What Did Donald Trump Do Today?
Weekend Update: March 8 & 9, 2025
President Trump's interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures showcased a characteristically combative communication style. Throughout the discussion, Trump’s responses frequently relied on broad generalizations and lacked specificity, particularly when addressing Bartiromo's pointed questions regarding tariffs and economic policy predictability. Although Trump's assertions that tariffs are necessary to prevent the U.S. from being exploited resonated with his political base, his dismissal of legitimate business concerns about stability and clarity weakened his credibility with broader audiences and could potentially exacerbate market uncertainty.
His portrayal of Democrats as obstructionist, irrational, and disrespectful—particularly during his recent Congressional address—underscored Trump's preference for polarizing rhetoric over conciliatory communication. He characterized Democrats negatively, referencing their reaction to his policies as universally hostile, even framing their advocacy for transgender rights and tax increases in a dismissive and mocking tone.
In terms of foreign policy, Trump's statements were inconsistent. He highlighted past accomplishments, such as halting the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and providing Ukraine with military assistance, to assert his toughness toward Russia. However, his criticism of Ukrainian President Zelensky as ungrateful and his transactional framing of international relations—expecting overt appreciation in exchange for U.S. aid—undermined diplomatic goodwill. His bold declaration about reclaiming the Panama Canal from foreign influence, although resonant with nationalist sentiment, also simplified complex international dynamics, potentially raising diplomatic tensions.
Domestically, Trump's proposal to introduce a "gold card" immigration pathway—allowing corporations or individuals to purchase citizenship for five million dollars- raises serious ethical and practical questions, particularly regarding security concerns and fairness. His casual acknowledgment of the risks of exploitation by foreign adversaries, such as China, without concrete safeguards diminished the seriousness of potential implications.
Finally, Trump’s comments comparing nuclear threats and climate change concerns were notably oversimplified. His dismissal of climate change as trivial ("climate lunatics") while emphasizing nuclear risks suggested an either-or scenario, failing to recognize the complexity and legitimacy of both global challenges.
Overall, the interview reinforced Trump's persistent rhetorical polarization, inadequate policy detail, and overly transactional and simplistic approach to complex issues, which remain critical weaknesses, limiting his potential to broaden support beyond his political base.
President Trump issued an executive order that significantly revised the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) Program by explicitly restricting eligibility to exclude individuals employed by organizations engaged in activities deemed substantially illegal or detrimental to national security and American values. While the order addresses legitimate concerns regarding misuse of taxpayer funds—such as premature loan forgiveness and potential subsidization of criminal activity—it simultaneously incorporates controversial political positions, particularly regarding immigration policy and gender-affirming care for minors, characterizing certain medical procedures as child abuse. This blending of valid policy aims with contentious political assertions complicates its application and risks creating ambiguities that could lead to arbitrary or politically motivated enforcement. Additionally, the broad and subjective language employed—phrases like "substantial illegal purpose" and references to loosely defined "activist organizations"—may produce unintended consequences, potentially discouraging employment in legitimate nonprofit or public-service roles due to uncertainty or fear of disqualification from PSLF benefits. A more precise, clearly delineated, and politically neutral framework would better achieve the order’s stated intent without inviting divisive public debate or protracted legal challenges.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, speaking on NBC's Meet the Press, defended President Trump's controversial tariff and trade policies, emphasizing that their primary purpose was to combat fentanyl trafficking, which he identified as a serious crisis responsible for tens of thousands of American deaths. Lutnick argued that recent fluctuations and apparent indecision by Trump on tariffs were strategic moves designed to pressure Mexico, Canada, and China into taking stronger actions to halt fentanyl imports. Although moderator Kristen Welker pointed out that only 1% of fentanyl enters the U.S. from Canada compared to 97% from Mexico, Lutnick maintained the administration's unified stance toward both neighbors, emphasizing Trump’s tactic of holding all parties accountable. He confirmed the administration’s plans for immediate tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. Still, he clarified that previously announced tariffs on Canadian dairy and lumber products would be postponed until April 2nd, pending further negotiation over Canada's trade barriers, including its high tariffs on U.S. dairy.
When pressed about the economic consequences of tariffs—specifically whether they would result in higher consumer prices—Lutnick acknowledged that certain imported goods might become more expensive initially but insisted the long-term benefits would far outweigh short-term pain. He argued Trump's policies, including tariff reciprocity and aggressive negotiations with trade partners, would ultimately lead to lower consumer prices by forcing foreign markets to open to American agricultural products. Lutnick cited examples like egg prices, which he claimed had risen 200% under President Biden, promising these prices would rapidly fall once Trump's reciprocal trade measures took effect.
Addressing growing concerns from Wall Street analysts about a potential recession, Lutnick firmly rejected such predictions, asserting that Trump's economic policies would drive unprecedented growth. He highlighted anticipated outcomes, including significantly lower interest rates, reduced mortgage costs, cheaper energy prices from increased domestic oil production, and the influx of over $1 trillion in new investment into the United States. Lutnick framed these economic projections as clear indicators that recession fears were unfounded, asserting strongly that the country would experience substantial economic expansion under Trump's leadership.
Finally, Lutnick addressed the recent controversy surrounding Elon Musk's involvement in discussions of government spending, which reportedly caused friction among Cabinet members. Lutnick clarified that Trump had explicitly communicated that Cabinet secretaries, not Musk, maintained authority over their departments. However, he characterized Musk as an invaluable partner and adviser, bringing world-class technological expertise to the government's efforts to streamline operations. Lutnick portrayed Musk’s role positively, emphasizing the administration’s collaborative approach rather than allowing Musk to dictate final policy decisions. Throughout the interview, Lutnick repeatedly depicted President Trump as a decisive leader and effective negotiator committed to protecting American interests, particularly through tough stances on fentanyl and fair trade.
In an interview on CBS's Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the Trump administration's use of tariffs against Mexico and Canada, underscoring that their primary justification is the fentanyl crisis. Although Mexico and Canada have cited recent sharp declines in fentanyl seizures—Mexico reported a 75% drop over the past six months, and Canada cited a 97% decrease from December to January—Noem emphasized that while progress is evident, the administration seeks stronger commitments and action from both countries. Specifically, she called for enhanced partnerships involving deeper intelligence sharing, access to criminal background databases, and advanced technological tools to intercept drug shipments. Noem pointed out that despite Mexico's and Canada's public assurances and recent positive steps, the administration remains skeptical due to past unfulfilled promises and wants measurable actions rather than merely rhetoric. She emphasized that tariffs would remain until President Trump is confident that sufficient measures are implemented to halt fentanyl trafficking, clarifying explicitly that the tariffs are genuinely aimed at combating fentanyl rather than merely influencing trade negotiations.
Secretary Noem also addressed border security, highlighting recent CBP data showing border crossings at a 25-year low as evidence of the administration's successful policies. However, she asserted that military and law enforcement support at the border will continue until security is entirely assured. Regarding immigration detention policies, Noem defended current practices, noting dedicated family detention facilities across the country, and argued that migrants facing detention have choices—either to enter the U.S. legally or voluntarily leave. When challenged by Brennan about family separations, Noem asserted that families who enter illegally and become separated make their own choices, equating the consequences they face to those Americans experience when breaking the law.
Secretary Noem further addressed internal security issues within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), emphasizing her commitment to aggressively identifying and prosecuting DHS employees who leak sensitive enforcement plans, which she said put law enforcement officers at risk. She affirmed her intention to continue employing stringent measures, including polygraph tests, to ensure operational security. Lastly, she reiterated the seriousness of the administration's stance on fentanyl, asserting that the tariffs imposed are genuinely focused on curbing drug trafficking and safeguarding American lives rather than merely negotiating trade terms.
The Trump administration has offered voluntary separation packages of up to $25,000 to most of the 80,000 federal employees at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Employees responsible for critical tasks such as disease research, food inspections, and administration of Medicare and Medicaid were informed via email about the buyout option. Affected workers at agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, as well as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), both based in Maryland, have from Monday until 5 p.m. Friday to accept the offer. This initiative aligns with President Trump's broader efforts to reduce the size and cost of the federal government, particularly targeting HHS, one of the government's largest agencies with an annual budget of approximately $1.7 trillion. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has strongly advocated staff reductions, previously vowing to eliminate roughly 600 positions at NIH. Kennedy has publicly criticized certain public health employees for making what he characterized as poor decisions, particularly in relation to nutrition guidelines, and mentioned having a mental list of potential dismissals. The reduction efforts are supported by the administration’s collaboration with billionaire Elon Musk and his recently created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). These buyouts come amid critical public health challenges, including a serious measles outbreak in West Texas and New Mexico and ongoing congressional debates over significant cuts to Medicaid funding. Employees interested in the separation package were instructed to contact their local human resources offices, though HHS has not yet provided an official public comment on the buyouts.