Robert Lighthizer

We haven't had a raise in the middle class in 15 years, and you're worried about wage inflation. This is a man with a plane. I'm praying for wage inflation. This is what I want. I want these people to make more money and do better and inspire their children and do all the things you do in a community to make the country great. Yeah. So anyway, there will be changes.

We haven't had a raise in the middle class in 15 years, and you're worried about wage inflation. This is a man with a plane. I'm praying for wage inflation. This is what I want. I want these people to make more money and do better and inspire their children and do all the things you do in a community to make the country great. Yeah. So anyway, there will be changes.

The whole notion on a micro scale, in my opinion, It's to take more resources from the very wealthy and spread them out among the people. So a liberal will say, I diagnose the problem the way Lighthizer does. Let's tax the rich people and give it to the other people. My idea, that's insanity. What you need to do is devise a structure where these people have good jobs and make lots of money.

The whole notion on a micro scale, in my opinion, It's to take more resources from the very wealthy and spread them out among the people. So a liberal will say, I diagnose the problem the way Lighthizer does. Let's tax the rich people and give it to the other people. My idea, that's insanity. What you need to do is devise a structure where these people have good jobs and make lots of money.

The whole notion on a micro scale, in my opinion, It's to take more resources from the very wealthy and spread them out among the people. So a liberal will say, I diagnose the problem the way Lighthizer does. Let's tax the rich people and give it to the other people. My idea, that's insanity. What you need to do is devise a structure where these people have good jobs and make lots of money.

And that's the way you transfer resources and make the country good. You don't do it by tax policy or things like that.

And that's the way you transfer resources and make the country good. You don't do it by tax policy or things like that.

And that's the way you transfer resources and make the country good. You don't do it by tax policy or things like that.

So when you think about tariffs, you have to kind of think of in two categories. There are, I think, like two buckets. There are national security issues which you have to deal with. And if the issue is a sufficient importance to really merit national attention, you should do everything you can to solve that problem. If we were in a war, people would say, of course, do whatever you have to, right?

So when you think about tariffs, you have to kind of think of in two categories. There are, I think, like two buckets. There are national security issues which you have to deal with. And if the issue is a sufficient importance to really merit national attention, you should do everything you can to solve that problem. If we were in a war, people would say, of course, do whatever you have to, right?

So when you think about tariffs, you have to kind of think of in two categories. There are, I think, like two buckets. There are national security issues which you have to deal with. And if the issue is a sufficient importance to really merit national attention, you should do everything you can to solve that problem. If we were in a war, people would say, of course, do whatever you have to, right?

Take over, whatever. So he has some things, and in this case, primarily, some others, but primarily this fentanyl issue with Canada and Mexico, mostly a Mexican issue. And that's a national security issue. In my opinion, it's not an economic issue, and it should be separated from it. Do you think fentanyl is a sufficiently important crisis to merit doing everything you can to solve it?

Take over, whatever. So he has some things, and in this case, primarily, some others, but primarily this fentanyl issue with Canada and Mexico, mostly a Mexican issue. And that's a national security issue. In my opinion, it's not an economic issue, and it should be separated from it. Do you think fentanyl is a sufficiently important crisis to merit doing everything you can to solve it?

Take over, whatever. So he has some things, and in this case, primarily, some others, but primarily this fentanyl issue with Canada and Mexico, mostly a Mexican issue. And that's a national security issue. In my opinion, it's not an economic issue, and it should be separated from it. Do you think fentanyl is a sufficiently important crisis to merit doing everything you can to solve it?

I believe it is. So for me, doing something in that space makes sense. And the president threatened that. And I think we got good results. That's national security. The bigger question is what – and you can use that tool in other times. And the debate is not whether the tool is appropriate. The debate is whether the national security issue is of sufficient importance to pay that price.

I believe it is. So for me, doing something in that space makes sense. And the president threatened that. And I think we got good results. That's national security. The bigger question is what – and you can use that tool in other times. And the debate is not whether the tool is appropriate. The debate is whether the national security issue is of sufficient importance to pay that price.

I believe it is. So for me, doing something in that space makes sense. And the president threatened that. And I think we got good results. That's national security. The bigger question is what – and you can use that tool in other times. And the debate is not whether the tool is appropriate. The debate is whether the national security issue is of sufficient importance to pay that price.

So then the other issue is tariffs generally to get us to, I would say, balance. Some people would say fairness. Some people would say reciprocity. But basically to get us to balance, to offset all this unfair balance. Not just terrorists, but unfair practices. And I think what you're going to see on April 2nd is an attempt. You're seeing the USTR and – and the Secretary of Treasury, U.S.

So then the other issue is tariffs generally to get us to, I would say, balance. Some people would say fairness. Some people would say reciprocity. But basically to get us to balance, to offset all this unfair balance. Not just terrorists, but unfair practices. And I think what you're going to see on April 2nd is an attempt. You're seeing the USTR and – and the Secretary of Treasury, U.S.

So then the other issue is tariffs generally to get us to, I would say, balance. Some people would say fairness. Some people would say reciprocity. But basically to get us to balance, to offset all this unfair balance. Not just terrorists, but unfair practices. And I think what you're going to see on April 2nd is an attempt. You're seeing the USTR and – and the Secretary of Treasury, U.S.