The National Interest Remaking the World Order: No Small Feat January 30, 2025 By: Thomas E. Graham

 The National Interest 

Remaking the World Order: No Small Feat

January 30, 2025

By: Thomas E. Graham

The United States needs to redefine its role in world affairs, what does that mean and what will it take?

The liberal rules-based international order it built and sustained in the years after the Second World War is disintegrating at an accelerating pace. 

After a period of comity following the end of the Cold War, great-power competition has returned with a vengeance, pitting the United States against two major revisionist powers, China and Russia, meanwhile, smaller powers cozy up to one or multiple members of this unfriendly trio.

The Trump administration stressed the return of great-power competition in its National Security Strategy, and the Biden administration only amplified that view on its own. In these administrations’ telling, America’s rivals are disputing the foundations of the liberal order, including the democratic values that inspire it and the U.S. power that undergirds it.    

As the United States’ margin of superiority over other powers thins, new, mostly illiberal centers of global power such as China, arguably India, and possibly Russia, gain authority and influence. More generally, world power and dynamism are flowing away from the Euro-Atlantic community, the core of the liberal order. Although the United States resists the idea, the world is moving toward illiberal, if not necessarily anti-liberal, multipolarity.  

Avoiding Multipolarity: The Grand American Tradition  

Although the United States has confronted a multipolar world before, it has rarely engaged actively as a pole of power. To be sure, from the moment it gained independence to the end of the nineteenth century, it exploited European rivalries to advance its interests as it spread across a continent. However, she made a determined effort to avoid entanglement in European affairs, as Washington and Jefferson had counseled, while stoutly defending its neutrality, that is, its refusal to engage in multipolar competition. 

As her geopolitical ambitions expanded overseas beginning around the twentieth century, the United States was challenged to devise a way to engage a multipolar, balance-of-power world that was consistent with its profound belief in its exceptionalism as a uniquely moral force in world affairs. 

Americans rejected Theodore Roosevelt’s enthusiastic practice of realpolitik and they felt uneasy with Woodrow Wilson’s effort at the end of the First World War to transcend balance-of-power politics with a world system grounded in law and collective action against aggressive states. 

That sustained U.S. global engagement until the Cold War ended in a U.S. triumph and gave birth to a unipolar world. That arrangement allowed the United States to continue to combine moral purpose with leadership, as it sought to spread the benefits of liberal democracy across the globe and consolidate the foundations of a liberal, rules-based order that would sustain American primacy well into the future.                    

How Not to Engage the Multipolar World: Retrenchers and Restorers  

Today, the unipolar world is no longer and new centers of power are emerging. The question that confronts the United States is how to react to the nascent multipolarity. The debate has been dominated by two schools of thought: the retrenchers and the restorers.   

The retrenchers seek to limit U.S. engagement, harkening back to U.S. foreign policy of the pre-Second World War era; the restorers seek to fashion a bipolar framework as a basis for engagement, replicating the approach since that war. Neither is aimed at positioning the United States for active engagement in a genuinely multipolar world.   

For that reason, neither school is adequate for American purposes. Retrenchers are right in the belief that the United States is a fundamentally secure country because of its geopolitical location and power potential. However, the United States cannot afford to remain aloof from global developments. 

In today’s interconnected world beset by great-power competition, regional balances need constant tending. The United States need not be present everywhere abroad; it can and should set priorities. But it will still need to be an active presence in many places abroad, particularly on the periphery of the vast Eurasian supercontinent: Europe, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Northeast Asia, and the Arctic.   

Restorers, by contrast, are firm in the belief that the United States needs to be an active presence abroad. But they want the United States to be engaged across the globe in the promotion and defense of liberal democratic values, not simply in regions vital to America’s security. In this spirit, they seek to reduce the emerging multipolarity to a bipolar world, to a struggle between democracy and autocracy. 

The current effort by many restorers to forge an axis of upheaval out of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea is a clear manifestation of this tendency, even if it overlooks the critical tensions among those countries and the clear preference of each to deal with the others bilaterally and not as part of a broader coalition. The rest of the world, however, rejects the bipolar framing, beginning with U.S. allies in Europe and East Asia. In short, despite the restorers’ preference, the rest of the world is stubbornly determined to foster multipolarity.        

Shaping a Multipolar Order   

Rather than seeking to evade the challenges of multipolarity or create a bipolar world, the United States should embrace the emerging multipolar order and seek to shape it in ways that advance American interests. American leadership would be manifested not in policing the world but rather in the careful, deliberate construction of regional balances of power that combine to create a global balance that promotes U.S. interests and values across the globe.    

The more immediate task, however, is to consolidate the pillars of a multipolar order. Today, there are four potential great powers in addition to the United States: China, India, Russia, and Europe. Each one poses unique challenges to the United States. 

The task for the United States is to craft approaches to the peculiarities of each power that cohere in an overall approach to world affairs. In brief, China will have to be constrained as a great power; India, nurtured as one; Russia, preserved as one; and Europe, shaped into one.   

China  

As the Biden administration’s National Security Strategy argues, China is the only country, “with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to do it.” President Xi Jinping promotes the Chinese Dream, which foresees his country becoming the world’s dominant power by 2049, the centennial of the founding of the People’s Republic of China.    

To retain its margin of superiority, the United States will have to constrain Chinese geopolitical ambitions and national power, especially in the technology sector.  

In this light, a core element of any China policy is domestic revitalization. The United States needs to gain control of its spiraling debt problem, raise stagnating educational and health standards, bolster its innovation ecosystem, and overcome acute political polarization to steel itself for the sharp competition ahead with China.  

India  

India’s capabilities have long fallen far short of its global ambitions. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is determined to change that. He has laid a path for his country to play a greater role on the world stage, starting with the Indian Ocean region.    

Continuing American support should help India enhance its role as a global player. One particularly sensitive area will be India’s defense-industrial sector. The United States is right in the desire to reduce India’s reliance on Russian military equipment, but the goal should not be simply to replace over time Russian kit with Western production, rather, the United States should help India develop, expand, and modernize its indigenous defense-industrial sector.   

