duties on nearly all imports and invoked IEEPA for justification. The law, historically used for asset freezes and sanctions, had never been interpreted to support tariff powers.'IEEPA doesn't even mention the word 'tariffs' anywhere,' Circuit Judge Jimmie Reyna remarked, according to the Associated Press.
Administration attorney Brett Schumate said, 'No president has ever read IEEPA this way,' but argued Trump acted because 'the US trade deficit posed a national emergency.' No ruling has been issued yet, but the case is expected to reach the US Supreme Court. A lower court earlier held that Trump had overstepped his authority — a decision now under appeal.Earlier in the day, Trump signed a new executive order imposing a 50% tariff on Brazilian imports, citing 'an economic emergency' due to that country's policies and the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro.The latest round of tariffs — covering 68 countries and the entire European Union — will take effect on August 7. Countries not specifically named will face a baseline 10% tariff. Meanwhile, India has been slapped a 25% tariff plus penalty for buying Russian crude.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
29 minutes ago
- India.com
Modi govt upset as these two Muslim countries were included in SCO summit, they were once India's friend, names are...
Modi govt upset as these two Muslim countries were included in SCO summit, they were once India's friend, names are... India has strongly objected to the participation of Pakistan's allies in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit to be held in Tianjin, China. Heads of 20 countries from around the world may participate in this summit to be held in early September. According to reports, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Narendra Modi may also visit Tianjin. According to a report in the Economic Times, before the summit, India has made it clear that the presence of Turkey and Azerbaijan who sided with Pakistan during Operation SIndoor and were seen supporting terrorism may undermine the objectives of the SCO. What is the fault of these two countries? In fact, after the Pakistan-sponsored terrorist attack in Pahalgam on April 22, Turkey and Azerbaijan started showing brotherhood with Pakistan. While on one hand the rest of the Muslim countries also condemned the terrorist attack and adopted a balanced stance on Operation Sindoor, Turkey and Azerbaijan openly supported Pakistan. Even during Operation Sindoor, Pakistan was using drones made in Turkey to attack India. At the same time, Azerbaijan was fully supporting Pakistan politically. Azerbaijan was also maintaining brotherhood with Pakistan because Pakistan supports Azerbaijan in its war with Armenia. Pakistan has not even recognized Armenia as a country. In such a situation, Pakistan's policy in the case of Azerbaijan and Armenia has been one-sided. There is a dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. On the one hand, India is adopting a balanced attitude on this issue, while Pakistan supports Azerbaijan one-sidedly. Talking about trade relations, relations between India and Azerbaijan are also good. However, in terms of political support, Azerbaijan supported Pakistan. One reason for this is also the closeness between Azerbaijan and Turkey. What is SCO summit? The Shanghai Cooperation Organization has 10 full members. It was formed in 2001 in China itself. It earlier included Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan. In 2017, India and Pakistan also joined this organization. In 2021, Iran was also given full member status in the organization. Belarus has been included in the organisation as the 10th full member. This time, China has invited Turkey, Azerbaijan, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Armenia, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Maldives, Myanmar, Bahrain and UAE as dialogue partners. What is India's stance? Last month, when External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar visited China, he had clearly said during the SCO meeting that countries supporting terrorism will have to be sidelined. He had said that the purpose behind the Pahalgam attack was to harm the tourism economy of Jammu and Kashmir and create hatred between Hindus and Muslims. He had said that the SCO countries will have to jointly fight terrorism, separatism and radicalism.
