博客

Court tosses sentence for former clerk in scheme tied to 2020 election

April 2, 2026 at 1:43 p.m. EDT / The Washington Post

The Colorado appeals court ordered a new sentence for Tina Peters, a former county elections official convicted for her efforts to boost Trump’s false claims.

Tina Peters at her trial on March 3, 2023, in Grand Junction, Colorado. (Scott Crabtree/Grand Junction Daily Sentinel/Pool/AP)

By Patrick Marley

A Colorado appeals court Thursday threw out the nine-year prison sentence for Tina Peters, a former Mesa County clerk convicted on charges related to a scheme to bolster President Donald Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

Trump’s ballroom gets the green light from loyalist-stacked commission

2026-04-02T18:14:34.772Z / CNN

By Betsy Klein

Updated 1 hr 34 min ago

Updated Apr 2, 2026, 2:27 PM ET

PUBLISHED Apr 2, 2026, 2:14 PM ET

President Donald Trump’s sprawling ballroom project officially got the green light on Thursday from a board that oversees planning for federal buildings and land, marking the latest step in an accelerated process that now faces some legal uncertainty.

Despite more than 32,000 public comments overwhelmingly opposed to the project, the National Capital Planning Commission was stacked with Trump loyalists who voted in favor of the measure.

Thursday’s vote clears a hurdle, but the ballroom’s future is unclear after a federal judge threw a wrench into Trump’s plans when he ruled earlier this week that construction must stop until it’s approved by Congress.

“The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!” said Judge Richard Leon, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, in his ruling Tuesday.

He added: “Unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop!” The Trump administration has already appealed Leon’s ruling.

The judge delayed implementation of his ruling for two weeks, telling the White House that any above-ground construction during that time may have to be reversed if a higher court doesn’t quickly overturn his decision.

It’s still unclear if the legal wrangling will stall the construction or if Trump’s lawyers will convince a different federal court to let that work proceed for now, keeping the project in a holding pattern for the moment.

Meanwhile, experts have raised concerns about the scale and scope of the addition to the White House grounds, along with the introduction of Corinthian columns, and the asymmetric changes it will impose on the existing once-circular driveway. But the ballroom has been on the fast track since the East Wing was demolished last October to make way for the massive new structure, which is expected to cost between $300 and 400 million.

Trump has maintained that the ballroom, which is being privately funded, isn’t subject to any oversight and that he should be able to continue with the changes without any serious scrutiny.

NCPC chairman Will Scharf, a top Trump aide, heralded the project, saying in his remarks ahead of the vote that he believes that, in time, “this ballroom will be considered every bit as much of a national treasure as the other key components of the White House.”

Scharf also sought to push back on criticism of the project. Space to accommodate 1,000 people, he said, is “not an unreasonable number programmatically,” adding it could be needed for entertainment, speeches and displays. As for the height of the structure, he said that the project “befits a high ceiling.” And regarding criticism of the president, he noted that Trump “will get very limited use of this structure before the end of his term.”

Other Trump-aligned commissioners praised the president’s role in the project. But DC Council chairman Phil Mendelson, who serves on the commission in an ex-officio capacity, offered the most substantive negative feedback as he lamented what he described as a “rushed process.”

“I think there’s a lot of value to the iterative process and we’ve not had that,” Mendelson said.

He continued: “It is possible to build a 1,000-person ballroom that, unlike the plan currently under review, truly honors the iconic status, the primacy and historic significance of the People’s House.”

He also said he “didn’t get a persuasive answer” from the architect on why the building needs to be so tall.

“I’m trying to be nice here: It’s just too large,” Mendelson said.

Commissioner Linda Argo echoed Mendelson’s comments, expressing concerns about “a rush to approve something this significant.”

Mendelson voted no, Argo voted “present,” and commissioner Arrington Dixon also voted “present.” All of the other commissioners approved the project, and it passed.

The remarkable speed with which the multimillion-dollar project has progressed has underscored an emboldened Trump’s personal interest in unveiling a finished ballroom before the end of his second term, part of a broader effort to remake the White House and Washington to suit his style and taste. He has promised it will be complete in the summer of 2028, months before he leaves office.

Artist renderings of the planned White House Ballroom are photographed on Tuesday.

Jon Elswick/AP

A construction crane stands over the White House on Wednesday.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The president, a former real estate developer, has been deeply involved in this project, from floor plans to marble selection, underscoring that it has been a key priority.