Russia  

There is no doubt that Russia wants to be a great power, and being respected by other great powers as such is a core element of Russia’s national identity. 

Today, the challenge for Russia is retaining its strategic autonomy, especially given its ever-closer embrace of China, a consequence of Western sanctions and Russia’s rejection of the West. For all the talk of an equal partnership, the relationship is profoundly asymmetric. China’s economy is seventeen times the size of Russia’s, depending on how GDP is calculated, and the gap is only growing in China’s favor.   

The United States will not be able to rupture the current China-Russia strategic alignment—there are compelling strategic reasons for closer relations, but the United States could attenuate them. Easing sanctions so that Russian and Western firms can cooperate in such places as Central Asia and the Arctic would help Russia counter growing Chinese influence in both regions. 

Carefully restoring Europe’s energy relations with Russia to avoid an over-reliance on Russia would be another. The near-term goal is not to split Russia from China but to ensure that any deals Russia cuts with China, diplomatic or commercial, are not so heavily tilted in China’s favor as they are now.  

Europe  

Europe will present the greatest challenge. 

It has all the economic and technological capabilities to be a great power, but it lacks the political will and cohesion. Since the Cold War, European countries have allowed their defense capabilities to atrophy, using the peace dividend to expand and deepen socio-economic well-being, and relying on the United States for security. Even in the face of the current acute Russian threat, major European countries are reluctant to increase defense spending to the necessary levels.   

A change in the U.S. mindset will be needed to encourage Europe to assume the responsibilities of a great power. Washington needs to work with its allies to build a capable European pillar, one that has the hard power needed to deal with most security contingencies in its immediate neighborhood.   

Redefining American Leadership  

Success in a multipolar order will require Washington to rethink its conduct. 

To start, it will have to reconcile itself to the reality that great powers by definition enjoy strategic autonomy. Even ones that share U.S. values may, at times, pursue interests that run contrary to the United States. 

Washington will also have to acknowledge the limits of its power. Because of real-world limits, the United States will have to focus more sharply on a narrower set of priorities than in the past if it is to defend and advance its vital interests.    

In the emerging multipolar world, the United States will no longer have the margin of superiority over other great powers necessary to bend other countries to its own will. Rather, leadership will come in the form of melding varying and often competing interests into a framework that favors U.S. interests, that is, in manipulating multipolarity more adroitly and confidently than other great powers. 

The United States could, for instance, demonstrate leadership in rallying coalitions, which would include at least some of the other great powers to deal with urgent global issues.  

There is space for moral leadership, especially for the great power that stands first among equals on the world stage. That is the role the United States should aspire to, in part because that is the only way it can retain its sense of exceptionalism and reconcile it with the permanent engagement it needs to defend its interests in an interconnected multipolar world it cannot dominate.  

Thomas Graham is a distinguished Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of the recent book Getting Russia Right. Graham is a research fellow at Yale University’s MacMillan Center and, after a long career in the U.S. Foreign Service, was Special Assistant to President George W. Bush and National Security Council Senior Director for Russia. 

Image Credit: Shutterstock.

The Washington Post - Breaking News - January 31, 2025 - ...about migrant children and teens

 

Breaking News Jan. 31, 4:02 p.m. EST

Trump administration seeks to give immigration officers access to restricted information about migrant children and teens The Trump administration is preparing directives that would grant U.S. immigration officers access to databases that contain information about hundreds of thousands of immigrant teens and children who crossed into the United States without parents, says White House border czar Tom Homan. The Office of Refugee Resettlement at the Department of Health and Human Services, which is responsible for caring for unaccompanied minors taken into custody along the border, has long operated independently of ICE out of concern that the minors’ undocumented family members and sponsors may not come forward to claim them, fearing arrest.

Financial Times - Breaking News - January 31, 2925 - US says it will push ahead with tariffs against Canada, Mexico and China

 

US says it will push ahead with tariffs against Canada, Mexico and China The US will go ahead with plans to hit Canada, Mexico and China with new tariffs, the White House has said, heightening the risks of a trade war. Keep reading

WSJ OPINION Commentary Follow Marco Rubio: An Americas First Foreign Policy U.S. diplomats have neglected the Western Hemisphere for too long. By Marco Rubio Jan. 30, 2025 4:55 pm ET

 WSJ OPINION 

Commentary

Follow

Marco Rubio: An Americas First Foreign Policy

U.S. diplomats have neglected the Western Hemisphere for too long.

By Marco Rubio

Jan. 30, 2025 4:55 pm ET

You may also like

WSJ Opinion: Joe Biden's Bitter Last Word

Tap For Sound

Global View: The power that a rising and expanding America would inevitably acquire will be seen in Beijing and Moscow—and not only there—as a threat. Photo: Ju Peng/Alexander Kazakov/Associated Press/Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

When Donald Trump won his sweeping victory in November, he received a mandate to put America first. In the realm of diplomacy, this means paying closer attention to our own neighborhood—the Western Hemisphere.

It’s no accident that my first trip abroad as secretary of state, to Central America on Friday, will keep me in the hemisphere. This is rare among secretaries of state over the past century. For many reasons, U.S. foreign policy has long focused on other regions while overlooking our own. As a result, we’ve let problems fester, missed opportunities and neglected partners. That ends now.

President Trump’s foreign-policy agenda begins close to home. Among his top priorities is securing our borders and reversing the disastrous invasion abetted by the last administration. Diplomacy’s role in this effort is central. We need to work with countries of origin to halt and deter further migrant flows, and to accept the return of their citizens present in the U.S. illegally.

Some countries are cooperating with us enthusiastically—others, less so. The former will be rewarded. As for the latter, Mr. Trump has already shown that he is more than willing to use America’s considerable leverage to protect our interests. Just ask Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro.

