Advertisement
Matt K. Lewis

Right-wing commentators scrambled to spin Trump’s disastrous tariffs

Jeanine Pirro and Jesse Watters on a TV news show set
Jeanine Pirro (facing away), Jessica Tarlov and Jesse Waters on a Fox broadcast. Pirro and Waters have jumped to Trump’s defense on tariffs.
(John Lamparski / Getty Images)

In the wake of reciprocal tariffs landing with all the finesse of a cannonball dive into a hot tub, President Trump has decided to pause them temporarily for most countries (while raising China’s tariffs to 125%).

The problem? This past week Trump’s army of talking heads and Twitter commandos has pushed his “no pain, no gain” theory like it was the Sermon on the Mount, all while insisting this was the economic tough love America needed. So while Trump struts around declaring victory, as if this whole thing was a masterclass in geopolitical brinkmanship and not a half-baked tantrum, his loyal foot soldiers are left twisting in the wind — on record, parroting laughable justifications for an industrial policy plan their guy now clearly doesn’t have the guts, or attention span, to complete.

For the record:

7:18 p.m. April 14, 2025The caption for the photo with this piece has been updated to identify Jessica Tarlov in the picture and explain that Jeanine Pirro faces away from the camera.

I’ve got the receipts. And before these painfully awkward justifications get quietly shuffled off to the great memory hole where bad takes go to die, allow me to immortalize a few of the more inspired defenses that were trotted out to sell this mess.

Let’s begin with Jesse Watters — Fox News’ enthusiastic golden retriever in a blazer — who earnestly declared that “the tariffs are for the children.”

Advertisement

It’s the last refuge of a scoundrel; apparently, we’re supposed to think of tariffs as a kind of noble sacrifice, like planting a tree you’ll never sit under, only with less shade and more inflation. “Here you go, Jimmy — I made your Legos cost 30% more, so you can grow up strong, patriotic and perpetually broke.”

Fox News co-host Jeanine Pirro skipped worrying about the children and went straight to not worrying about her retirement account, saying, “I don’t care about my 401(k) today.... I believe this man.” The implication seems to be that the Dow Jones should run on vibes and unshakeable devotion.

Well, good for you, Judge. Just hope your Uber Eats app accepts spiritual currency, because blind faith doesn’t cover mozzarella sticks.

Likewise, Ainsley Earhardt of “Fox & Friends” endorsed the notion that we should just trust in Trump. “Give him some time. He’s a billionaire. He knows what he’s doing,” she said. This is the classic American logic loop: Rich people are smart because they’re rich, and they’re rich because they’re smart.

Now, maybe you’re thinking that their blind faith in Trump has actually been vindicated. After all, Trump might have gotten close to the edge, but he backed away before catastrophic damage occurred. Check out the stock market, though. And look at our relationships with other nations around the world. Damage has already been done.

This brings us to some of the other lines of argument that were bandied about.

Right-wing podcaster Benny Johnson tried to put a Zen spin on the economic freefall, saying, “Nobody ever had their net worth carved onto their tombstone.” Johnson also channeled your favorite hippie aunt, claiming that money is just “digital ones and zeroes,” man.

Advertisement

Sure. Right up until the ones in your bank account run out and the zeroes get tacked onto your rent bill.

And then there’s Fox Business’ Larry Kudlow — once a proud free trader, now just another guy huffing Trump fumes — saying, “Buying cheap goods is not a real prosperity.” You know what else isn’t prosperity, Larry? Telling working people to pay more for socks while billionaires get tax breaks and bailouts.

And who could forget the Fox News caption “Trump’s Manly Tariffs” that popped on screen during a segment in which Watters asserted that “When you sit behind a screen all day it makes you a woman.” Which is a weird flex coming from a guy who literally gets paid to sit behind a screen all day. In makeup. Also … what’s wrong with being a woman?

And just when you think the excuses couldn’t get any crazier, the weirdest theory (which Trump shared on social media!) alleged that the president was intentionally crashing the economy to lower interest rates so we can refinance our debt — a sort of 4D chess-meets-psychotic break.

I’m not even sure I fully understand how this was supposed to work, because this sort of delusional thinking usually only emerges after you watch “The Producers” on mushrooms.

Taken together, these various Trumpian hot takes weren’t serious rationalizations; they were desperate attempts to throw rhetorical spaghetti at the wall and hope something sticks.

Advertisement

They could all coexist in the same swirl of chaos — belief over logic, loyalty over evidence, vibes over value — what Rush Limbaugh used to call a “phony-baloney plastic banana good-time rock-and-roll” kind of thing. It was like a “Choose Your Own Adventure” book, until Trump decided it was time for the story to end (or, at least, pause). .

Trump’s specialty isn’t policy; it’s performance art. Just remember that the next time something like this happens. (Hint: We could all be doing this again in 90 days — when Trump’s tariff “pause” expires.)

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

Insights

L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.

Viewpoint
This article generally aligns with a Center Left point of view. Learn more about this AI-generated analysis

Perspectives

The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.

Ideas expressed in the piece

  • The author argues that President Trump’s tariffs were implemented haphazardly, causing economic instability and strained international relations, with right-wing commentators offering contradictory or nonsensical justifications[4].
  • Critics highlight that the tariffs led to immediate market volatility and long-term inflationary pressures, undermining their purported goal of economic revitalization[4].
  • The article mocks defenses of the tariffs as unserious, citing examples like claims that tariffs “are for the children” or that financial losses are irrelevant because “money is just digital ones and zeroes”[4].
  • It suggests Trump’s reversal—pausing tariffs for most countries while escalating them for China—exposed a lack of coherent strategy, leaving supporters to rationalize the policy’s failures[4].

Different views on the topic

  • Supporters contend the tariffs address long-standing trade deficits and non-reciprocal practices by foreign nations, aiming to rebuild U.S. manufacturing and secure critical supply chains[1][3].
  • Proponents argue the tariffs leverage presidential authority under IEEPA to pressure trading partners into fairer agreements, with flexibility to adjust rates based on foreign retaliation or cooperation[2][3].
  • Advocates emphasize the tariffs as a fulfillment of campaign promises, asserting they protect national security and align with broader economic policies like tax cuts and deregulation[1][3].
  • Legal analysts note the tariffs’ unprecedented scale but acknowledge their grounding in statutory authority, despite challenges over their economic impact and constitutional validity[2][3].

Advertisement