“I’m so busy that I don’t have time to do this,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday as he presented mockups of the new structure.

He added: “I’m fighting wars and other things, but this is very important, because this is going to be with us for a long time.”

The project has already received signoff from another key body, the Commission of Fine Arts, which is also composed of Trump allies.

At the last NCPC meeting, the commission heard dozens of experts – architects, historians, preservationists and former White House staffers; representatives from key groups like the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the DC Preservation League, and the American Institute of Architects; and concerned citizens who voiced opposition to the project. Just one person, the owner of a local historic event venue, spoke in support of it.

Public Citizen, a government watchdog organization, is already questioning the validity of the NCPC vote. The group alleges in a report that Trump’s installation of a trio of top allies to the commission – staff secretary Will Scharf as chair, Office of Management and Budget associate director Stuart Levenbach as vice-chair, and deputy chief of staff James Blair as a commissioner, violates the law. The three White House staffers, the report says, “fail to have any of the ‘experience in city or regional planning’ the law requires appointees to have.”

“I was appointed because I did have the qualifications necessary to serve on the commission,” Scharf said at the March meeting, pointing to experience as policy director to the governor of Missouri and calling the claims “insulting.”

Neither Blair nor Levenbach responded to Public Citizen’s assertions.

This story was updated with additional information.

Planning commission approves Trump’s ballroom and East Wing design

April 2, 2026 / 2:30 PM EDT / CBS News

By

Arden Farhi Washington bureau managing editor

The National Capital Planning Commission voted Thursday to green light President Trump’s 90,000-square-foot East Wing makeover, the final regulatory obstacle for a project that hit legal headwinds earlier this week.

The commission, which is chaired by a White House staffer, voted 9 to 1 to approve the design, which includes a ballroom with seating for 1,000 guests. Two commissioners voted present.

Even with the commission’s vote, above-ground construction is likely to soon be on hold. A federal judge ruled Tuesday that the administration must get congressional authorization before proceeding with the ballroom. The Department of Justice has already appealed.

The commission’s vote was delayed a month by public opposition to the project. Some 32,000 comments poured in online. More than 100 people, including architects and preservationists, signed up to speak at the March commission meeting.

James Blair, a commissioner and senior White House aide, called the critiques largely “unserious” and politically driven.

Mr. Trump has called the project the “finest ballroom of its kind anywhere in the world.”

The White House announced its intent to build a ballroom in July at a cost of $200 million. The privately financed endeavor’s price tag has since doubled. The new space will house offices for the first lady, kitchen space, a double-decker colonnade and upgrades to a secure underground military complex.

It is not clear whether taxpayer or private dollars are funding the military bunker.

Early on, Mr. Trump said the renovations would not impact the existing White House structure, but heavy machinery shredded the East Wing in October, demolishing what had been a White House fixture for generations.

Pieces of the structure were hauled off to a scrap yard in Maryland. Dirt has been trucked to a nearby golf course.

In December, the Trust for Historic Preservation sued to stop construction. A judge initially denied the Trust’s request for a temporary restraining order, but ultimately sided with the Trust, citing a lack of congressional authorization and a questionable financing arrangement.

Democrats have also objected to the president’s use of private donations to pay for the project. The president enlisted a nonprofit organization to collect donations from companies and individuals — some with business before the government, including tech giants and defense contractors.

“This vanity project has become an instrument of corruption,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut told CBS News. “We are demanding information not just from the government and the White House, but from the donors themselves about what they have at stake.”

Several Democratic members have introduced legislation to constrain this and future projects, but none have received a vote in the Republican-controlled Congress.

The White House has shared a partial list of donors and hosted a dinner recognizing them last fall. It has yet to disclose how much each donor has given and how much has been raised for construction.

The Commission of Fine Arts, another regulatory body with jurisdiction over federal construction in Washington, unanimously approved the East Wing design in February after being first briefed on it in December. The commission is composed of Trump appointees, including Chamberlain Harris, the president’s executive assistant.

Previous White House renovations, all of which were less significant than the East Wing project, have undergone months — and sometimes years — of scrutiny by the CFA and NCPC.

NCPC chairman Will Scharf defended the commission’s speedy approval timeline of just over three months. “The notion that we have been less than thorough, that we have not met our obligations is frankly insulting to the work that our team has done,” Scharf said, adding that he read every public comment the commission received.

