Connect with us

Politics

Trump digs in on tariff plan and threatens stiffer China levies as trade crisis deepens

Published

on

Trump digs in on tariff plan and threatens stiffer China levies as trade crisis deepens

Mixed messages on trade from the Trump administration threw markets into further turbulence on Monday, leaving investors, foreign governments and the president’s own allies desperate for an offramp from a dramatic increase in global tariffs scheduled to go into effect Tuesday night.

Yet President Trump, posting on social media and speaking to reporters throughout the day, gave no indication he was open to a rapid course correction, suggesting some of his new tariff rates — set at a baseline of 10% for all countries, but increasing substantially for some of the largest U.S. trading partners — would be permanent. Other rates, he said, might be the subject of bilateral negotiations without any guarantee of success that could take weeks, months or even years.

The mere rumor that Trump would consider a pause in the policy led to a fleeting rally on Wall Street, only for stocks to plummet again on word from the White House that the suggestion was “fake news.” The day of confusion led the Dow Composite and Standard & Poor’s 500 to post moderate losses at the closing bell, with the NASDAQ up a fraction of a point.

From the Oval Office, Trump said he would escalate an emerging trade war with China after Beijing said it would respond to a new U.S. tariff rate of 34% with an identical tariff hike of its own. In response, Trump said, he would add another 50% tariff increase on Chinese imports — a move that would result in Chinese products facing 104% import duties by Wednesday.

Trump also said he was negotiating on a bilateral basis with individual countries over their tariff policies and trade deficits with the United States, including Israel and Japan.

Advertisement

“We’re going to have one shot at this, and no other president is going to do this, what I’m doing — and I’ll tell you what, it’s an honor to do it, because we have just been destroyed,” Trump said. “We’ll be talking to China, we’ll be talking to a lot of different countries.”

He denied that the administration would consider a pause in the global increase. “We’re not looking at that,” he said.

“We have many, many countries that are coming to negotiate deals with us, and they’re going to be fair deals,” Trump continued. “In certain cases, they’re going to be paying substantial tariffs. They will be fair deals.”

Conflicting messages

The president’s remarks came after a day of uncertainty, with several of the president’s top advisors sending conflicting messages over the president’s willingness to change course.

“This is not a negotiation,” Peter Navarro, senior counselor for trade and manufacturing to Trump, wrote in the Financial Times about the new policy. “President Trump is always willing to listen. But to those world leaders who, after decades of cheating, are suddenly offering to lower tariffs — know this: that’s just the beginning.”

Advertisement

Yet when asked whether the president was willing to pause the policy, Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, said, “I think the president is going to decide what the president is going to decide.”

“There are more than 50 countries in negotiation with the president,” Hassett said.

Later, Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, said the administration would open negotiations with Japan to “implement the president’s vision for the new Golden Age of Global Trade” — just one of “50, 60, maybe almost 70” countries that had approached the administration to open talks.

Those negotiations, he said, could extend through June — a message to markets, sent after trading stopped for the day, that a fix to the immediate crisis would take time.

“It’s going to be very busy,” Bessent said in an interview with Fox Business. Trump “gave himself maximum negotiating leverage, and just when he has achieved the maximum leverage, he’s willing to start talking.”

Advertisement

Success of the talks is not guaranteed. On Monday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen offered “zero for zero tariffs on industrial goods.” But Trump said it was not enough, stating the European Union itself “was formed to really do damage to the United States in trade.”

Visiting the White House on Monday afternoon, sitting alongside the president, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel offered fellow U.S. allies a potential road map to appease Trump in the trade wars.

The president has argued that foreign nations, “friend and foe alike,” have ripped off the United States for decades, imposing both tariff and non-tariff barriers on the import of U.S. goods that have disadvantaged U.S. businesses.

“We will eliminate the trade deficit with the United States,” Netanyahu said. Before Trump’s tariff announcement Wednesday, Israel, a relatively minor U.S. trading partner, said it would eliminate all import duties on U.S. products. It was nevertheless hit with a 17% tariff rate by the Trump administration over the country’s trade deficit with Washington.

“We intend to do it very quickly — we think it’s the right thing to do — and we’re going to also eliminate trade barriers,” Netanyahu added. “I think Israel could serve as a model for many countries who ought to do the same.”

Advertisement

Allies urge a reversal

Stock markets reacted to the president’s policy announcement last week with a historic rout, eviscerating $5 trillion in value in just 48 hours.

As markets in Asia and Europe continued their plunge on Monday morning, and as U.S. futures trading Sunday night intensified, some of the president’s wealthiest allies on Wall Street began airing criticism of the new trade policy and pleaded with him to reconsider.