Yet even when circumstances demand toughness, the president’s vision for the hemisphere remains positive. We see a prosperous region rife with opportunities. We can strengthen trade ties, create partnerships to control migration, and enhance our hemisphere’s security.

El Salvador, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Panama and the Dominican Republic—the countries I will visit on this trip—all stand to benefit tremendously from greater cooperation with the U.S. These nations were neglected by past administrations that prioritized the global over the local and pursued policies that accelerated China’s economic development, often at our neighbors’ expense.

We can reverse this. Covid exposed the fragility of America’s dependence on far-flung supply chains. Relocating our critical supply chains to the Western Hemisphere would clear a path for our neighbors’ economic growth and safeguard Americans’ own economic security.

Closer relationships with the U.S. lead to more jobs and higher growth in these countries. This reduces incentives for emigration from these countries while providing governments with revenue to fight crime and invest at home. As our regional partners build themselves up, they can more easily resist countries such as China that promise much but deliver little.

Mass migration has destabilized our entire region. Drug cartels—now correctly categorized, thanks to the president, as foreign terrorist organizations—are taking over our communities, sowing violence and poisoning our families with fentanyl. Illegitimate regimes in Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela are intentionally amplifying the chaos. All the while, the Chinese Communist Party uses diplomatic and economic leverage—such as at the Panama Canal—to oppose the U.S. and turn sovereign nations into vassal states.

I am confident that the countries I will soon visit will be ready partners. Like President Trump, their leaders are pragmatists who put their citizens first. And because they are pragmatists, they also know that there is much more to be gained from working with the U.S. than not.

This is an approach to foreign policy based on concrete shared interests, not vague platitudes or utopian ideologies. It is representative of the approach the State Department will be taking to all its international dealings. We will extend our hand to all nations of goodwill, in the confident expectation that they will recognize what we can do together.

Thankfully, the Western Hemisphere harbors more congruent interests than conflicting ones. Making America great again also means helping our neighbors achieve greatness. The threats Mr. Trump was elected to stop are threats to the nations of our hemisphere as well.

We share a common home. The safer, stronger and more prosperous that home becomes, the more all our nations stand to benefit. Together, there are few limits to what we can accomplish.

Mr. Rubio is U.S. secretary of state.

On-the-Record Briefing on Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s First Trip to the Western Hemisphere 01/31/2025 02:03 PM EST Tammy Bruce, Department Spokesperson Mauricio Claver-Carone, United States Special Envoy for Latin America Via Teleconference

 On-the-Record Briefing on Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s First Trip to the Western Hemisphere

01/31/2025 02:03 PM EST

Tammy Bruce, Department Spokesperson

Mauricio Claver-Carone, United States Special Envoy for Latin America

Via Teleconference

MS HOUSTON:  Greetings and welcome.  I’m Mignon Houston, the deputy spokesperson at the Department of State.  I am honored to serve as your moderator for today’s background briefing with senior State Department officials discussing Secretary Marco Rubio’s first trip.  This trip is an exciting opportunity to underscore the U.S. Government’s deep commitment to our Western Hemisphere.  We are honored to be joined today by distinguished guests.  We have Mauricio Claver-Carone, the special envoy for Latin America.

Before we begin, I would like to outline a few key ground rules at the top.  This is an on-the-record call.  Information may be attributed to the special envoy, identified by name and title.  We ask that the contents of the call be embargoed until the conclusion of today’s call. Thank you for your understanding.

At this time, we will begin with remarks from our special envoy.  Please join me in welcoming our special envoy, Mauricio Claver-Carone, for Latin America.  Special Envoy, you now have the floor.

MR CLAVER-CARONE:  Thank you so much, Mignon, for the introduction, and thank you for everyone for joining us.  Look, this is a truly historic visit that Secretary Rubio will be paying to the region.  I can’t stress enough the historic nature of this visit and how it harkens back to President Trump’s overall message during his inauguration of the golden age of the Americas.  This is the first time – and I stress for everyone to please read Secretary Rubio’s op-ed in The Wall Street Journal today – this is the first time that the Secretary of State, that the U.S. Secretary of State, his first visit – his or her first visit to anywhere in the world is to Latin America, for the first time in over a hundred years.  Last time that happened I believe was in 1912, when Philander Chase Knox went to Panama to watch – to oversee the conclusion of the Panama Canal’s construction and operations at the time.  And what a great message to harken back to that golden age of the Americas, as President Trump himself has mentioned.

When – if you go back to the inauguration speech with President Trump, he talked about, obviously, President McKinley, American greatness, and the Panama Canal was referenced.  This was a time that began to set the framework for what ultimately became the 20th century as a great American century.  And now, harkening back to President Trump and his notion and his efforts for, again, the reinstating of America’s golden age, and having frankly the most experienced senior policy team ever in the history of the United States Government on the Americas, it goes to show really the focus and the priority that President Trump has given to the region, and the fact that that’s led by our Secretary of State, the first Hispanic secretary of state, who knows the region like no one – like no one else, inside-out, is really historic in that nature.

What we’re focused on in this trip and what I think the message to harken back to that is as well, 20 years ago people were talking about whether the 21st century was going to be a Chinese century or an American century.  And a lot of these experts – and I harken back, again, to what actually Secretary Rubio yesterday in his interview with Megyn Kelly talked about a lot of experts and foreign policy experts that write a lot, and frankly seem not to know what they’re talking about – but 20 years ago, if you read a lot of the materials out there, there was really a lot about, oh, is this going to be the Chinese century, because America was in decline and China was on the rise.  And what President Trump began and what he’s focused on with his golden age and with this trip signifies that harkens back to that and that era of American greatness and the golden age is that the 21st century will also be an American century.  And that’s what the focus – and America can’t – just like in the 20th century, it begins right here.  It begins right here in where we live, in the hemisphere we live.  It begins right here, harkening back to what made America great – the growth, the manufacturing growth of America, the reindustrialization of America, and frankly the great assets that America has built across the world, and in this case particularly the Panama Canal.