“I think there is a lot of value to the iterative process and we have not had that,” said commissioner Phil Mendelson, a Democrat who serves as chairman of the D.C. council. “It’s just too large.”

Mendelson was the lone ‘no’ vote Thursday.

CFA’s rubber stamp came despite thousands of public comments that the commission’s secretary Thomas Luebke described as “overwhelmingly in opposition — over 99%.” Several comments cited the speed at which the president has moved.

Aboard Air Force One on Sunday, the president shared new architectural renderings of the ballroom which showed the annex’s south face without a grand staircase that had been in previous iterations, including the design that CFA had approved. An analysis of the previous plans by the New York Times pointed out some idiosyncrasies in the design, among them, that its grand staircase didn’t lead to the ballroom and there was no door on the side facing the staircase. Mr. Trump showed the new renderings soon after the Times’ article was published.

Luebke did not answer CBS News’ questions about whether the CFA will reconsider the project in light of the architectural changes.

NCPC was informed of the change Wednesday and voted to approve it Thursday.

Trump backs off campaign promises to protect Medicare, help with child care

2026-04-02T18:33:43.948Z / The Washington Post

As a candidate, Trump pledged to prioritize child care affordability and preserve Medicare. A spokeswoman argued that the president, in his comments Wednesday, was referring to fraud.

April 2, 2026 at 2:33 p.m. EDT 35 minutes ago

Trump reverses himself on childcare promise

President Donald Trump previously said he was committed to make childcare more affordable. Yet, on April 1 he said the federal government cannot afford to help. (Video: The Washington Post)

By Isaac Arnsdorf

President Donald Trump said this week that Medicare and day care were too expensive for the federal government to cover, reversing himself on explicit campaign promises to protect the seniors’ health insurance program and address child care costs.

Trump administration accused of violating court order by sharing Medicaid data with ICE

April 2, 2026 1:42pm EDT / Fox News

A senior legal expert says a ‘strong possibility’ exists that HHS and ICE violated the district court’s ruling on Medicaid recipient data

By Elaine Mallon Fox News

More than a dozen Democratic-led states are accusing the Trump administration of violating a federal court order by sharing Medicaid data with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, asking a judge to enforce the ruling.

The states’ complaint asks the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to enforce its existing injunction blocking HHS from sharing Medicaid data with ICE.

“The Trump Administration appears to be defying a direct court order blocking it from sharing the personal, sensitive data of individuals including U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. It’s invasive — and deeply troubling,”said California Attorney General Bonta, who led the coalition of 22 states. “When Californians signed up for Medi-Cal, they did so with the understanding that their data would not be used for purposes unrelated to administering this program.I urge the court to enforce its earlier order and make clear that these guardrails exist for anyone who is lawfully residing in the United States.”

The complaint stems from a lawsuit spearheaded by California in July 2025 against the Trump administration. The lawsuit accused Health and Human Services of violating federal law through its “mass transfer of sensitive Medicaid data” of both lawful permanent and temporary residents. The lawsuit also argued that the sharing of the personal information will likely create a “chilling effect on individuals’ willingness to enroll in Medicaid programs for which they are legally eligible.

SECOND FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS IRS FROM SHARING ADDRESSES WITH ICE

A split image shows Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents patrolling Terminal C at LaGuardia Airport on March 24, 2026, in New York City (L), and U.S. President Donald Trump arriving at Miami International Airport on March 27, 2026, in Miami, Florida (R). President Trump deployed ICE agents to airports amid TSA staffing shortages, with border czar Tom Homan overseeing the effort.(Michael M. Santiago and Nathan Howard / Getty Images)

A federal judge ruled last December that the Trump administration is not allowed to collect the personal information of lawful permanent residents or citizens, but that it can continue to collect basic information from individuals such as addresses, birthdates and immigration status for residents with temporary status. However, the scope of data that can be collected is limited and cannot include sensitive health information.

The attorneys general accuse Health and Human Services of sharing “a large and complex” set of data on Medicaid recipients with ICE, which is in violation of a federal court ruling allowing the exchange of limited personal information but excluding the information of legal permanent residents. The complaint also accuses the Trump administration of failing to share its criteria for determining if a resident is being “lawfully present.”

CATO Institute Senior Legal Fellow Dan Greenberg told Fox News Digital there is “a strong possibility” that HHS and ICE violated the district court’s order.

