President Donald Trump’s bid Friday to sootheconsumers by dropping tariffs on a wide array of groceries, including coffee, beef, bananas and tomatoes — contradicting his repeated claims that the levies were not affecting retail prices — shows he is on the defensive over his signature policy initiative.
Public opposition, eroding support on Capitol Hill and a potentially lethal challenge before the Supreme Court have Trump scrambling to defend his economic strategy even as the administration notches diplomatic agreements that are cementing its high-tariff approach to rebalancing global trade.
Sophia Loren with her cat, 1959
Public opinion is the immediate worry, following recent Democratic electoral victories in Virginia and New Jersey that were fueled by Americans’ ire over the cost of living. By a nearly 2-to-1 margin, registered voters disapproved of the president’s tariffs in a recent Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll, a finding that has been consistent all year and could imperil Republican candidates in next year’s congressional elections.
The president on Friday issued an executive order rolling back import taxes on many foods, his most significant retreat on the emergency tariffs he imposed in April, which were billed at the time as loophole-free. In September, the White House had signaled that some products that are not generally produced in the United States could be spared tariffs once nations where they originate reached trade deals with the United States. But Friday’s exemptions apply to products from any nation, even those that have not agreed on trade terms.
“They know that they shouldn’t have imposed a lot of these tariffs and that they’re hurting affordability for consumers. Now they’re looking for a way to justify lowering them. And that’s fine. But did we really need to go through all this in the first place?” said Christopher Padilla, senior adviser to the Brunswick Group and a former trade official in the George W. Bush administration….
This week’s tariff cuts appear aimed at responding to public concern over high prices. Inflation overall is running at an annual rate of 3 percent, above the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent target for price stability but well down from the mid-2022 peak of 9.1 percent.
Prices on many everyday items, however, continue to soar. Through September, the most recent data available, coffee prices were up 19 percent over the previous 12 months, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Bananas were up 7 percent.
Elizabeth Buchwald at CNN: Trump’s latest tariff TACO probably won’t make your life more affordable.
Americans could soon see some goods get cheaper after President Donald Trump exempted certain agricultural imports from a set of tariffs on Friday. But any price drops likely won’t be enough to make life feel more affordable any time soon.
The executive order exempted products like coffee, beef and some fruit from Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs, which began rolling out in April.
The new exemptions are part of what traders have dubbed TACO, or Trump Always Chickens Out, to describe times when the president backs off a policy after unintended consequences pop up. In the case of tariffs, Trump has already reversed a number of his measures, a sign that the administration is reshaping his signature economic tool.
The latest TACO comes after voters, worried about affordability, gave Republicans a drubbing in recent off-year elections.
Why this likely won’t help consumers much:
Nevertheless, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the new exemptions generally won’t help improve affordability.
“It depends on what the importers do with the tariff,” he said in a CNBC interview on Friday. “So when you look at the overall price trend, it hasn’t been because of tariffs. It’s been because of these other events going on and just supply and demand.”
Steve Martin and cat
But in cases where tariffs have been passed along to consumers, prices could drop, Greer said.
One potential example: bananas. American consumers are paying about 8% more for bananas than before Trump’s second term began.
The US largely imports bananas from South American countries. With bananas exempt from “reciprocal” tariffs that started at 10%, prices could go back to where they were earlier this year, said Sarah House, senior economist at Wells Fargo. But it’s unlikely to be something most consumers notice unless they’re buying bananas often, she added.
But not everyone is convinced it will even do that much.
“It is not clear that lowering tariffs will lower prices — it depends on what retailers think they can get away with. The import price of bananas has fallen since tariffs were imposed, but the US consumer price has risen,” Paul Donovan, chief economist at UBS global wealth management, said in a note last week. (The United States tracks import prices before accounting for tariffs. In some cases, import prices have fallen as exporters lower what they charge as a way to share in the tariff expense importers pay.)
More analysis at the CNN link.
Another flop: Trump’s soybean deal with China may have just been a mirage. AP: USDA data casts doubt on China’s soybean purchase promises touted by Trump.
New data the Agriculture Department released Friday created serious doubts about whether China will really buy millions of bushels of American soybeans like the Trump administration touted last month after a high-stakes meeting between President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
The USDA report released after the government reopened showed only two Chinese purchases of American soybeans since the summit in South Korea that totaled 332,000 metric tons. That’s well short of the 12 million metric tons that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said China agreed to purchase by January and nowhere near the 25 million metric tons she said they would buy in each of the next three years.