The trip will begin in Panama, where the Secretary will meet with, obviously, President Mulino, and will also visit the Panama Canal and visit with the Panama Canal administrator during this trip.  Various issues will be discussed, including obviously the canal; also the cooperation on migration.  On that issue, Panama has been very helpful in dealing with its border, Darién border, in regards to expatriating a lot of the folks from not only South America but from throughout the world that use the Darién border with Colombia in order to come and try to make it – the route up to the United States.  We have a very successful repatriation program with Panama that frankly should be expanded, and obviously that’ll be a focus on the conversation.

But also a focus on the conversation will obviously be the Panama Canal, and obviously the President has made that an important issue and a priority to be discussed, and how at the end of the day this extraordinarily strategic asset that the United States built and handed over to Panama – to ensure that during that process, particularly going back to the handover of the canal in 1999, to ensure that we’ve seen in the increasing growth of China, which has been expounded by the Varela government in – with this recognition of Beijing of a few years back in 2018 and then this increasingly creeping presence of Chinese companies and actors throughout the Canal Zone – and everything from force and logistics to telecommunications, infrastructure, and otherwise – which is very concerning not only, frankly, to the national security of the United States, but frankly to the national security of Panama and to the entire Western Hemisphere.  So that’ll be an issue of discussion.

Pursuant to that – to Panama, the – Secretary Rubio will be traveling to El Salvador.  We’ll – he’ll visit with President Bukele.  As many of you know, the first phone call to a leader in the Western Hemisphere by President Trump and the second globally was to President Bukele of El Salvador, who is not only the most popular leader in the Western Hemisphere from an approval ratings perspective, but the reason he’s so – has become so popular is just because of the extraordinary measures that have been taken in the country on security.  Just decades ago – it was just a decade ago San Salvador was the murder capital of the world, and today it’s one of the safest cities in the world.  And those extraordinary measures, which are frankly the envy of a lot of countries throughout the Western Hemisphere, has really made him one of the most consequential leaders not only on security but a great ally on migration.  During the first Trump Administration, El Salvador was one of three countries that had a Safe Third Agreement with the United States, which will also be a topic of discussion.  And what’s also been out there in the news quite a bit is his extraordinary handling of the MS-13 gang problem, how he’s managed it in El Salvador, and frankly how that can also be an alternative to help and support the United States in dealing with the most current gang problem that we have, which are the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gangs and how they can – and how President Bukele can help us there.  All of those will be issues of discussion with President Bukele during the Secretary’s trip.

After that, we’ll go to Costa Rica, where the President will meet with President Chaves – also a great ally of the United States.  President Chaves has been – was also a country that had changed its recognition towards China.  President Chaves has been a great leader in that country in regards to recognizing the threat that China poses in that country, but also on the migration front has been a great ally in ensuring that kind of the residuals from Panama as it goes further up continues to not only maintain – but akin to Panama, one of the subjects of discussion will be a repatriation program with Costa Rica to help with not only those that are coming up from South America but those that are coming from throughout the world, extracontinentals that are coming through and how they can help repatriate in that manner.

Also an issue of great importance to Costa Rica that will be discussed is the challenges with Nicaragua on its border, and obviously there with the Ortega dictatorship in Nicaragua, which there’s probably no country along with the United States more affected in that regards than Costa Rica, and – due to the border and the challenges that it faces as well.  And that’ll be a subject of discussion with President Chaves there.

Then we’ll go to Guatemala, where he’ll meet with President Arévalo.  Guatemala has been – this is a new government, still newish government in Guatemala where the relationships are being strengthened and built but has thus far frankly in two weeks has turned out to be an extraordinary ally particularly in helping us deal with migration issues.  They have been taking – been very supportive of flights, including military flights, in order to repatriate Guatemalans, and we look forward to deepening those discussions.  And Guatemala is still also one of the countries in the region that recognizes Taiwan, and obviously the United States is grateful for its support in regards for – to Taiwan.  And there’s a lot of – there’s a lot of kinship in regards to a lot of these issues there so we look forward to expanding with Guatemala the discussions on how to continue to support us on migration, and obviously countering Chinese influence throughout the region.

And the final stop will be the Dominican Republic, where we’ll discuss – obviously with President Abinader in the Dominican Republic, the Secretary will discuss other challenges.  The Dominican Republic is one of our greatest, if not our greatest, ally in the Caribbean; in that regards, has also been the country most affected by the challenges and frankly the vacuum created by the previous administration in Haiti which has led to frankly chaos in Haiti.  There’s a – Dominican Republic is the most challenged across its border.  It’s not only a tremendous cost for the Dominican Republic, but they’ve had to deal with a tremendous migration crisis whereby they’re having to repatriate about 250,000 Haitians per year, and it’s an extraordinary challenge, and we seek to continue support to them, along with counter-narcotics.  It’s very important for Dominican Republic in that regards to step up.  It is – the Caribbean had become in the past a transit point, and they have been great allies in this regards.

Now, if you really look at these – the significance of these five countries, that these are all overall allies of the United States, obviously where we seek to deepen and strengthen cooperation in all of these.  And if you look at El Salvador, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic, and you look at President Bukele, President Chaves, and President Abinader – Dominican Republic – these are the three most – when you look at popularity rating-wise, these are three of the most popular leaders – I would say three out of five most popular leaders in the Western Hemisphere.  And their popularity stems from the success they’ve had in their country, their strong alliance with the United States; the strong, courageous measures they’ve taken in their own countries to combat corruption, to combat – to really fight security, to open up their markets, and really to foment better lives for their citizens.

We consider these key allies across the board, and again, when we talk about the golden age of America, we’re looking at the golden age of the Americas, and consistent with our policies in the 20th century which led to the America – the American century in the 20th century, we are leaving – pursuant to President Trump’s directive, Secretary Rubio is going to be making very clear and very showing that if there’s any doubt of, like, the issues that have been talked about for the past – even during the first Trump Administration, where President Trump courageously, for the first time in five prior presidencies, pivoted – pivoted – on China, pivoted our foreign policy on China when everyone thought that China was literally going to become the most influential force throughout the Americas.  This is a re-pivot of the golden age of America, of the Americas, to leave unequivocally, without a doubt, that the 21st century, akin to the 20th century, will be an American century.

