120

White House blasted by AP reporter for touting tariffs as 'a tax cut for the American people': 'Have you ever paid a tariff?' (www.latintimes.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Summary

AP reporter Josh Boak clashed with White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt over Trump's tariff policy, which she called “a tax cut for the American people.”

Boak challenged her claim: "I'm sorry, have you ever paid a tariff? Because I have. They don't get charged on foreign companies, they get charged on importers," Boak said.

Leavitt accused him of questioning her economic knowledge and later regretted calling on AP.

The tense exchange highlights ongoing White House-AP tensions, as a federal judge prepares to hear AP’s legal challenge over press access on March 20.

top 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] PointyReality@lemmy.world 46 points 2 weeks ago

Man people are dumb, for those that still think this is a good idea here is the logic. Tariffs increase the price to bring in goods to a country, the supplier will typically add this additional price increase and charge it back onto the buyer to absorb. Meaning the buyer will see an increase.

Now let’s say Trump is doing this to bring production back to the States, in order to be successful you need to keep costs down as low as possible. This is also the reason alot of countries sent their production overseas because it’s cheaper (wages for example). So in order for the US to even begin competing with production giants like China and keep costs down means workers in the US have to get used to the idea of China style wages and work conditions. Hence Trumps reasoning for giving more power back to companies so that in X years US becomes the new production hub. But the pain to get there is going to be astronomical for the US. Feel free to add or point out any illogical thought processes in my opinion.

[-] SatanClaus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 weeks ago

This comment sounds completely in line with reality lol. Weird reading something like that in these times.

[-] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Mind you, bringing production back to the US will never lower costs, completely regardless of the fact that labor and environmental compliance is more costly. All tariffs do is set a price floor for imported products that domestic supplies now only have to match.

[-] BrokenGlepnir@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

I don't think it's just the pain to get there. It's also painful just being there for the lower class.

[-] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

Which is everyone below the top 30%. They're eliminating the middle class.

[-] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Is the real way to stick it to Canada (and others) is set a limit on the amount of product they can export to the US?

[-] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Well...

First off, why do you want to stick of to Canada. They, by and large, have been good neighbors to the US. The only people who get angry at Canada are usually Canadians.

That aside, limiting imports limits supply, likely increasing prices for whatever product has been limited. It's not that different from the tariffs, as far as the consumer is concerned. The big difference is that it sets up a first mover benefit for the exporters/importers (if you get your whole supply across before the cutoff, you get to sell all of it, whereas later sellers might only be able to get part of their supply across. Faster companies benefit from this, to unknown effect.) as opposed to a capital/demand limit from the tariffs. (higher tariffs require higher prices, which often prices out some amount of people who would buy the item. Importers can try to narrow their unit margin or spend capital to sell more slowly. Companies with more capital can find it easier to afford either/both.)

[-] IHeartBadCode@fedia.io 34 points 2 weeks ago

Leavitt accused him of questioning her economic knowledge

Which is none. Her degree is in communications and politics which she got while riding a softball scholarship. She was a press writer for Trump's first term, worked as a communications director for Elise Stefanik during the interim, and now she is Press Secretary. None of that is fucking economics. She has zero fucking knowledge of how fucking economics works, that's just stating fucking fact. When it comes to economics she is a fucking idiot.

It's not even a fucking question. Josh Boak has worked in DC economics reporting since 2013, he literally has more economic knowledge in his left pinky fingernail than that stupid fuckface has in her entire fucking life. That is just FACT.

later regretted calling on AP

Because she is a thin skinned bitch. She absolutely cannot stand that people could possibly know MORE than her dumb fucking softball is about as good as it is ever going to get for her, ass could ever know. She's just a fucking idiot, that's all there is to it.

Yes you fucking idiot, yes, Boak knows more by measures larger than stellar bodies are measured, about economics than you. For a White House that gets up in arms about DEI hires, holy shit I dare someone to explain her dumbass.

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 27 points 2 weeks ago

"I now regret letting a real reporter show how stupid I am, and how stupid I think the American people are."- Dumb Reich Barbie.

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

This is the person whose tweet they directly spilled the beans was directly referenced by the judge as the reason an induction was placed on Trump's spending freeze order.

[-] doug@lemmy.today 8 points 2 weeks ago

Well he won’t be allowed back in the press room anytime soon.

[-] sleezer@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah that is true. It's good to see someone call out the lies when they happen though.

[-] Fingolfinz@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

The other day my mom asked me “wouldn’t you rather pay tariffs than income taxes?” I’m in the bottom percent of tax payers and she’s even worse off. I still haven’t responded.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I was interested in the video. Here is Josh Boak be a damn good journalist.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

LOL, when in doubt blame it on lugenpresse, oops, I mean the "fake news".

It's not that you are a fucking idiot and/or a fucking LIAR, it's that the question came from AP.

this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025

120 points (97.6% liked)

politics

22505 readers

1659 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News