LETITIA JAMES SUES HHS OVER TYING FEDERAL FUNDS TO TRANSGENDER POLICY

ICE agents stand at the scene where a woman was shot and killed earlier in the day during an enforcement operation on Jan. 7, 2026, in Minneapolis, Minnesota.(Christopher Juhn/Anadolu via Getty Images)

“The reason this is a strong possibility is that DHHS communications apparently indicate that it shared a ‘large and complex’ dataset of Medicaid recipients with ICE,” Greenberg said. “That phrase suggests that the dataset that was shared with ICE may have included information that is outside the scope of the court order. That is a question of fact: that is why the states are now asking the court to compel the federal government to explain just what was shared and how it is now being used.”

Greenberg also pointed out that the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System database does not “appear to have any simple or direct way to identify/single out immigrants who are undocumented,” making “information-sharing that complies with that court order difficult or impossible.”

“The TMSIS identifies people who are only eligible for emergency Medicaid services, but the problem is that this class of people includes both undocumented and lawfully present immigrants,” Greenberg said. “In short, it is as if the court order said that only some of the information in one particular file should be disclosed, but there is reason to believe that DHHS decided that — because they can’t figure out how to separate out this particular type of information – they may have handed over the whole filing cabinet.”

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services building in Washington, D.C.(Saul Loeb/AFP)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

In addition to California, attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin, and the governor of Kentucky signed on to the complaint.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and Health and Human Services for comment.

Elaine Mallon is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business covering national politics.

Justice Department says law requiring president to turn over records at end of administration is unconstitutional

April 2, 2026 / 2:38 PM EDT / CBS News

Washington — The Justice Department said that a federal law enacted in the wake of the Watergate scandal that requires the president to preserve certain documents and turn them over to the National Archives at the end of his administration is unconstitutional.

The opinion from Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser, who leads the Office of Legal Counsel, concluded that the Presidential Records Act exceeds Congress’ power and “aggrandizes the legislative branch” at the expense of the independence of the executive branch.

Gaiser, who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, wrote that as a result of his determination that the Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional, President Trump does not need to comply with it.

“The PRA is not a valid exercise of Congress’s Article I authority and unconstitutionally intrudes on the independence and autonomy of the President guaranteed by Article II,” he found. “The Act establishes a permanent and burdensome regime of congressional regulation of the Presidency untethered from any valid and identifiable legislative purpose.”

The Office of Legal Counsel decision on the constitutionality of the records law was made public Thursday and first reported by Axios.

The Presidential Records Act was enacted in 1978, four years after President Richard Nixon’s resignation. The law established that presidential records belong to the U.S. government, not the president personally, and must be preserved. When a president leaves office, the Presidential Records Act requires material to be turned over to the National Archives, which maintains the documents.

The measure governs the records of the president, vice president and certain parts of the Executive Office of the President, like the National Security Council, and sets out requirements for the maintenance, access and preservation of information during and after a presidency.

Under the law, the White House must preserve material relating to certain political activities and information regarding the president’s duties, including emails, text messages and phone records. But it excludes the president’s personal records, which are documents of a “purely private or nonpublic character.”

The Presidential Records Act has no enforcement mechanism, but Mr. Trump repeatedly invoked the law after he was indicted in 2023 on charges stemming from his alleged mishandling of sensitive government records after the end of his first term in January 2021.

In a case pursued by then-special counsel Jack Smith, Mr. Trump was accused of keeping classified documents at his South Florida resort, Mar-a-Lago, after repeatedly rebuffing demands from the National Archives that he turn them over.

Mr. Trump denied any wrongdoing and claimed that he was allowed to keep all of the material under the records law. The case eventually ended after he won a second term in the White House last November.

The Office of Legal Counsel provides the president and federal agencies with advice on legal questions, and its opinions bind the executive branch. But if a court reaches a different interpretation of a legal question, that determination prevails.

‘We’re fighting wars. We can’t take care of day care’: Trump’s ill-timed rant

Apr 2, 2026, 12:41 PM ET / CNN Politics

Analysis by Aaron Blake

Updated Apr 2, 2026, 2:39 PM ET

President Donald Trump attends an executive order signing in the Oval Office on March 31, 2026.

Evan Vucci/Reuters/FILE

President Donald Trump delivered one of his most extensive sales pitches for the Iran war in a primetime address on Wednesday night.

But comments he delivered in a closed-door Easter lunch just hours earlier epitomize why he has utterly failed to make the sale.