MS HOUSTON:  Excellent.  Special Envoy, thank you so much for that great overview of what we can expect during the trip.  We are fortunate now to also have the spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State joining us, Ms. Tammy Bruce.  At this point I will hand the floor over to our spokesperson for a few words as well.

MS BRUCE:  Hi, everyone.  Thank you, Mignon.  It’s – I am very excited as, of course, we have a new administration.  I’m the new spokesperson, and this will be my first trip with the Secretary, as it is for all of us.  It is – I’m a native Californian.  Of course, we know – and it’s why I was particularly pleased with the attitude and the approach of the Secretary when we were asked earlier by media about why Central America.  We tend to look to Europe, of course.  We tend to look to Asia.  But the fact of the matter is this is where we live.  This is who we are.  This is about not just wanting to have new partnerships – but that’s always good – but the nature of what it means to have an extended relationship with the people closest to you.  It’s valuable in dealing with, certainly, the issues that cross our borders when it comes to the supply chain, the economy, stability in general, the relationship that can come from dealing with problems, but also expanding on opportunities and the nature of what can be accomplished when you actually sit down, talk with people, when you have the – focusing on what we have in common and the issues, of course, that we all want to deal with to get resolved.

We certainly – and I know the Secretary feels this way that this is – when we think of America first, of course, it’s not America alone by any imagination.  But it is also a recognition that relationships and partnerships across the board on every issue that matters to all of these nations, it can only become better or resolved or expanded upon when we take the time, sit down at the table – and not just in a moment when there’s an urgent situation, and that will always occur.  But when you know people and – but they understand the nature of what our goals are and where we meet each other on the field, it makes a huge difference for communication, for how things gets resolved.

And there’s so much that’s done with social media, right?  We’ve all seen that.  But with social media, you don’t see a smile, you don’t see body language, you don’t hear tone.  And I think this is why technology, while it’s wonderful and we’re able to get a lot done with that, the fact is these kinds of visits – the nature of the commitment of Secretary Rubio for America relies on the nature of our relationships with these countries as well.

And there’ll be political issues always, but there’s really – what it all comes down to are the social realities of the fact that we aren’t alone, we shouldn’t be alone; that the problems we all experience can be resolved by working together and the creativity and the ideas for expansion of economic growth, for prosperity, right, for individual people.  The dreams of Americans and the dreams of Panamanians or those in the Dominican Republic or in Costa Rica, wherever you are – Salvador – are the same.  It’s the same thing.  We think about our families.  We think about our children.  What is tomorrow going to look like?  If something happened, could we rely on our next-door neighbor to come over and give us a hand?  This is now a new age, that it is not America issuing orders.  It’s an America that is moving forward knowing that it is partnerships that matter on every issue.  It is a commitment.  That’s why this is the first trip, to make that point.

But of course, the Secretary will be making that point in a variety of different ways with all of the people that he meets – the workers, the leaders in these nations, the people who are getting us on and off a plane.  The importance of the individual moving through their lives in whatever country you’re in, it is the same desire about making enough money to pay our rent, getting back home to our families, being able to know that your daughter or son’s life is going to be better than your life.  And I know that Secretary Rubio wants this country to be a part of that for all of us.

So I am – I can’t tell you how excited I am about his leadership and his commitment, but also what this trip is going to look like.  And so I’m thrilled to be here, and I just want to say thank you.

MS HOUSTON:  Wonderful.  Thank you, Spokesperson Tammy Bruce.

At this time, we will open the floor for questions.  We hope to get through as many as we can, so please make them brief if possible, and also use the “raise your hand” feature to be called upon.  And remember to unmute yourself before speaking.

We will begin with Nora Gámez Torres from the Miami Herald.  Nora, please unmute yourself.  The floor is yours.

QUESTION:  Thank you so much for doing this, and thank you so much, Mauricio, for doing this conference.  Quick question – we just learned about this expected meeting by Special Envoy Richard Grenell with Nicolás Maduro today in Venezuela.  So I wonder:  How do you square that with Secretary’s – Rubio longstanding criticism of negotiations with Maduro, and if you think this potential negotiation with the Maduro regime kind of undercuts the strong message Secretary Rubio wants to project in this trip?  Thank you so much.

MR CLAVER-CARONE:  Thank you for the – thank you, Nora.  Let me just first and foremost add something to Tammy’s remarks, which were excellent.  Just to highlight – from migration to security to commerce, there’s no other region in the world that affects individual American lives more on a daily basis than the Western Hemisphere.  And that’s why team-wise, that’s why in the golden age notion of President Trump, he’s prioritized the Americas in this administration, and that’s why you’re seeing the Secretary’s first trip be to the region.

In regards to Ric’s visit to Venezuela, let me just – Ric is the special envoy for special missions, and he is there on a special mission, and that special mission is very specific.  That very – a specific special mission, which is one, that the United States and President Trump expects Nicolás Maduro to take back all of the Venezuelan criminals and gang members that have been exported to United States and to do so unequivocally and without condition, first and foremost, as we would expect any other country in the world, and that is non-negotiable in that sense; and two, that American hostages that are being held in Venezuela not only are unacceptable, but that they must be released immediately.

That doesn’t change President Trump and – President Trump’s priorities, which he himself has said in regards to Venezuela and what he would like to see.  It doesn’t change the Secretary’s position, obviously, in regards to Venezuela and the priorities of the United States in that regards, and obviously the recognition of elections, the recognition of democracy and democratic change in Venezuela.  It focuses on two very specific issues: that we expect that Venezuelan criminals and gangs will be returned, as they are to every country in the world, without conditions; and two, that American hostages need to be released immediately, unequivocally.  This is not a quid pro quo.  It is not a negotiation in exchange for anything.

