Live rates: the White House says that the rates of 104% on China will have a midnight effect

President Donald Trump observed how rates could have an impact on the medium -term elections of 2026.

He added that many countries have “torn us away, left and right”.

“But now it’s up to us to tear,” he added.

In his observations at the NRCC dinner tonight, President Donald Trump says that the resolution of the resolution of the republican budget at the house: “Today we had a great meeting, I think we are there. But in the event that there are some republicans out there, close your eyes and get there … just stop very well.”

The secretary of agriculture Brooke Rollins has declared on Tuesday that new commercial agreements could be established with other countries as regards rates by the end of this week.

Rollins made these observations during an interview with the conductor of Fox News Bret Baier on the net Special relationship show.

“I think, honestly, it will be first rather than after. I think we will hear about new agreements that are affected, perhaps by the end of the week,” said Rollins, adding that 70 countries had contacted the United States for discussions.

Rollins was also asked how the increase in egg imports could help reduce prices in the United States when they would have been subject to new rates.

Driven about the fact that the rates plan was to generate revenue for the United States or to open negotiations with the commercial partners, Rollins said: “It is an approach to everything above”.

The Trump administration said he wanted to be both the case, although any discount negotiation would have significantly incompatible the collection of rates … 🤔

Eric Garcia Reports from Washington, DC

American consumers and the stock market are not the only groups in search of relief from the commercial actions of the Whipsaw of President Donald Trump; Senate Republicans also hope to find an exit from the Trump tariff train.

Trump seems disinterested in stopping the tariff steam roller. At midnight, the administration is set to a further rate of 50 % On China if China does not withdraw its retaliation of 34 %. This would increase the rates on Chinese goods to an extraordinary 104 percent.

During an audition at the Senate Financial Committee with the commercial representative of the United States Jamieson Greer, Senator Thom Tillis of the North Carolina warned that in the end a person must have the fault if the projects are bad while referring to his time in managerial advice.

So “whose throat I have to suffocate if this turns out to be wrong,?” Tillis asked Greer.

China According to reports, he is considering a ban on all US Movie in retaliation for Donald Trump Increase the rates on Chinese imports.

Bloomberg News It indicates that in China, two bloggers widely followed with connections to the local authorities have shared identical lists of measures that could be introduced by the Chinese authorities in response. These include “reduce or prohibit the import of US films”.

Kevin Eg Perry Reports from Los Angeles.

The National Press Club praised Judgment of the Federal Court of today To say that the discrimination of the point of view towards journalists is unconstitutional, calling it a vital step to restore responsibility and safeguard the public right to know.

“This is a critical victory for the freedom of the press and the right of the public to independent reports on the highest levels of government,” said the president of the National Press Club Mike Balsamo, the national director of the police of the Associated Press.

“This sentence states that the government cannot punish an organization of news for its independent publishing decisions.”

In his decision, the district judge of the United States Trevor McFadden wrote: “If the government opens its doors to some journalists … it cannot therefore close those doors to other journalists because of their points of view. The Constitution does not require less”.

While the injunction of the Court has currently remained until April 13, the sentence clarifies that the exclusion based on the point of view of journalists violates the main constitutional protections. “At a time when transparency is more vital than ever, today’s decision recalls that the first amendment remains a milestone of our democracy,” said Balsamo. “This is not just a victory for a editorial staff; it is a victory for every journalist and every American that depends on a free press.”