In rambling hourlong remarks — video of which was briefly posted on YouTube by the White House and preserved by a reporter for Business Insider— Trump riffed on how the federal government should focus more on funding defense and less on health care and day care, which should be left to the states.

And at one point, he even set it up as a choice between funding war and funding day care — while apparently choosing the former.

The president began by recalling a conversation he had with Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought.

“I said to Russell, ‘Don’t send any money for day care,’ because the United States can’t take care of day care. That has to be up to a state,” Trump said. “We can’t take care of day care. We’re a big country. We have 50 states. We have all these other people.”

Trump then added, in quick succession: “We’re fighting wars. We can’t take care of day care.”

He said states should raise their taxes to pay for day care and health care.

“It’s not possible for us to take care of day care, Medicaid, Medicare — all these individual things, they can do it on a state basis. You can’t do it on a federal,” Trump added. “We have to take care of one thing: military protection. We have to guard the country. But all these little things, all these little scams that have taken place — you have to let states take care of them, Russell.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed on X Thursday that Trump “was talking about the importance of stopping the scams and rooting out the billions of dollars in fraud in these vital programs that elected Democrat officials have allowed to happen.” Trump did briefly mention scams, but his larger argument was about who should pay for such programs.

A few points off the bat about his remarks.

First, he has a point that health care expenditures are a major budgetary problem. They are, in fact, the largest portion of federal spending, and the Congressional Budget Office projects they will grow from around $2 trillion today to around $3 trillion a decade from now.

The other point is that Trump’s argument is more nuanced than just choosing between day care and the war; he seems to be making a somewhat philosophical point about which level of government should fund which things, not whether they should be funded at all.

But it’s a heck of a way to talk about spending decisions, especially at this juncture.

And a new CNN poll released Wednesday demonstrates why.

The survey reinforces that perhaps Trump’s biggest political problem with the war is how much it’s costing. That’s especially the case with $4-plus gas, but it’s also the case more generally.

Americans don’t see the point of the war, but they especially don’t see the point given the price tag.

Americans opposed the Pentagon’s proposal to spend $200 billion on the war by an overwhelming margin, 71%-29%. Even about 4 in 10 Republicans opposed that.

The poll also showed that, while 66% broadly disapproved of the decision to take military action against Iran, that number increased to 70% when people were asked whether the war was “worth it” — both in terms of lives and the financial burden.

Even 35% of Republicans said the war wasn’t worth it.

The CNN poll echoes an earlier CBS News-YouGov poll that showed 67% of Americans and 36% of Republicans said Americans should not be willing to pay more for gas during the war.

In other words: There is precious little appetite for sacrificing for this particular cause. Yet here’s Trump setting up the choice in some of the most politically unhelpful terms imaginable — between paying for bombs and paying for taking care of children.

And in case you don’t think it’s a bad talking point, consider that it’s very similar to the argument that Secretary of State Marco Rubio was attempting to use against Iran, just two days earlier.

“Imagine an Iran that, instead of spending their wealth, billions of dollars, supporting terrorists or weapons, had spent that money helping the people of Iran,” he said on ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Monday. “You’d have a much different country.”

Trump and those around him have struggled to talk about these kinds of things before. His meandering answer on childcare was arguably one of his worst moments of the 2024 campaign. And the president and other top administration officials have repeatedly spoken awkwardly about how people can make ends meet in tough economic times and during a period of stubborn inflation. (Remember Trump telling Americans to just buy fewer dolls and pencils.)

But none of those comments came in the context of such a high-profile political issue — and one that was cutting against Trump so much.

The White House must be ruing that they somehow went out publicly.

This story has been updated with comment from Karoline Leavitt.

US trade deficit widens in February as imports offset record exports

2026-04-02T13:39:19.498Z / Reuters

By Reuters

April 2, 2026 1:39 PM UTC Updated 2 hours ago

节点运行失败

Shipping containers are shown stacked together on Terminal Island at the port of Los Angeles in Los Angeles, California, U.S., February 24, 2026. REUTERS/Mike Blake/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

WASHINGTON, April 2 (Reuters) – The U.S. trade deficit widened in February as a rebound in imports offset strong growth in exports, which increased to a record high, potentially keeping trade on track to subtract from economic growth in the ​first quarter.

The trade gap increased 4.9% to $57.3 billion, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis and ‌Census Bureau said on Thursday. Data for January was revised to show the deficit narrowing to $54.7 billion instead of $54.5 billion as previously estimated. Economists polled by Reuters forecast the trade deficit rising to $61.0 billion in February.

The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

The BEA and Census Bureau are still catching up on ​data releases following last year’s government shutdown. Trade data continues to be volatile amid shifting policy.

The U.S. ​Supreme Court in February struck down President Donald Trump’s broad tariffs, which he pursued under ⁠a law meant for use in national emergencies. Trump, however, responded by imposing a global tariff for up to 150 ​days.

Trump has defended the tariffs as necessary to address the trade deficit and revive the nation’s industrial base, though ​100,000 factory jobs have been lost since January 2025.

Economists expect the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, which has led to shipping restrictions impacting goods ranging from energy products to fertilizers through the Strait of Hormuz, to reduce trade volumes.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Imports increased 4.3% to $372.1 billion in February. Goods ​imports rose 5.0% to $291.5 billion. They were boosted by imports of capital goods, which increased $7.8 billion, mostly reflecting computers, computer ​accessories and semiconductors. These imports are likely linked to artificial intelligence and the construction of data centers.

Imports of industrial supplies and ‌materials increased $3.1 ⁠billion, mostly lifted by crude oil. Consumer goods imports rose $2.2 billion amid a $1.0 billion increase in pharmaceutical preparations. Imports of automotive vehicles, parts and engines increased $1.6 billion.

Exports jumped 4.2% to a record high $314.8 billion. Goods exports soared 5.9% to an all-time high of $206.9 billion.

Exports of industrial supplies and materials increased $10.2 billion to a record high, driven by monetary gold ​and natural gas. Exports of ​non-petroleum goods were also ⁠the highest on record.

The goods trade deficit widened 3.0% to $84.6 billion in February. When adjusted for inflation, the goods deficit increased $0.5 billion, or 0.6%, to $83.5 billion.

Trade subtracted from gross ​domestic product growth in the fourth quarter. The Atlanta Federal Reserve is forecasting GDP ​increasing at a ⁠1.9% annualized rate in the first quarter. The economy grew at a 0.7% pace in the fourth quarter.

The goods trade deficit with China increased to $13.1 billion in February from $12.5 billion in January, while the shortfall with Mexico swelled $4.1 billion to $16.8 billion.

Exports ⁠of ​services increased $1.1 billion to a record $107.9 billion amid rises in travel, other ​business services, financial services and charges for the use of intellectual property. But exports of transport services fell.

Imports of services jumped $1.3 billion to an ​all-time high of $80.6 billion, boosted by charges for the use of intellectual property.

Reporting by Lucia Mutikani; Editing by Andrea Ricci

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

FLASHBACK: Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs hit one-year mark as economists split on fallout

April 2, 2026 9:45am EDT / Fox News

The revenue from tariffs has emerged as a central pillar of Trump’s economic agenda

By Amanda Macias, Fox News

A year ago today, President Donald Trump announced a sweeping new round of global tariffs, escalating trade tensions with key allies and adversaries alike, raising fresh concerns about the outlook for the U.S. and global economy.

The “Liberation Day” tariffs were introduced as a broad set of import taxes that Trump said would correct long-standing trade imbalances and reduce U.S. reliance on foreign goods.

In the months that followed, markets experienced bouts of volatility as businesses and investors adjusted to the shifting trade landscape. Policymakers and economists, meanwhile, debated the longer-term impact on growth, inflation and global trade flows.

Many economists warned of potential consequences, including higher prices, slower growth and rising uncertainty for businesses and investors.

TRUMP SAYS US WOULD BE ‘DESTROYED’ WITHOUT TARIFF REVENUE

President Donald Trump announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs on April 2, 2025, at the White House.(Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images)

But not everyone agreed.

“Trump proved 12 Nobel Prize economists wrong,” economist Stephen Moore told Fox News Digital.

“Inflation didn’t rise. Why? Because the tax cuts, deregulation and ‘drill, baby, drill’ policies lowered prices and offset the tariffs,” added Moore, a former Trump adviser and co-founder of the free-market advocacy group Unleash Prosperity.

But Moore’s view was not widely shared. Here’s a look back at what other economists said at the time.

Larry Summers

Lawrence Summers, former president emeritus and professor at Harvard University, called the tariff policy “masochistic.”(Ting Shen/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers called the ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs “masochistic,” saying they were the worst levy the U.S. had imposed in decades.