President Trump himself has made very clear we don’t need Venezuelan oil, that we – all the oil we need is right here in the United States, and as a matter of fact that’s why the President’s energy plan is focused on continuing to make the United States energy independent, as he did the first term, and making it ultimately a net exporter in that regards.

So again, two very specific issues, and all I would do on this call is urge the Maduro government, the Maduro regime in Venezuela, to heed to Special Envoy Ric Grenell’s message and to his demands and what he puts on the table, because ultimately there will be consequences otherwise.

MS HOUSTON:  Great.  Thank you so much.  Our next question goes to Nick Schifrin from PBS.  Nick, we invite you to begin your question at this time.

QUESTION:  Hey, guys, thanks so much for doing this.  Mauricio, two questions related to Panama.  Wondering if you could just expand on what the Secretary said yesterday in his Megyn Kelly interview.  He pointed out two things.  He believed that if China wanted to obstruct traffic in the canal, they could, and also talked about the costs for American ships going through.  What kinds of asks are you asking for, or what kind of expectations are you asking for out of the Panamanian Government on those two specific things?

And the Secretary also said, in regards to Greenland, a lot of stuff is done publicly and it’s not helpful because it puts the other side in a tough spot domestically.  Are you concerned at all that some of the tough talk on Panama publicly boxes them in given privately they do want to help you guys on other issues?  Thanks

MR CLAVER-CARONE:  Look, I think President Trump has put a very important issue on the table, which has only gotten worse.  In 1997 there was a Senate report that talked about the Hutchison ports on each side, Cristobal and Balboa.  And at the time, because basically it was looking at whether the handover should continue because whether these companies were a threat to U.S. national security, et cetera.  And the conclusion was that these were Hong Kong companies at the time.  This was 1997.  Handover happens 1999.  There’s – unquestionably today those companies, Hutchison and those two ports, are under control of the Chinese Government – unquestionably.  So that changes completely the dynamic.

And when President Varela recognized China in 2018, it wasn’t just a diplomatic recognition.  He literally opened the floodgates and gave strategic assets throughout the Canal Zone to China, including, by the way, which was – well, including by the way – and I won’t re-harken kind of in the first administration of the Trump Administration what we did – including, by the way, he wanted to give them in one of the prime locations on the Canal Zone and prior U.S. property an embassy in the highest peaks.  Literally they can have free range for espionage.

Of course, he also gave them smart cities, brought in Huawei throughout the realm, other Chinese ports are developed, other assets – a bridge, obviously that we’re aware of, obviously there was rail.  I mean, really throughout the conglomerate of logistics in the Panama Canal the Varela administration – and by the way, again, this is not President Mulino’s fault.  This was President Varela’s fault in 2018.  He just now has to deal with it because it got completely out of hand.  It got completely out of hand.

So we see China’s presence in the Panama Canal – and the President has made it very clear – as not only a threat to the United States national security but to that of Panama itself and ultimately to that of the region.  And that needs to be addressed, right?

But moreover, what makes it even more susceptible is on the cost issue and on the maintenance issue.  Look, when I was in the White House National Security Council in the first Trump Administration, the Panamanian Canal Authority kept asking us and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for help because they knew the looming problem.  People keep saying it was climate change, it’s climate change.  B.S.  The problems that were faced during COVID ultimately had not – yes, there was a drought, and – but it wasn’t climate change.  They knew that these issues were coming.  The maintenance was not being upkept as it needed to be.  The salination of the water in the lake was happening, and they kept asking us for help in dealing with it because they didn’t know how to deal with it.

So the President has made it very clear that it hasn’t been well-maintained in that sense.  And indeed, if the United States is going to help Panama do so, it can’t charge the United States for doing so and then go up and raise prices and raise costs, which overwhelmingly affect the United States, its manufacturers, exporters, and its consumers in that regards because that wasn’t our fault.  That supposedly – under the treaty, that maintenance is supposed to be under their issue.

And then finally, the United States under the treaty is focused on – and basically the security of the canal falls upon the United States and Panama.  And then to have – essentially charge us for our naval military vessels to cross the canal is also adding insult to injury.  It has brought another issue to the table.

So the President has brought three – as he usually tends to do – very common-sense, practical, important issues to the table.  And now those issues need to be addressed, and those conversations will be had, and obviously Secretary Rubio will be digging into all of those.  But this is a key issue because, at the end of the day, this is a key, important, strategic asset.  And obviously, if the 21st century, akin to the 20th century, is going to be an American century and a golden age of the Americas, that strategic asset cannot be under the control, whether de facto or de jure, of China.

MS HOUSTON:  Okay, excellent.  Next up we have Matt Foldi from the Washington Reporter.  Matt, we turn it over to you at this time.

QUESTION:  Hello.  Can you hear me?

MS HOUSTON:  Yes, we can.

QUESTION:  Thank you, guys, for doing this call.  I’m curious.  Could you talk some more about the actions that we saw with Colombia right off the bat from Secretary Rubio, maybe some of the back story of what created this kerfuffle and how you see that interaction and I think the subsequent success that this had in forming the administration’s foreign policy in Latin America and also beyond?

MR CLAVER-CARONE:  It was very simple.  The United States had reached an agreement with Colombia to obviously repatriate its citizens.  The Colombian Government agreed to use military aircraft, and it signed so.  Like, there’s – essentially there’s the flight information, everything.  They knew exactly what they were getting into.

Suddenly, in the middle of the night, for whatever reason, the president, President of Colombia, decided to tweet and turn one of the planes around.  And obviously that’s going to have consequences.  And the leadership of President Trump and Secretary Rubio in reacting to that was unprecedented.  I have – I served in the first administration.  I’ve seen it.  There has never – on a Sunday from the morning to the evening, the leadership of the State Department, the fact that the State Department immediately closed down the Consular Affairs section in Bogota, literally canceled 1,500 appointments, sent shockwaves through the government.  That was done on Sunday morning immediately, thanks to the leadership of Secretary Rubio.