Larry Fink, chief executive of BlackRock, told the Economic Club of New York that he had no doubt the economy was weakening, and could even already be entering a recession, because of the White House policy, Bloomberg reported. Bill Ackman, a billionaire hedge fund manager who backed Trump in the 2024 presidential campaign, warned of a “self-induced, economic nuclear winter” if the president refused to back down.

“The president has an opportunity to call a 90-day time out, negotiate and resolve unfair asymmetric tariff deals, and induce trillions of dollars of new investment in our country,” Ackman wrote on X. “If, on the other hand, on April 9th we launch economic nuclear war on every country in the world, business investment will grind to a halt, consumers will close their wallets and pocket books, and we will severely damage our reputation with the rest of the world that will take years and potentially decades to rehabilitate.”

Recession risks

Goldman Sachs updated its assessment of the risks of recession this year from a 35% to 45% probability, following a similar assessment from JP Morgan Chase last week, warning of a 60% likelihood.

Advertisement

JP Morgan’s chief executive, Jamie Dimon, wrote in a letter to shareholders Monday that increased inflation is likely, not only on imported goods but on domestic prices, as input costs rise and demand increases on domestic products.”

“Whatever you think of the legitimate reasons for the newly announced tariffs — and, of course, there are some — or the long-term effect, good or bad, there are likely to be important short-term effects,” Dimon wrote. “Whether or not the menu of tariffs causes a recession remains in question, but it will slow down growth.”

Even Elon Musk, a top ally of the president leading an administration effort to cut jobs across the federal government, went public with his concerns about the policy, sparring with Navarro, Trump’s economic advisor, on X over their respective qualifications to be advising the president.

“I hope it is agreed that both Europe and the United States should move, ideally, in my view, to a zero tariff situation, effectively creating a free trade zone between Europe and North America,” Musk said Sunday. “That has certainly been my advice to the president.”

Advertisement

Politics

Playing catchup to Republicans, Democrats launch ‘largest-ever’ partisan national voter registration campaign

Published

on

Playing catchup to Republicans, Democrats launch ‘largest-ever’ partisan national voter registration campaign

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Acknowledging that “we’ve been getting our butts kicked for years now by the Republicans on voter registration,” Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin on Tuesday announced the DNC will spend millions of dollars to get “back in the game.”

Martin said that the newly created “When We Count” initiative, which he described as the party’s “largest ever voter registration effort … will train hundreds of fellows throughout the country to register tens of thousands of new voters in communities across the country.”

The announcement by the DNC, in what Martin called an “all hands on deck moment,” comes in the wake of massive voter registration gains by Republicans in recent years and ahead of November’s midterms, when Democrats aim to win back majorities in the House and Senate and a whopping 36 states hold elections for governor.

“For too long, Democrats have ceded ground to Republicans on registering voters,” Martin pointed out. “Between 2020 and ’24 alone, our party lost a combined 2.1 million registered voters. Meanwhile, Republicans gained 2.4 million voters.”

Advertisement

GOP OVERTAKES DEMOCRATS ON VOTER ROLLS IN KEY SWING STATE AFTER YEARS OF DEM DOMINANCE

Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin addresses party members at the DNC’s summer meeting, on Aug. 25, 2025, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Paul Steinhauser/Fox News)

The latest example is North Carolina, where new State Board of Elections data indicated that Republicans officially surpassed Democrats in voter registration for the first time in the crucial southeastern battleground state’s history.

Martin said a key reason for the Democrats’ deficit is that “Republicans have invested heavily in targeted partisan registration” to mobilize and grow their base of voters.

TRUMP TOUTS NEW INFLATION NUMBERS AS AFFORDABILITY ISSUE FRONT AND CENTER AHEAD OF MIDTERMS

Advertisement

But he lamented that “on the left” voter registration for decades has largely been led by nonpartisan advocacy organizations and civic “which limits their ability to engage in partisan conversations about registering as a Democrat.”

Martin said the new effort “is going to require everyone,” including the national, state and local parties, as well as outside groups and political campaigns, “participating in this critical work.”

Pointing to the sweeping ballot box successes by President Donald Trump and the GOP in the 2024 elections, when Republicans won back the White House and Senate and held onto their House majority, Martin said “we can’t just assume that certain demographics, whether they be young voters, voters of color or otherwise, will automatically support the Democratic Party. We have to earn every registration so that we can earn every vote.”

The DNC’s seven-figure initiative, which Martin said would kick off in the western battleground states of Arizona and Nevada, “puts our national party and local parties back in the game. When we count, we’ll begin to chip away at the Republican advantage as we prepare to organize everywhere and win everywhere in 2026.”