“Never before has an hour of Presidential rhetoric cost so many people so much,” Summers wrote on X. “The best estimate of the loss from tariff policy is now closer to $30 trillion or $300,000 per family of four.”

Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman, a Nobel laureate, said Trump had “gone full-on crazy” after the ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs were announced.(Gene Medi/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prize–winning economist, said Trump had “gone full-on crazy” in the hours after the “Liberation Day” tariffs were announced.

“If you had any hopes that Trump would step back from the brink, this announcement, between the very high tariff rates and the complete falsehoods about what other countries do, should kill them,” Krugman, a former MIT and Princeton University professor, wrote in his Substack newsletter.

Christine Lagarde

Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank (ECB), at a rates decision news conference in Frankfurt, Hesse, Germany, on Thursday, March 19, 2026.(Alex Kraus/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, warned that the tariffs would be “negative the world over,” in an interview with Ireland’s Newstalk.

She said Trump’s trade policy would weigh on global growth and carry broad consequences.

“It will not be good for the global economy, and it will not be good for those who impose the tariffs or those who retaliate,” Lagarde said.

Joseph Stiglitz

节点运行失败

Joseph Stiglitz said the Trump administration’s tariffs would “crater the economy.”(Alessandro Bremec/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Economist Joseph Stiglitz said Trump’s tariff threats have made the U.S. “a scary place to invest” and could unleash stagflation. Stagflation refers to a combination of slow economic growth and rising prices. Stiglitz, a Columbia University professor and former World Bank economist, warned in an interview with The Guardian that he does not see a strong economic outlook ahead.

“I cannot see a really robust economy,” said Joseph Stiglitz, former chair of President Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers. “I see the global economy suffering greatly from the uncertainty that Trump poses.”

He also said the inflation triggered by the tariffs is moving in the wrong direction and that the only thing the Trump administration will succeed in doing is “to crater the economy.”

Jared Bernstein

Jared Bernstein, chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, said the Trump administration may reverse course on tariffs if economic pressures intensify.(Samuel Corum/Sipa/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Jared Bernstein, the former White House chief economist under President Joe Biden, said the U.S. is a “large, dominant economy” that is relatively closed, meaning it relies less on trade than most countries.

“That means, as Trump has argued, we can hurt other countries more than they can hurt us,” Bernstein said. “But he hasn’t offered a clear rationale for why we should start a trade war with traditionally reliable partners like Canada, Mexico, Japan, and Europe.”

Bernstein said Trump may reverse course if mounting economic pressures—such as higher inflation, slower growth, falling stock prices and rising recession risks—intensify from the tariffs.

“So far, that may have been the approach in Trump’s first term; it doesn’t appear to be the approach this time around,” he said.

Mohamed El-Erian

Mohamed El-Erian, chief economic advisor for Allianz, said the U.S. economy could adjust to the tariffs provided the White House shared more details about the trade policy.(Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Allianz chief economic adviser Mohamed El-Erian called for clarity from the White House. “If we get clarity on this, this is an economy that can adjust,” he told FOX Business.

El-Erian, the former CEO of bond giant PIMCO, wrote on X that “the price action in global financial markets in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. tariff announcement points to major worries about global economic growth.”

Bill Gross

Bill Gross, co-founder of PIMCO, said he did not believe Trump would reverse course on tariffs, even if there was economic pressure.(Patrick T. Fallon/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Bill Gross, the co-founder of Pacific Investment Management Co., known as Pimco, said the latest round of tariffs is “similar to going off the gold standard in 1971″—an “epic” shift that markets won’t quickly recover from.

“It’s not something where you can time a market bottom quickly,” Gross told CNBC. “It’s something we’re going to have to live with as long as President Trump maintains this stance.”

Gross, dubbed the “Bond King,” added that he does not expect Trump to reverse course. “To be very blunt, President Trump is a macho male, and this macho male is not going to back down tomorrow simply because the Nasdaq is down 5%,” he said.

Amanda covers the intersection of business and politics for Fox News Digital.

泰国猪血获准进口 多数食肆欢迎久违老味道

2026年4月2日 22:50 / 联合早报

卜蜂集团新加坡负责从泰国进口猪血制品。这款400克装的“巴氏灭菌猪血”约可分为两份食用，富含铁质和蛋白质，煎炒或水煮三至五分钟就可吃。 （卜蜂集团新加坡提供）

猪血在本地餐桌消失近30年后获准恢复供应，勾起不少饕客对古早风味的期待。多数食肆表示欢迎，但也有业者谨慎观望，认为猪血久未上桌，需求仍有待时间检验。

1999年立百病毒疫情暴发，马来西亚200多名猪农感染急性脑炎，新加坡也出现病例。我国那时起禁止本地屠宰场采集和供应猪血，此后也没批准任何猪血进口来源。

相隔多年，新加坡食品局星期三（4月1日）宣布，批准本地业者向泰国的邦克拉屠宰场（Bangkhla Pig Slaughterhouse），进口经加热处理的猪血制品。

《联合早报》记者星期四（2日）采访多家熟食中心和餐馆，不少业者都有意愿引进猪血，为菜肴增添风味层次。

大巴窑1巷第127座熟食中心“大成粿汁”摊主史坚固（72岁）说，滑嫩的猪血以往是粿汁必点的食材，乐见当局批准进口，但口感要试过才知道。

他售卖粿汁40多年，早期会从大成的猪场购入一桶桶新鲜猪血，“切开像豆干，只卖五角钱，顾客爱吃，老一辈说有清除毒素的效果，销量不错。后来都说猪血肮脏，我们就没卖了。”

大巴窑1巷第127座熟食中心“大成粿汁”摊主史坚固（不在图中）和妻子王萍售卖粿汁40多年，乐见当局批准进口猪血，带回老味道。（邝启聪摄）

经营12年的武大郎老火锅以四川香辣口味著称，在本地有三家门店。老板武恒（36岁）看见新闻后马上联系进口商，希望早日把猪血带上餐桌。

“涮火锅离不开猪血、鸭肠和黑毛肚，前两者在新加坡无法售卖。一些本地顾客到中国旅行，尝过猪血，不时都会来询问，但不能卖，如今获准进口猪血，当然非常开心。”

泰国餐馆Gin Khao有三家门店，常务董事黄志发（53岁）说，猪血是船面（boat noodles）的灵魂原料，用以增稠和挂汤，增添风味。以往缺少这一食材，难以还原船面传统味道。“当然有意愿要选用，但厨师团队要先研究试菜，看一下猪血的质感，能否融入汤头。”

部分摊贩仍在观望

也有的摊主持保留态度。黄埔通道第90座熟食中心 “猪什汤·药材羊肉汤”摊主游义坤（63岁）说，猪血多年不能卖，食客更习惯吃猪内脏，不考虑增加这一品类。

黄埔通道第90座熟食中心 “猪什汤·药材羊肉汤”摊主游义坤说，食客更习惯吃猪内脏，暂时不考虑售卖猪血。（邝启聪摄）

一些摊贩则因个人喜好、菜单种类足够、食客偏好等因素，不引进猪血。

老字号潮州菜深利美食馆总厨兼老板蔡华春（53岁）说，猪血不是潮州菜主要食材，一般会加入珍珠花菜和肉片汤中，或者与韭菜搭配着炒。

他认为，年长食客可能会怀念猪血的味道，但年轻人却未必，因此不急于一时，可再观望一阵子。

食客陈淑丽（64岁，退休者）说，一家人到马来西亚或泰国旅游都会品尝猪血，本地若能售卖再好不过。“猪血好吃的！细细的口感。”

在科技业工作的陈智颜（40岁）回忆道，儿时常在本地吃猪红粥，后来却再也找不到，只能到香港或台湾解馋。“如今相隔27年终于解禁，能在本地再次吃到，真让人期待。”

公众黄韵璇（24岁，媒体工作者）则不愿意食用猪血和猪内脏。“我总怀疑到底有没有清理干净，即使加热过，我还是不放心。”

包装猪血煮三五分钟就能吃

卜蜂集团新加坡（CP Foods Singapore）是猪血的进口商，预计产品还需一至两个月才能在本地上市。

公司星期四发文告说，这款猪血制品在受控环境中卫生采血、加热处理并进行巴氏杀菌、检测微生物，也配有严格的冷链管理以及可追溯和召回的机制。

包装资料显示，400克装的“巴氏灭菌猪血”约可分为两份食用，富含铁质和蛋白质，煎炒或水煮三至五分钟就可吃。

根据营养标签，猪血每100克含约5.8克蛋白质和12.5毫克铁质，脂肪含量低，不含膳食纤维。