New U.S. tariffs linked to claims of foreign forced labor dismay and anger trading partners

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-07-24 11:57:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump’s New Tariffs Spark Global Backlash Over Unfounded Forced Labor Claims

U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has triggered a wave of criticism from major trading partners after announcing new tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on goods from 60 economies. The administration justified these tariffs by claiming that the targeted countries failed to adequately enforce bans on goods made with forced labor.

Trading Partners Reject Forced Labor Allegations

Australia, New Zealand, Japan, the European Union, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, and China have all strongly objected to the tariffs, with officials labeling the U.S. claims as “completely unjustified” and lacking meaningful evidence. Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell specifically rejected the Trump administration’s attempt to link Australia’s exports to modern slavery, stating that Australia takes the issue of modern slavery seriously and will continue to lobby for the removal of all tariffs on its goods.

New Zealand’s Prime Minister Christopher Luxon echoed these objections, calling the tariffs “extremely disappointing” and “harmful to trade.” He pointed out that the U.S. investigation underpinning the tariffs did not provide substantial evidence to support the forced labor allegations.

European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas also questioned the U.S. position, noting that European labor laws and conditions are strong and “not really grounded” in the claims made by the Trump administration.

Tariffs Take Effect Amid Legal and Economic Doubts

The new tariffs took effect immediately after the expiration of previous stopgap levies imposed by Trump following a Supreme Court defeat. Japan protested the move, highlighting that the Trump administration had previously reassured Tokyo that no further tariffs would be imposed beyond an earlier agreement.

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated its opposition to “all forms of unilateral tariffs,” warning that tariff wars do not serve anyone’s interests. Trade tensions between China and the U.S. have already led to a sharp drop in Chinese exports to the U.S. since Trump’s earlier “Liberation Day” tariffs.

Fact-Check: Lack of Evidence for Forced Labor Claims

A key fact-check from the excerpt is that the U.S. investigation cited by the Trump administration as the basis for the tariffs “did not provide meaningful evidence to support allegations of forced labor.” Multiple countries and officials have challenged the validity of the administration’s claims, suggesting that the tariffs are being used as a protectionist tool rather than a genuine response to labor abuses.

Conclusion: International Pushback and Higher Costs

Trump’s latest tariffs have drawn widespread condemnation from America’s trading partners, who argue that the forced labor justification is unfounded and harmful to global trade. Experts warn that while the tariffs are lower than previous rounds, they will still contribute to higher prices for consumers and businesses. The international backlash underscores ongoing concerns about the Trump administration’s use of trade policy and the credibility of its claims regarding labor practices abroad.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/new-u-s-tariffs-linked-to-claims-of-foreign-forced-labor-dismay-and-anger-trading-partners

Donald J. Trump: “The all Republican Senators! Terminate the Filibuster, which the Dumocrats w…

Trump's Truth – Latest Posts — 2026-07-25 22:48:00 — trumpstruth.org

Trump Calls on Republican Senators to End Filibuster and Pass “Save America Act”

In a forceful message, Donald Trump urged all Republican senators to “Terminate the Filibuster, which the Dumocrats will do as soon as they get the chance, and PASS THE SAVE AMERICA ACT, and everything else, including the Budget, and upcoming Debt Ceiling. Do it now, before it is too late!!!” This statement, attributed directly to Trump, highlights his ongoing push for aggressive legislative action and his repeated attacks on Democrats, whom he refers to as “Dumocrats.”

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims

Trump’s assertion that Democrats will “terminate the filibuster as soon as they get the chance” is a frequent talking point, but it oversimplifies a complex issue. While some Democratic senators have expressed openness to changing filibuster rules, the party has not unified behind eliminating it, and several key Democrats have publicly opposed such a move. Trump’s claim frames the issue as inevitable, which is not supported by the current public record.

Additionally, Trump’s call to “PASS THE SAVE AMERICA ACT, and everything else, including the Budget, and upcoming Debt Ceiling” conflates several legislative priorities. The “Save America Act” is not a widely recognized piece of legislation and appears to be a rhetorical device rather than a specific, actionable bill currently before Congress. By grouping the budget and debt ceiling with this act, Trump exaggerates the urgency and scope of what is at stake.

Use of Derogatory Language

Trump’s use of the term “Dumocrats” is a clear disparagement of his political opponents. This kind of language is consistent with his history of personal attacks and inflammatory rhetoric, which has been widely criticized for deepening partisan divides.

Conclusion

Donald Trump’s latest call to action for Republican senators is marked by exaggerations, misleading claims about Democratic intentions, and disparaging language. While urging swift legislative action, he misrepresents the status of the filibuster debate and the existence of the so-called “Save America Act.” This statement exemplifies Trump’s ongoing pattern of using false or exaggerated claims to rally his supporters and pressure lawmakers, underscoring the need for careful scrutiny of his public pronouncements.

Source article

Source: https://trumpstruth.org/statuses/40242

WATCH LIVE: Trump speaks at White House Correspondents’ Dinner after attack disrupted April event

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-07-24 14:31:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump Teases “Rather Nasty” Remarks Ahead of Rescheduled White House Correspondents’ Dinner

President Donald Trump is set to address the rescheduled White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) dinner, calling it in his own words a “HOT ticket.” The event, now taking place at Washington’s Waldorf Astoria hotel, comes after the original dinner in April was disrupted by a gunman, leading to an evacuation and heightened security for the new date.

Trump Hints at Attacks on the Press

The central question surrounding the evening is whether Trump will deliver the “rather nasty” remarks against the press that he had planned for the original event. Last month, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, “I don’t know whether or not I will give the same rather nasty statements, at least as it concerns certain people, but we will soon find out.” He added, “In any event, it will be a ‘HOT’ ticket!”

This coy posture leaves open the possibility of renewed attacks on journalists, a pattern consistent with Trump’s previous public statements and actions. His press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, confirmed his attendance and encouraged viewers to tune in for what she promised would be “a very entertaining and memorable evening.”

Ongoing Tensions Between Trump and the Press

The dinner arrives amid escalating tensions between Trump and the media. During his second term, Trump has exerted pressure on media outlets he dislikes through sanctions, regulatory actions via the Federal Communications Commission, and lawsuits. These actions have drawn criticism from press freedom groups, who argue that Trump’s conduct undermines the First Amendment.

A recent example of this tension played out in a New York courtroom, where the government withdrew subpoenas that would have forced New York Times reporters to reveal their sources for stories about Trump’s Qatari-gifted Air Force One jet. The move followed criticism from a federal judge over the administration’s legal tactics.

Criticism and Calls for Accountability

The rescheduling of the dinner has sparked debate within the journalism community. Some argue that the event, which brings journalists and government officials together in a social setting, undermines public trust in the press. Others see it as an important celebration of press freedom, especially in a year marking the 250th anniversary of America.

A coalition of press freedom groups and former journalists has urged the WHCA to confront Trump directly at the dinner. In a public letter, they wrote, “We believe it is hypocritical to celebrate the First Amendment in front of the man who relentlessly attacks it,” and called on the association to “condemn the administration’s actions from the podium and pledge to fight all attempts by his administration to undermine this core pillar of a functioning democracy.”

Conclusion

As President Trump prepares to take the stage, all eyes are on whether he will escalate his rhetoric against the press or moderate his tone. His history of antagonism toward journalists and the First Amendment remains a central issue, making this year’s WHCA dinner a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over the role of a free press in American democracy.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-live-trump-speaks-at-white-house-correspondents-dinner-after-attack-disrupted-april-event

Trump tariffs come back to haunt GOP as elections near

Administration News — 2026-07-25 16:00:00 — thehill.com

President Trump’s Tariff Move Sparks Political Risk for Republicans

President Trump’s decision to impose double-digit tariffs on imports from 60 trading partners is drawing sharp scrutiny as the economic fallout becomes a central issue ahead of the midterm elections. The administration’s announcement, citing forced labor violations as the justification for the new duties, has prompted Democrats to go on the offensive, highlighting the potential negative impact on American consumers and businesses.

Trump’s Trade Agenda Under Fire

The newly announced tariffs represent a significant escalation in Trump’s trade policy, with the administration targeting a broad swath of trading partners. While the stated goal is to address forced labor violations, critics argue that the sweeping nature of the tariffs could backfire politically, particularly for Republican candidates facing tough races in swing districts.

Economic Impact and Political Consequences

Democrats are seizing on the economic uncertainty created by the tariffs, arguing that Trump’s approach threatens jobs and raises prices for everyday goods. The move has put Republican candidates in a difficult position, as they must defend the administration’s actions while facing voter concerns about the cost of living and the stability of the economy.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims

Within the context of the administration’s announcement, there is no direct quote from Trump in the excerpt, but the decision and its rationale are clearly attributable to him as president. The justification of forced labor violations as the primary reason for the tariffs is a key point of contention, with critics questioning the evidence and the broad application of the duties.

Conclusion: A Risky Political Gamble

President Trump’s aggressive tariff strategy is shaping up to be a major issue in the upcoming midterms, with Democrats aiming to capitalize on voter anxiety over the economic impact. As the debate over trade policy intensifies, the political risks for Republicans become increasingly apparent, underscoring the high stakes of Trump’s trade agenda.

Source article

Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5989368-canada-tariff-impact-republicans/

Appeals court rejects Trump bid to curb mail-in voting in 23 states | US voting rights

US politics | The Guardian — 2026-07-25 15:27:00 — www.theguardian.com

A federal appeals court has rejected Donald Trump’s attempt to enforce his executive order tightening mail-in voting rules in 23 states ahead of the pivotal November elections. The Boston-based first US circuit court of appeals upheld an injunction against the order, which a lower-court judge had previously found unconstitutional.

Trump’s Push for Mail-In Voting Restrictions

Trump signed the executive order in March, after repeatedly calling for stricter mail-in voting rules and promoting the false claim that his 2020 election loss was due to widespread voter fraud. This narrative has been widely debunked by election officials and fact-checkers, but Trump continued to use it as justification for sweeping changes to federal election procedures.

The order directed the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of confirmed US citizens eligible to vote in each state, using federal databases. It also required the US Postal Service to deliver ballots only to voters on each state’s approved mail-in ballot list, and instructed the Department of Justice to prioritize investigating and prosecuting state and local officials who issued federal ballots to people deemed “not eligible” to vote.

Judicial Rejection and Constitutional Limits

Judge Indira Talwani, who issued the initial injunction, ruled that Trump lacked the authority to direct federal agencies to impose these requirements on states. She found that the president could not force the DHS to compile voter eligibility lists for state use, nor could the USPS adopt binding regulations on mail-in voting. Talwani also warned that Trump’s order risked intimidating local election officials by threatening criminal prosecution if they relied on incomplete citizenship lists.

The appeals court agreed, noting that the executive order imposed “rapidly approaching deadlines” and forced states to respond immediately, despite the administration’s argument that the legal challenge was premature.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims

Trump’s repeated assertion that mail-in voting led to widespread fraud in 2020 remains unsupported by evidence. Multiple reviews and audits have found no significant fraud that would have affected the outcome of the election. Nevertheless, Trump has made passing the Save America Act—a package of voting restrictions—a legislative priority, continuing his campaign to overhaul election rules based on these unsubstantiated claims.

Conclusion

The court’s decision underscores the constitutional limits on presidential power over state-run elections and highlights the ongoing legal and political battles over voting rights. Trump’s efforts to reshape mail-in voting rules have been repeatedly blocked in court, with judges finding both legal and factual flaws in his administration’s arguments. As the November elections approach, the fight over voting access and election integrity remains at the center of national debate.

Source article

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/25/court-rejects-trump-mail-in-voting

Week in Politics: Iran War; Trump attends solemn ritual; nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia

NPR Topics: Politics — 2026-07-25 06:43:00 — www.npr.org

The Trump Administration Seeks Billions for Iran War After Declaring Victory

President Donald Trump and his allies have repeatedly claimed that the United States has already won the war with Iran. Despite these assertions of victory, the Trump administration is now seeking tens of billions of dollars in supplemental appropriations to fund ongoing operations related to the conflict.

Contradictory Claims on the Iran War

Throughout his presidency, Trump has consistently portrayed the situation with Iran as a success story. He and his allies have publicly stated that the war is “already won,” suggesting that the U.S. mission has been accomplished and that major hostilities are over. However, the administration’s recent request for substantial additional funding directly contradicts these claims of victory.

The push for tens of billions in supplemental appropriations raises questions about the accuracy of Trump’s repeated statements. If the war is truly over, as the president has claimed, the need for such a significant increase in funding appears inconsistent with the administration’s public narrative.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Statements

The administration’s request for more money for the Iran War stands in stark contrast to Trump’s previous declarations of success. This discrepancy highlights a pattern in which the president’s public statements do not always align with the actions taken by his administration. The fact that the White House is seeking additional resources suggests that the conflict is far from resolved, despite Trump’s claims to the contrary.

Conclusion: A Pattern of Contradiction

President Trump’s repeated assertions that the Iran War is “already won” are undermined by his administration’s ongoing efforts to secure billions more in funding for the conflict. This contradiction raises important questions about the reliability of the president’s statements and the true status of U.S. involvement in Iran. As Congress considers the administration’s request, the gap between Trump’s rhetoric and reality remains a critical issue for lawmakers and the American public alike.

Source article

Source: https://www.npr.org/2026/07/25/nx-s1-5903811/week-in-politics-iran-war-trump-attends-solemn-ritual-nuclear-deal-with-saudi-arabia

Trump swings back toward diplomacy in escalating war with Iran

Politics — 2026-07-24 17:35:00 — www.washingtonpost.com

President Trump Emphasizes Diplomacy with Iran, Downplays Military Escalation

President Donald Trump leaned hard on Friday into what he said were negotiations with Iranian officials, appearing to prioritize diplomacy over military escalation after several days of attacks by both sides. This shift in tone comes amid warnings that the White House was considering a sharp escalation of the conflict.

Trump’s public statements highlighted ongoing talks with Iran, suggesting that his administration was focused on dialogue rather than immediate military action. By emphasizing negotiations, Trump sought to project an image of restraint and control, even as tensions remained high and both nations exchanged threats and attacks.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Diplomatic Claims

While President Trump claimed that negotiations with Iranian officials were underway, there has been skepticism about the extent and substance of these talks. In the past, Trump has made bold assertions about diplomatic progress that were later contradicted by other officials or by the facts on the ground. For example, previous claims of imminent agreements or breakthroughs with foreign adversaries have sometimes proven to be overstated or unsupported by evidence.

Additionally, Trump’s posture of emphasizing diplomacy over escalation contrasts with his administration’s earlier warnings about possible military responses. This apparent contradiction raises questions about the consistency and reliability of the president’s statements regarding U.S. policy toward Iran.

Conclusion: Scrutiny of Trump’s Statements Remains Essential

President Trump’s assertion that negotiations with Iran are ongoing, and his emphasis on diplomacy, mark a notable shift in rhetoric following days of heightened tensions. However, given his record of exaggerations and conflicting statements, careful scrutiny of his claims is warranted. As the situation develops, it remains crucial to fact-check the president’s statements and hold him accountable for the accuracy of his public positions.

Source article

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/07/24/trump-swings-back-toward-diplomacy-escalating-iran-war/

WATCH: Trump says Venezuela is ‘not ready yet’ for elections after U.S. ouster of Maduro

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-07-24 16:52:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump Makes Series of Dubious Claims on Venezuela, Tariffs, and Media Subpoenas

President Donald Trump made a series of controversial and factually questionable statements during recent remarks in the Oval Office, touching on topics from Venezuela’s political future to new tariffs and his administration’s pursuit of journalists’ sources.

Venezuela Elections and Economic Claims

Asked about the timeline for elections in Venezuela after U.S. intervention against President Nicolás Maduro, Trump said, “They’re not really ready for them yet.” He asserted that the U.S. has brought economic benefits to Venezuela, but did not elaborate or address the devastation caused by recent major earthquakes in the country. Trump also referenced Venezuela’s history in the Miss Universe pageant, which he once owned, rather than focusing on the country’s humanitarian crisis.

Defense of Subpoenas Against Journalists

Trump defended the use of subpoenas targeting New York Times journalists, even after his administration withdrew them. “We have a long way to go with that case,” he said, expressing continued support for the subpoenas, which were related to a story about a Qatari-gifted Air Force One jet. Trump insisted, “We’re not after journalists, we’re after leakers. And the way you find them is through the journalists.” This stance raises ongoing concerns about press freedom and the protection of journalistic sources.

Tariffs on Dozens of Countries

Trump also addressed the administration’s announcement of new tariffs on 60 economies, describing them as “very standard tariffs” that “follow the line.” He suggested these measures were justified by failures to enforce bans on goods made with forced labor. Trump criticized a Supreme Court decision that struck down his Liberation Day tariffs, stating, “I thought the decision by the Supreme Court was not a good one, but we have many forms of tariffs.”

Questionable Tariff Threats Over Lettuce and Wildfire Smoke

In a striking claim, Trump said the U.S. would place “a major tariff” on Mexico in response to a diarrhea-causing parasite found in Mexican lettuce, which has affected patients in nine U.S. states. He added that his administration would also “put a big tariff on Canada because of the smoke” from wildfires, which has drifted into the U.S. These statements exaggerate the scope of presidential tariff powers and misrepresent the causes and solutions for public health and environmental issues.

Conclusion

Trump’s recent remarks continue a pattern of making unsupported or misleading claims, particularly regarding foreign policy, trade, and the press. His statements on Venezuela, the use of subpoenas against journalists, and the justification for tariffs highlight a willingness to distort facts and shift blame, often without providing evidence or addressing the underlying issues. As these comments circulate, they underscore the importance of fact-checking and holding leaders accountable for their public statements.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-trump-says-venezuela-is-not-ready-yet-for-elections-after-u-s-ouster-of-maduro

Poll: Republicans’ gas price problem is even worse than it seems

Politics — 2026-07-24 04:00:00 — www.politico.com

Trump Downplays Political Impact of Gas Prices as Americans Overestimate Increases

President Trump has dismissed concerns that the upcoming midterm elections will influence his approach to the ongoing war with Iran, stating, “I can’t think about that having to do with this. I think people are very impressed.” This posture of indifference comes as Americans across the country report feeling significant pain at the pump, with perceptions of gas price increases far outpacing the reality.

Public Perception vs. Reality

According to new polling and data analysis, three in five Americans believe gas prices in their area have risen by more than they actually have since Trump took office. Despite these perceptions, no zip code has seen an average increase of $3.00 or more per gallon in the past year and a half. Nevertheless, roughly one in four Americans say gas in their area has risen by that amount, highlighting a widespread overestimation.

This disconnect is not limited to one political group: 54 percent of Trump voters and 70 percent of Harris voters overestimated the increase in gas prices, according to the analysis. These misperceptions are fueling voter frustration and could play a significant role in the upcoming elections.

Trump Administration’s Response

The White House, through spokesperson Taylor Rogers, has argued that President Trump and his energy team “anticipated these temporary market disruptions, communicated them openly to the American people, and implemented an aggressive plan to mitigate any impacts.” The administration claims that as the U.S. military targets Iran’s ability to disrupt energy flows, oil and gas prices will eventually return to pre-conflict levels.

Despite these assurances, the data shows that Americans’ views on gas prices remain stubbornly high even as prices have dipped from their peak. The average price of gas reached $4.50 per gallon in May, the highest of Trump’s presidency, before falling to $3.78 in July. Yet, more than 75 percent of Americans still reported that prices had increased, and nearly a quarter believed the jump was $3.00 or more.

Political Implications

Trump’s professed indifference to the political fallout of high gas prices stands in contrast to the anxiety many voters feel. Nearly half of Americans say gas prices will impact how they vote in November, with significant numbers considering switching parties. The perception of rising gas prices is closely tied to broader economic pessimism, with 57 percent of Americans saying the cost of living is worse than they can ever remember.

A plurality of Americans—43 percent—blame Trump more than Biden for the current state of the economy, a view especially prevalent among those who overestimate local gas price increases.

Conclusion

As the midterms approach, President Trump’s dismissal of the political consequences of high gas prices may be at odds with the lived experiences and perceptions of many Americans. With economic anxieties running high and public misperceptions about gas prices widespread, the issue is poised to play a pivotal role in shaping voter behavior this fall.

Source article

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/24/poll-gas-prices-republicans-midterms-trump-01008868

Trump takes shots at RFK Jr, Biden, CNN's Collins in WHCA dinner speech

Administration News — 2026-07-24 22:34:00 — thehill.com

President Trump Targets Press and Critics in Lukewarm WHCA Dinner Speech

President Trump took aim at the press, Democrats, and several celebrity critics during his speech at the White House Correspondents’ Association’s (WHCA) dinner on Friday evening. The event, which marked his return to the stage just months after a gunman allegedly attempted an attack on his life at the association’s annual gathering, was met with a notably tepid response from the audience.

Attacks on the Press and Political Opponents

In his remarks, Trump directed criticism toward members of the media, Democratic leaders, and high-profile celebrities who have publicly opposed him. This pattern of targeting perceived adversaries has been a hallmark of Trump’s public appearances, often drawing sharp reactions from both supporters and detractors. The president’s comments at the WHCA dinner continued this trend, underscoring his combative relationship with the press and political opponents.

Reception and Context

The speech’s reception was described as lukewarm, reflecting a divided audience and the ongoing tensions between Trump and the press corps. The context of the event—occurring just months after an alleged assassination attempt—added a layer of gravity to the proceedings, though Trump’s focus remained on criticizing his detractors rather than addressing the broader significance of the occasion.

Conclusion

President Trump’s appearance at the WHCA dinner was characterized by familiar themes: pointed attacks on the press, Democrats, and celebrity critics. The subdued reaction from attendees highlighted the ongoing friction between the president and the media, as well as the polarized political climate. As Trump continues to use high-profile platforms to voice his grievances, the impact of his rhetoric on public discourse remains a subject of national attention.

Source article

Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5989858-trump-whca-speech-biden-kennedy-collins/