Mint
29 minutes ago
- Mint
US appeals court keeps bar on Los Angeles federal immigration arrests
Aug 2 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court late on Friday affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring U.S. government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled that the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on peoples' appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and U.S. Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge last month blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity," speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day laborer pick up site, agricultural site, etc." The Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, welcomed the ruling in statement: "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region." (Reporting by Chandni Shah in Bengaluru; Editing by William Mallard)
India Today
32 minutes ago
- India Today
Explained: Why India shouldn't lose sleep over Trump's 25% tariffs
When Donald Trump announced a sweeping 25% tariff order targeting Indian exports, effective August 1, it had all the hallmarks of a trade provocation. Yet in Delhi's ministries and Mumbai's market floors, the response was consensus across policy circles is clear: Trump's move is less about trade policy and more about leverage. A pressure from threatening retaliation, India is opting for dialogue. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal told Parliament that the government would 'safeguard the interests of our farmers, workers, and small entrepreneurs".The Ministry of External Affairs reaffirmed that the broader US–India partnership 'has weathered transitions and challenges' and should not be derailed by short-term frictions.25% TARIFF TO HAVE LIMITED IMPACTStrategic affairs expert Brahma Chellaney has been one of the few voices raising alarm over what he calls the "lopsided" nature of the trade expectations coming from pointed out that even under a new trade accord, the United States would retain relatively high tariffs on Indian goods—comparable to what it maintains on Vietnam and the Philippines, around 19–20%. In return, India would be expected to impose zero tariffs on most US imports, a clearly uneven 25% tariff order, while headline-grabbing, is unlikely to trigger major macroeconomic tremors. According to estimates by ICRA, Nomura, and ANZ, the GDP impact is expected to be modest, around 0.2 to 0.4 percentage points. India exports roughly $87 billion worth of goods to the US annually—just 2 to 3% of its total likely to take a near-term hit include traditional export mainstays: textiles, gems and jewellery, auto components, and seafood. But core sectors like pharmaceuticals, IT services, and high-end engineering remain relatively INDIA A 'DEAD ECONOMY'? ASK AMERICAN CONSUMERSStill, the frustration behind the tariff move isn't rooted in deficit calculations alone. Trump has publicly derided India's economy as a 'dead economy,' but data tells another story, especially when it comes to what American consumers depend top four exports to the US—pharmaceuticals, textiles, electricals and electronics, and jewellery—form a critical part of American supply chains. India ranks among the top five import destinations for the US in pharma, textiles, and jewellery. In electronics, India is one of the fastest-growing exporters to the US.'The total volume of 'Made-in-India' smartphones grew 240% year-on-year and now accounts for 44% of smartphones imported into the US, up from only 13% of smartphone shipments in Q2 2024,' according to Canalys data cited in this India Today DIU report. In the last quarter, India emerged as the dominant player in mobile handset shipments to the tariffs on key import destinations such as India could push up domestic prices for American consumers, especially in sectors where substitution is neither immediate nor HOLDING UP THE INDIA–US TRADE DEAL?The underlying tensions go beyond tariffs. Chellaney warns that the United States is not just demanding better market access but is pushing India to rewrite domestic policy in ways that could have long-term noted that India would be expected to open its agricultural and dairy markets, even though industrial-scale American imports could shatter India's family farms and undermine its food United States also expects India to ramp up purchases of American energy products by tens of billions of dollars annually. And despite already being a growing buyer of US arms, India would be nudged to increase its defence imports expectations haven't been officially acknowledged by Indian negotiators. But several of these themes have surfaced in earlier trade talks between the two countries, and officials say regulatory changes are already being quietly evaluated, including customs streamlining and possible tariff rationalisation on select capital INDIA MUST STAND ITS GROUNDExporters, meanwhile, are not standing still. Many are pivoting toward the EU, ASEAN, and Middle East markets, especially in sectors like engineering goods and climate-aligned manufacturing. The recently signed India–UK free trade agreement is expected to generate over Rs 500 billion annually and contribute 0.06% to India's GDP in the long term, signalling new avenues for growth.'A 25% US tariff may put some pressure on India's export-driven sectors like engineering goods, textiles, and jewellery. This move underscores the growing trend of protectionism and may compel India to diversify export markets, push for FTA negotiations, and accelerate domestic value addition to maintain global competitiveness,' said Ajay Garg, CEO, SMC Global Securities.'While Trump's trade policies unsettle global supply chains, India's resilience and economic agility are emerging as key differentiators. Notably, regional competitors like Bangladesh and Sri Lanka are still facing steeper tariffs, weakening their edge,' Garg added. 'Amid global uncertainty, India remains one of the fastest-growing major economies, poised to lead the next phase of emerging market growth.'Still, the deeper concern lies not in tariffs themselves, but in what they represent. Chellaney argues that this isn't merely about trade, it's about shaping the architecture of India's future economic dependencies. 'Conceding quietly,' he says, 'can become a pattern.'Opposition parties have accused the government of being too passive in the face of what they see as a coercive gambit. But export bodies and trade associations have largely backed New Delhi's calm approach. They have urged exporters to renegotiate contracts directly with US buyers, share cost burdens, and reinforce India's reputation as a reliable trade insist that India's sovereignty on food security, defence procurement, and digital trade remains non-negotiable, regardless of tariff TARIFF PLAYBOOKIt may be noted that the 25% tariff order isn't about economics; it's Trump playing the same old game. Trump's tariff playbook thrives on calibrated disruption: loud threats, sudden reversals, and pressure designed to unsettle rather than resolve. Sometimes he calls India a close ally. The next moment, it's a 'dead economy.' The inconsistency is the now, India is not retaliating, but there's little reason to lose sleep over what may well be another of Trump's arm-twisting theatrics.- Ends advertisement