The Democratic National Committee announced on Tuesday it will spend millions to shift its voter registration strategy ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. (Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images)

Advertisement

The DNC, as it ramps up to this year’s midterm elections, also faces a formidable fundraising deficit compared to the rival Republican National Committee (RNC).

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

RNC Communications Director Zach Parkinson, pointing to the DNC’s campaign cash problems, charged in a statement to Fox News Digital that “Ken Martin has driven the DNC into debt, overseen anemic fundraising.”

“We at the RNC think he’s the perfect person to oversee Democrats voter registration efforts,” Parkinson added, in a shot at the DNC chair.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

House Democrats challenge new Homeland Security order limiting lawmaker visits to immigration facilities

Published

on

House Democrats challenge new Homeland Security order limiting lawmaker visits to immigration facilities

Twelve House Democrats who last year sued the Trump administration over a policy limiting congressional oversight of immigrant detention facilities returned to federal court Monday to challenge a second, new policy imposing further limits on such unannounced visits.

In December, those members of Congress won their lawsuit challenging a Department of Homeland Security policy from June that required a week’s notice from lawmakers before an oversight visit. Now they’re accusing Homeland Security of having “secretly reimposed” the requirement last week.

In a Jan. 8 memorandum, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem wrote that “Facility visit requests must be made a minimum of seven (7) calendar days in advance. Any requests to shorten that time must be approved by me.”

The lawmakers who challenged the policies are led by Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) and include five members from California: Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), Jimmy Gomez (D-Los Angeles), Raul Ruiz (D-Indio) and Norma Torres (D-Pomona).

Advertisement

Last summer, as immigration raids spread through Los Angeles and other parts of Southern California, many Democrats including those named in the lawsuit were denied entry to local detention facilities. Before then, unannounced inspections had been a common, long-standing practice under congressional oversight powers.

“The duplicate notice policy is a transparent attempt by DHS to again subvert Congress’s will…and this Court’s stay of DHS’s oversight visit policy,” the plaintiffs wrote in a federal court motion Monday requesting an emergency hearing.

On Saturday, three days after Renee Nicole Good was shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent, three members of Congress from Minnesota attempted to conduct an oversight visit of an ICE facility near Minneapolis. They were denied access.

Afterward, lawyers for Homeland Security notified the lawmakers and the court of the new policy, according to the court filing.

In a joint statement, the plaintiffs wrote that “rather than complying with the law, the Department of Homeland Security is attempting to get around this order by re-imposing the same unlawful policy.”

Advertisement

“This is unacceptable,” they said. “Oversight is a core responsibility of Members of Congress, and a constitutional duty we do not take lightly. It is not something the executive branch can turn on or off at will.”

Congress has stipulated in yearly appropriations packages since 2020 that funds may not be used to prevent a member of Congress “from entering, for the purpose of conducting oversight, any facility operated by or for the Department of Homeland Security used to detain or otherwise house aliens.”

That language formed the basis of the decision last month by U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb in Washington, who found that lawmakers cannot be denied entry for visits “unless and until” the government could show that no appropriations money was being used to operate detention facilities.

In her policy memorandum, Noem wrote that funds from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which supplied roughly $170 billion toward immigration and border enforcement, are not subject to the limitations of the yearly appropriations law.

“ICE must ensure that this policy is implemented and enforced exclusively with money appropriated by OBBBA,” Noem said.

Advertisement

Noem said the new policy is justified because unannounced visits pull ICE officers away from their normal duties. “Moreover, there is an increasing trend of replacing legitimate oversight activities with circus-like publicity stunts, all of which creates a chaotic environment with heightened emotions,” she wrote.

The lawmakers, in the court filing, argued it’s clear that the new policy violates the law.

“It is practically impossible that the development, promulgation, communication, and implementation of this policy has been, and will be, accomplished — as required — without using a single dollar of annually appropriated funds,” they wrote.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

Published

on

Video: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

new video loaded: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

transcript

transcript

Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

Minnesota and Illinois filed federal lawsuits against the Trump administration, claiming that the deployment of immigration agents to the Minneapolis and Chicago areas violated states’ rights.

This is, in essence, a federal invasion of the Twin Cities and Minnesota, and it must stop. We ask the courts to end the D.H.S. unlawful behavior in our state. The intimidation, the threats, the violence. We ask the courts to end the tactics on our places of worship, our schools, our courts, our marketplaces, our hospitals and even funeral homes.

Advertisement
Minnesota and Illinois filed federal lawsuits against the Trump administration, claiming that the deployment of immigration agents to the Minneapolis and Chicago areas violated states’ rights.

By Jackeline Luna

January 12, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending