Connect with us

Economics

Donald Trump has again rewritten the history of January 6th

Published

on

“THIS IS A big one,” Donald Trump said as he signed a clemency order for nearly 1,600 January 6th rioters just hours after being sworn into office. By evening Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys, a far-right group, who had been serving a 22-year sentence in federal prison for choreographing the attack on the Capitol, was in a holding cell in Louisiana awaiting release. In a phone call with The Economist that night his mother exulted that her boy would be home in Miami within days.

The amnesty proved to be even more sweeping than its beneficiaries had anticipated. “This is leaps and bounds better than I could have hoped,” says John Kinsman, a Proud Boy who served four years in prison. “Never in a million years” did he think that Mr Trump would set every January 6th “hostage” free. All but 14 leaders of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, a militia, who breached the Capitol building, were granted full pardons. Their pardons lift penalties that typically arise from felony convictions, such as restrictions on buying guns, visiting certain foreign countries and, in some states, voting. Those who weren’t pardoned had their sentences commuted. In those cases, Mr Trump said, his team needed to do “further research”.

The outcome seemed surprising because just last week J.D. Vance, now the vice-president, told viewers on Fox News that “if you committed violence on that day obviously you shouldn’t be pardoned.” Yet many who had were. Pam Bondi, Mr Trump’s nominee to lead the Department of Justice (DoJ), echoed Mr Vance’s restraint, saying that she planned to look at the January 6th offenders on a “case-by-case” basis. The fact that Mr Trump overruled them suggests that the scope of his final decision was his own idea. Asked why he had ignored Mr Vance’s advice, Mr Trump said that those imprisoned had served enough time and had had their lives upended.

To some career DoJ lawyers who brought the cases, Mr Trump’s actions only reinforce their belief that he sought on January 6th to goad his supporters to sack the Capitol. “This is one of the most candid acknowledgements that what happened that day is what he intended,” says a senior DoJ lawyer. It is indeed reasonable to see the pardons as an endorsement of the mob violence that took place. In the summary of his now-dismissed case published on January 7th, Jack Smith, the special counsel investigating Mr Trump for his role in the Capitol attack, wrote that his office had sufficient evidence to “obtain and sustain a conviction”. But Mr Trump has now made sure that the meaning of the January 6th assault will be long contested. To them the pardons rectify an injustice arising from overreach by Mr Trump’s foes, including Mr Smith.

It is unarguable that soon hundreds of people who punched police, smashed windows and broke through barricades will be home. Though many of them are ordinary doctors and businessmen, at least 200 have pledged allegiance to a militia-like group. In interviews Proud Boys across America say that jail time has subdued their movement—and watch-dog groups like Miami Against Fascism agree that their power has been “severely diminished”.

Nonetheless political violence, both on the left and the right, has soared since 2021; there were two lone-wolf attempts on Mr Trump’s life during the campaign. According to an analysis by Robert Pape of the University of Chicago, the DoJ prosecuted 26 threats against members of Congress between 2022 and 2023. Yet Mr Trump’s administration may not pursue domestic radicals as forcefully as Joe Biden’s administration did.

There is some precedent for a president pardoning citizens who attacked America’s government with physical force, says Kimberly Wehle, a law professor who wrote a book on pardon power. The closest parallel is perhaps Andrew Johnson’s decision to grant amnesty to thousands of Confederate soldiers after the civil war. But he forced them to swear loyalty to the country and free their slaves as a condition of their release, thereby requiring them to admit defeat on the biggest issue they had fought for. Then as now, forgiveness exacerbated the nation’s divides.

Economics

Trump’s triple-digit tariff essentially cuts off most trade with China, says economist

Published

on

U.S. President Donald Trump attends a cabinet meeting at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 10, 2025.

Nathan Howard | Reuters

President Donald Trump’s tariff increase on imports from China would basically end most trade between that country and the U.S., according to economist Erica York.

“It depends on how narrowly the tariff is applied or how broadly it’s applied, but generally if you get north of a triple-digit tariff, you are cutting off most trade,” the vice president of federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation’s Center for Federal Tax Policy said on CNBC’s “The Exchange” on Thursday. “There may still be some things without any substitutes that companies just have to foot the bill, but for the most part, that cuts it off.”

Her remarks came amid the market wiping out some of its monster gains seen on Wednesday. The market accelerated declines on Thursday once a White House official confirmed to CNBC that the U.S. tariff rate on Chinese goods now stands at 145%. That total includes the recent hike to 125% from 84% that Trump announced Wednesday as well as a 20% fentanyl-related duty that the president had previously put into effect.

On Wednesday, Trump announced that he’s temporarily reducing the tariff rates on imports from most countries, except China, to 10% for 90 days. In a Cabinet meeting Thursday, the president declined to rule out the possibility of extending the 90-day tariff reprieve.

Taking into account the China tariffs, the baseline 10% levies still in place and other sector tariffs, Trump has still taken the country into its most protectionist stance in decades, even with the pause.

“It’ll take the average tariff rate still to highs that we haven’t seen since the 1940s, so this is major,” the economist added. “It’s huge cost increases. It’s an economic hit. It’s clearly not setting us on a very good path.”

The Tax Foundation estimates that all of the new Trump tariffs will lead to an increase in federal tax revenues of $171.6 billion for this year. That would make Trump’s tariffs the biggest tax increase since 1993, more than the hikes under both former presidents George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama, the institution revealed.

China has said it won’t flinch if trade dynamics were to escalate into a trade war. Just hours prior to Trump’s tariff pause announcement, China raised its retaliatory levies on U.S. imports to 84% from 34%, which went into effect Thursday.

Even with Trump’s reversal, York stressed that the market isn’t in the clear just yet, saying “it’s not like the threat went away entirely.”

Continue Reading

Economics

Trump’s tariff blitz faces strong legal challenges

Published

on

WITH MARKETS gyrating from the tariffs Donald Trump has imposed on around 180 countries, only to pause some of the most punishing ones on April 9th, a conservative organisation has filed a lawsuit challenging an initial round of tariffs the president announced on Chinese imports in February, duties he has since escalated. The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), which counts Charles Koch, a right-wing billionaire, among its supporters, argues that the president lacked the authority to impose these levies. With Chinese goods still a prime target, the case retains its salience. Similar lawsuits against other tariffs could yet scuttle the boldest—and most destabilising—move of Mr Trump’s second term.

Continue Reading

Economics

Donald Trump wants to deport foreign students merely for what they say

Published

on

“EVERY TIME I find one of these lunatics I take away their visa.” That is how Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, last month described the Trump administration’s push to deport foreign university students who had participated in campus activism. Mr Rubio initially suggested that his department had cancelled at least 300 visas. That number increasingly looks out of date as the deportation campaign has spread beyond elite east-coast schools and for conduct beyond protest and speech. More than 100 students in California alone have had their visas yanked—some of them seemingly for infractions as minor as a speeding ticket.

Continue Reading

Trending