American farmers were hopeful that their biggest customer would resume buying their crops. But CoBank’s Tanner Ehmke, who is its lead economist for grains and oilseed, said there isn’t much incentive for China to buy from America right now because they have plenty of soybeans on hand that they have bought from Brazil and other South American countries this year, and the remaining tariffs ensure that U.S. soybeans remain more expensive than Brazilian beans.
“We are still not even close to what has been advertised from the U.S. in terms of what the agreement would have been,” Ehmke said.
Beijing has yet to confirm any detailed soybean purchase agreement but only that the two sides have reached “consensus” on expanding trade in farm products. Ehmke said that even if China did promise to buy American soybeans it may have only agreed to buy them if the price was attractive.
Will Trump try to distract from the Epstein files and his failures on the economy by taking us to war with Venezuela?
David E. Sanger, Eric Schmit, Tyler Pager, and Zolan Kanno-Youngs at The New York Times (gift link): Trump Escalates Pressure on Venezuela, but Endgame Is Unclear.
The Trump administration is rapidly escalating its pressure campaign against Venezuela, with America’s largest aircraft carrier, the Ford, about to take up a position within striking distance of the country, even as President Trump’s aides provide conflicting accounts of what, exactly, they are seeking to achieve.
Mr. Trump held back-to-back days of meetings at the White House over the past two days, reviewing military options, including the use of Special Operations forces and direct action inside Venezuela.
Marlyn Monroe with her cat
It is still not clear whether Mr. Trump has made a decision about what kind of action to authorize, if any. On Friday, he told reporters on Air Force One that “I sort of made up my mind.” “I can’t tell you what it is,” he said, “but we made a lot of progress with Venezuela in terms of stopping drugs from pouring in.”
It is possible Mr. Trump is relying on the arrival of so much firepower to intimidate the government of Nicolás Maduro, who the United States and many of its allies say is not Venezuela’s legitimate president. Mr. Maduro has put his forces on high alert, leaving the two countries with their weapons cocked and ready for war.
There were signs that the administration was moving into a new and more aggressive posture. Shortly after a meeting on Thursday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth posted on social media that the mission in the Caribbean now had a name — “Southern Spear.” He described its goal in expansive terms, saying the operation “removes narco-terrorists from our Hemisphere.”
“The Western Hemisphere is America’s neighborhood,” he wrote, “and we will protect it.” With the arrival of the Ford and three accompanying missile-firing Navy destroyers, there are now 15,000 troops in the region, more than there have been at any time in decades.
The only thing missing is a strategic explanation from the Trump administration that would clarify why the United States is amassing such a large force. Mr. Hegseth’s posting on X was only the latest in a series of statements from administration officials that, at best, are in tension with one another. Some are outright contradictory.
Mr. Trump has been the most consistent, saying it is all about drugs. But that would not explain why the Ford was rushed from the eastern Mediterranean Sea to the Caribbean region, adding to an American force that has now reached 15,000 soldiers and sailors, to attack small boats that until early September had been intercepted by the Coast Guard. Nor would it explain why Colombia or Mexico — Mexico being the main conduit for fentanyl — are not in the Navy’s sights.
Dan Lamothe, Tara Copp, Michael Birnbaum, and Noah Robertson: Trump weighs Venezuela strikes as U.S. forces prepare for attack order.
President Donald Trump said Friday night that he has “sort of made up my mind” about how he will proceed with the possibility of military action in Venezuela, following a second consecutive day of deliberations at the White House that included top national security advisers.
Trump’s vague remarks aboard Air Force One were delivered as he traveled for the weekend to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, and included no additional new details. The comments came as U.S. forces in the region awaited possible attack orders and after days of high-level discussions about whether — and how — to strike in Venezuela, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the matter is highly sensitive. Joining Trump in deliberations Friday were Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, these people said.
Robert Redford with his cat
Earlier in the day, an administration official said “a host of options” had been presented to the president. Trump is “very good at maintaining strategic ambiguity, and something he does very well is he does not dictate or broadcast to our adversaries what he wants to do next,” the official said.
Any strike on Venezuelan territory would upend the president’s frequent promises of avoiding new conflicts and betray promises made to Congress in recent weeks that no active preparations were underway for such an attack. It also would further complicate U.S. cooperation with other Latin American countries, and deepen suspicions — there and in Washington — over whether Trump’s endgame is the forced removal of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, whom Trump has accused of sending drugs and violent criminals to the United States.
Maduro, a socialist strongman, came to power in Caracas in 2013 and increasingly has become a fixation for Trump.
In August, U.S. officials increased the reward for information leading to his arrest and conviction from $25 million to $50 million, citing alleged ties to drug cartels and U.S. beliefs dating back to the Biden administration that he lost Venezuela’s 2024 presidential election and refused to step down.
“The United States is very plugged into what’s going on in Venezuela, the chatter among Maduro’s people and the highest levels of his regime,” the administration official said. “Maduro is very scared, and he should be scared. The president has options on the table that are very bad for Maduro and his illegitimate regime. … We view this regime as illegitimate, and it’s not serving the Western Hemisphere well.”
President Donald Trump has said he believes Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s days are numbered, and that land strikes inside Venezuela are possible.
Experts say that the US doesn’t currently have the military assets in place to launch a largescale operation to remove Maduro from power, though Trump has approved covert action within Venezuela, CNN has reported.
Bette Davis with cat
But if Trump did order strikes inside Venezuela aimed at ousting Maduro, he could face serious challenges with fractured opposition elements and a military poised for insurgency, according to experts, as well as political backlash at home for a president who promised to avoid costly entanglements overseas.
CNN reported that Trump received a briefing earlier this week to review updated options for military action inside Venezuela, a concept the White House has been weighing. The administration had not made a decision on whether to launch strikes, CNN reported, though the US military has moved more than a dozen warships and 15,000 troops into the region as part of what the Pentagon branded Operation Southern Spear in an announcement Thursday.
The concentration of military assets and threats of further attacks beyond the ongoing drug boat campaign have served to increase pressure on Maduro, with administration officials saying he needs to leave office while arguing that he’s closely tied to the Tren de Aragua gang and leading drug trafficking efforts.
But if Maduro does flee Venezuela or is killed out in a targeted strike, experts worry about a military takeover of the country or the boosting of another dictator similar to Maduro.
Read the rest at CNN.
Those are my recommended reads. I’ll add a few more links in the comment thread. What stories are you interested in today?
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
The Washington Post: Preservationists sue Trump over plans to paint Eisenhower building.
Preservationists concerned by President Donald Trump’s public musings this week about painting a 137-year-old building next to the White House completely white sued him Fridayto halt the work, arguing that he could not unilaterally alter “one of the most architecturally significant and historic structures in the Nation’s Capital.”
Trump had taken aim at the stately Eisenhower Executive Office Building in a television interview that aired Wednesday on FOX, saying “it was always considered an ugly building.” He was particularly irked by its color, which he said was too dour for the White House’s next-door neighbor.
“Gray is for funerals,” he told his interviewer, Laura Ingraham.
Trump vowed to make it “beautiful,” showing Ingraham a mock-up that turned the normally slate gray exterior into a palatial white.
“Look at it, how beautiful that is with a coat of paint,” he said.
The DC Preservation League and Cultural Heritage Partners, a law firm focused on historic preservation, took Trump seriously and scrambled to slow down any plans, given his recent demolition of the East Wing of the White House. On Friday, the groups asked a federal court to issue an emergency injunction prohibiting Trump and other federal officials from altering the building unless they complete legally required reviews. In a 35-page complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the plaintiffs accused Trump of trying to end-run legally-mandated public input into changes to historic buildings — echoing a complaint lodged by critics of his East Wing teardown.
“The Eisenhower Executive Office Building is one of our nation’s most significant architectural landmarks,” Greg Werkheiser, founding partner of the Cultural Heritage Partners law firm, said in a statement. “Any plan to alter that … like the President revealed this week, especially an irreversible action like painting it all white, must be preceded by a transparent public process that includes expert consultation and a full hard look at potential harms.”
David Herzberg at The New York Times: I Am a Drug Historian. Trump Is Wrong About Fentanyl in Almost Every Way.
It’s one of President Trump’s favorite stories: The Democrats weakened the borders, allowing Mexican drug cartels to smuggle fentanyl into the United States, where it devastated white suburban and rural communities. To stop this “evil scourge,” he has imposed tariffs on China for its role in fentanyl production. His administration is reportedly considering military strikes in Latin America. And Mr. Trump has built up the U.S. military presence in the Caribbean. “I think we’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country,” he told reporters of his campaign of deadly strikes.
The killing has already started. Since September, the military has carried out 20 strikes on boats supposedly smuggling drugs in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific, killing at least 80 people. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth celebrates these “lethal kinetic strikes” by posting aerial footage of the explosions on social media. Mr. Trump falsely boasts that each destroyed boat saves the lives of 25,000 Americans.
The brazenness is shocking. There is apparently no time to nitpick about imposing the death penalty on civilians never formally accused of a crime or to consider the destructive precedents of extending U.S. military force into the Americas.
The fentanyl story is based on an argument about history: The United States went from greatness to crisis because open-border Democrats betrayed the honest, hardworking people of America by exporting jobs and allowing in foreign drugs. Stopping the drugs, Mr. Trump wants us to believe, will let the wholesome, traditional American culture that he idealizes to flourish again. As a historian of drugs, I can tell you that this argument is wrong in almost every way.
There is no wholesome, traditional drug-free America that we can return to. Americans have always used a lot of drugs — even in the white suburbs and rural areas that Mr. Trump’s supporters call the “real America.”
The first drug crisis came in the Gilded Age of the late 19th century. In the unregulated, buyer-beware markets of that era, sales of pharmaceutical morphine, cocaine and heroin rose precipitously. Addiction rates skyrocketed, mostly among the white, propertied class of Americans who had ready access to a doctor.
New medical guidelines and federal laws curtailed the runaway opioid markets by the 1920s, but drug crises remained a persistent feature of American life. A combination of booming global trade, capital flight (“white flight”) and racial segregation led to repeated waves of heroin addiction in major cities from the 1950s to the 1970s. This “junkie” menace dominated the headlines, but non-urban America experienced even larger drug crises during the same period.
That’s because after pharmaceutical heroin and cocaine were reined in, their makers flooded markets with new drugs that did not face the same regulatory constraints. The first out of the gate were barbiturates, introduced in 1903, provoking warnings of “promiscuous use” by 1937 and contributing to the nation’s biggest wave yet of addiction and overdose by the 1950s. As barbiturates faded, they were replaced by “minor tranquilizers” such as Miltown, Valium and eventually Quaalude, which were among the best-selling medicines and the most common substances found in emergency room overdose victims of the 1960s and 1970s.
lincolnproject.us
The only person whose standard of living has improved during this Trump term is Ghislaine Maxwell.
https://www.meidasplus.com/p/trump-has-saturday-meltdown-as-crash
Saturday mornings in this country used to mean something predictable… Coffee, breakfast, maybe a quiet moment before the day begins. Remember those days?
Under Donald Trump, they’ve become a rolling crisis broadcast in real time from Mar-a-Lago, funded, as always, by the American taxpayer.
This morning, Trump’s crash out is escalating. He spent the morning erupting online, unleashing tirade after tirade at members of his own party and spiraling into increasingly erratic behavior, all in the wake of the 23,000 Epstein emails whose release has shattered what remains of Trump’s political equilibrium.
We now know that Trump’s name appears on more than half of the Epstein email threads, an extraordinary and deeply disturbing fact. And the president’s reaction is somehow even more revealing. His posts were a frenzy of projection and panic. He’s been calling Marjorie Taylor Greene “a disgrace,” before renaming her “lightweight Marjorie Taylor Brown.” He accused her of “turning left,” “becoming a RINO,” and “betraying the entire Republican Party.” Trump added: “Green grass turns Brown when it begins to ROT!” This is not strategy. This is collapse.
At the same time, the White House, now operating more like a crisis PR bunker than the seat of government, attempted a strange counter-programming campaign. They posted a photo of Trump and Melania embracing, captioned “I can’t help falling in love with you” as the Internet was abuzz regarding one email thread where Epstein and his brother discussed whether Vladimir Putin “has the photos of Trump blowing Bubba.” They posted a video of Trump and young children as his relationship with Epstein once again became the biggest news story. This is not normal.
I could not help but be reminded of all of Trump’s public obsessions and bizarre actions and comments on stage. There was nothing funny about it then, and there is certainly nothing funny about it now. The clips speak for themselves, from Trump miming sex acts on a microphone to retelling tales about Arnold Palmer’s anatomy during official events. These weren’t harmless eccentricities; they were symptoms of a leader unfit for any public office, let alone the presidency.
https://www.wbtv.com/2025/11/15/federal-officials-confirm-officers-have-begun-charlotte-immigration-enforcement/
Federal officials confirmed Saturday that a surge of immigration enforcement in North Carolina’s largest city had begun as agents were seen making arrests in multiple locations.
“Americans should be able to live without fear of violent criminal illegal aliens hurting them, their families, or their neighbors,” Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. “We are surging DHS law enforcement to Charlotte to ensure Americans are safe and public safety threats are removed.”
Local officials, including Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles criticized such actions, saying in a statement they “are causing unnecessary fear and uncertainty.”
“We want people in Charlotte and Mecklenburg County to know we stand with all residents who simply want to go about their lives,” said the statement, also signed by County Commissioner Mark Jerrell and Charlotte-Mecklenburg school board member Stephanie Sneed.