And that type of leadership of not thinking – and I think the Secretary just made this point yesterday in this interview – not thinking, writing 25 memos, getting 50,000 approvals, going through this endless bureaucracy.  No, that quick thinking, the quick action followed by the White House’s movements to then prepare the executive order on the tariffs in order for – by CBP and DHS for expediting inspections.  This whole government – I mean, when President – this is a dream team, like what Secretary Rubio – under the President’s leadership, Secretary Rubio first but then with Secretary Noem and CBP, like we saw all of this move in historic fashion.

And guess what?  In less than 12 hours, the Colombian Government changed its mind, and they were literally – and of course, they’re maintaining a diplomatic route.  We were having conversations with the Colombian Government.  As we are having conversations with them, guess what?  Before you knew it, something that in any other administration would have taken 12 months or 12 weeks to resolve was resolved in 12 hours.

And it sends a message that this administration, President Trump, Secretary Rubio – they mean what they say.  There will be consequences for breaking agreements with the United States or having bad faith with the United States, which is why we urge everyone to have – by the way, including Nicolás Maduro now with Ric Grenell – good-faith conversations to show good-faith efforts and not to try to in any way backtrack or things of the sort.  And I think that sends a message across the region.

And by the way, the fact that Secretary Rubio’s going to these five countries that are ultimately allies of the United States shows a message: we’re friends of our friends, and we’re going to, at the end of the day – and by the way, it’s not even ideological, per se, right?  If you are democratically elected, left-wing government in the region and you want to work with the United States, we wish no ill.  This was not – we didn’t pick this fight on Sunday with Colombia.  Like we had a good-faith agreement, and suddenly it was undone by Petro’s tweet.  That’s unacceptable.

And by the way, it’s gotten fixed.  Diplomacy prevailed.  You heard the President the other day say their team worked great.  And you know what, we’re going to move on, and we’re going to work with them and we’re going to find solutions.  And now there’s other issues that are going to come up and there’s going to be other challenges.  But lesson learned, and hopefully lesson learned throughout not only the region but the world.

MS HOUSTON:  Thank you, everyone, for this incredible exchange.  On behalf of the U.S. Department of State, I would like to express our gratitude to our distinguished speakers and to the members of the press.  This briefing is on-the-record and information may be attributed directly to our speakers, identifying them by name and title.

I understand that there are still many hands that are raised, and unfortunately we are not able to continue with the Q&A portion of our call.  But I ask if you have questions that have not been addressed that you send them to the department’s media inquiry system, and that is on our state.gov newsroom site.

In honor of this first trip, there will be a number of items that will be released from the department to provide additional color and fodder around what we can expect on this incredible opportunity to our hemisphere.  There will be a video that will be released announcing the trip in the Secretary’s words sometime today on our flagship accounts, as well as other items that you can continue to keep an eye out for.

Thank you again, everyone, for joining.  We very much look forward to staying in touch and moving forward with a renewed sense of purpose in our hemisphere. This concludes our on-the-record call.  The embargo is now lifted.  Thank you.

The entirety of this briefing is on the record.

The entirety of this briefing is on the record.

PRESS BRIEFING BY PRESS SECRETARY KAROLINE LEAVITT January 29, 2025 1:06 P.M. EST

 PRESS BRIEFING BY PRESS SECRETARY KAROLINE LEAVITT

January 29, 2025

1:06 P.M. EST

MS. LEAVITT:  Good afternoon, everybody. 

Q    Good afternoon.

MS. LEAVITT:  How are we?  Good to see all of you.  It’s an honor to be here with all of you.  A lot of familiar faces in the room, a lot of new faces.

And President Trump is back, and the golden age of America has most definitely begun. 

The Senate has already confirmed five of President Trump’s exceptional Cabinet nominees: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.  It is imperative that the Senate continues to confirm the remainder of the president’s well-qualified nominees as quickly as possible.

As you have seen during the past week, President Trump is hard at work fulfilling the promises that he made to the American people on the campaign trail.  Since taking the oath of office, President Trump has taken more than 300 executive actions; secured nearly $1 trillion in U.S. investments; deported illegal alien rapists, gang members, and suspected terrorists from our homeland; and restored common sense to the federal government.

I want to take a moment to go through some of these extraordinary actions. 

On day one, President Trump declared a national emergency at our southern border to end the four-year-long invasion of illegal aliens under the previous administration.  Additionally, President Trump signed an executive order to end catch and release and finish construction of his effective border wall.  By using every lever of his federal power, President Trump has sent a loud and clear message to the entire world: America will no longer tolerate illegal immigration. 

And this president expects that every nation on this planet will cooperate with the repatriation of their citizens, as proven by this weekend, when President Trump swiftly directed his team to issue harsh and effective sanctions and tariffs on the Colombian government upon hearing they were denied a U.S. military aircraft full of their own citizens who were deported by this administration.  Within hours, the Colombian government agreed to all of President Trump’s demands, proving America is once again respected on the world stage.

So, to foreign nationals who are thinking about trying to illegally enter the United States, think again.  Under this president, you will be detained, and you will be deported. 

Every day, Americans are safer because of the violent criminals that President Trump’s administration is removing from our communities.

On January 23rd, ICE New York arrested a Turkish national for entry without inspection who is a known or suspected terrorist.  On January 23rd, ICE San Francisco arrested a citizen of Mexico unlawfully present in the United States who has been convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a child aged 14 years or younger.  ICE Saint Paul has arrested a citizen of Honduras who was convicted of fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor.  ICE Buffalo arrested a citizen of Ecuador who has been convicted of rape. 

ICE Boston arrested a citizen of the Dominican Republic who has a criminal conviction for second-degree murder.  This criminal was convicted of murder for beating his pregnant wife to death in front of her five-year-old son. 

 And ICE Saint Paul also arrested a citizen of Mexico who was convicted of possessing pornographic material of a minor on a work computer.

These are the heinous individuals that this administration is removing from American communities every single day.  And to the brave state and local law enforcement officers, CBP, and ICE agents who are helping in the facilitation of this deportation operation, President Trump has your back and he is grateful for your hard work.

On the economic front, President Trump took immediate action to lower costs for families who are suffering from four long years of the Biden administration’s destructive and inflationary policies.  President Trump ordered the heads of all executive departments and agencies to help deliver emergency price relief to the American people, untangle our economy from Biden’s regulatory constraints, and end the reckless war on American energy.

President Trump also signed sweeping executive orders to end the weaponization of government and restore common sense to the federal bureaucracy.  He directed all federal agencies to terminate illegal diversity, equity, and inclusion programs to help return America to a merit-based society.

President Trump also signed an executive order declaring it is now the policy of the federal government that there are only two sexes: male and female.  Sanity has been restored.

Before I take your questions, I would like to point out to — all of you once again have access to the most transparent and accessible president in American history.  There has never been a president who communicates with the American people and the American press corps as openly and authentically as the 45th and now 47th president of the United States. 

This past week, President Trump has held multiple news conferences, gaggled on Air Force One multiple times, and sat down for a two-part interview on Fox News, which aired last week.  As Politico summed it up best, “Trump is everywhere again,” and that’s because President Trump has a great story to tell about the legendary American revival that is well underway.

And in keeping with this revolutionary media approach that President Trump deployed during the campaign, the Trump White House will speak to all media outlets and personalities, not just the legacy media who are seated in this room, because apporting — according to recent polling from Gallup, Americans’ trust in mass media has fallen to a record low.  Millions of Americans, especially young people, have turned from traditional television outlets and newspapers to consume their news from podcasts, blogs, social media, and other independent outlets.

It’s essential to our team that we share President Trump’s message everywhere and adapt this White House to the new media landscape in 2025.  To do this, I am excited to announce the following changes will be made to this historic James S. Brady Briefing Room, where Mr. Brady’s legacy will endure.

This White House believes strongly in the First Amendment, so it’s why our team will work diligently to restore the press passes of the 440 journalists whose passes were wrongly revoked by the previous administration. 

We’re also opening up this briefing room to new media voices who produce news-related content and whose outlet is not already represented by one of the seats in this room.  We welcome independent journalists, podcasters, social media influencers, and content creators to apply for credentials to cover this White House.  And you can apply now on our new website, WhiteHouse.gov/NewMedia. 

Starting today, this seat in the front of the room, which is usually occupied by the press secretary staff, will be called the “new media” seat.  My team will review the applications and give credentials to new media applicants who meet our criteria and pass United States Secret Service requirements to enter the White House complex.

So, in light of these announcements, our first questions for today’s briefing will go to these new media members whose outlets, despite being some of the most viewed news websites in the country, have not been given seats in this room. 

And before I turn to questions, I do have news directly from the president of the United States that was just shared with me in the Oval Office from President Trump directly — an update on the New Jersey drones: After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large numbers were authorized to be flown by the FAA for research and various other reasons. 

Many of these drones were also hobbyists — recreational and private individuals that enjoy flying drones.  In meanti- — in the — in time, it got worse, due to curiosity.  This was not the enemy.  A — a statement from the president of the United States to start this briefing with some news.

And with that, I will turn it over to questions, and we will begin with our new media members: Mike Allen from Axios, Matt Boyle from Breitbart. 

Mike, why don’t you go ahead.

Q    Thank you very much.  Karoline, does the president see anything fishy about DeepSeek, either its origins or its cost?  And could China’s ability to make these models quicker, cheaper affect our thinking about expanding generation data centers, chip manufacturing?

MS. LEAVITT:  Sure.  The president was asked about DeepSeek last night on Air Force One when he gaggled for, I think, the third or fourth time throughout the weekend with members of the traveling press corps.  The president said that he believes that this is a wake-up call to the American AI industry.  The last administration sat on their hands and allowed China to rapidly develop this AI program.

And so, President Trump believes in restoring American AI dominance, and that’s why he took very strong executive action this past week to sign executive orders to roll back some of the onerous regulations on the AI industry.  And President Trump has also proudly appointed the first AI and crypto czar at this White House, David Sacks, whom I spoke with yesterday — very knowledgeable on this subject.  And his team is here working every single day to ensure American AI dominance.

As for the national security implications, I spoke with NSC this morning.  They are looking into what those may be, and when I have an update, I will share it with you, Mike.

Q    And, Karoline, you say “restore” U.S. dominance.  Is there fear that the U.S. either is falling or has fallen behind?  And how would the president make sure the U.S. stays ahead?

MS. LEAVITT:  No.  The president is confident that we will restore American dominance in AI. 

Matt.

Q    Yeah.  So, Karoline, first off, thank you to you and President Trump for actually giving voices to new media outlets that represent millions and millions of Americans.  The thing I would add — the — I’ve got a two-part question for you.  The first is just: Can you expand upon what steps the White House is going to take to bring more voices, not less — which is what our founder, Andrew Breitbart, believed in — into this room, where they rightly belong?

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah, absolutely.  And as I said in my opening statement, Matt, it is a priority of this White House to honor the First Amendment.  And it is a fact that Americans are consuming their news media from various different platforms, especially young people.  And as the youngest press secretary in history, thanks to President Trump, I take great pride in opening up this room to new media voices to share the president’s message with as many Americans as possible.

In doing so, number one, we will ensure that outlets like yours — Axios and Breitbart, which are widely respected and viewed outlets — have an actual seat in this room every day.  We also, again, encourage anybody in this country — whether you are a TikTok content creator, a blogger, a podcaster — if you are producing legitimate news content, no matter the medium, you will be allowed to apply for press credentials to this White House. 

And as I said earlier, our new media website is WhiteHouse.gov/NewMedia, and so we encourage people to apply.  Again, as long as you are creating news-related content of the day and you’re a legitimate independent journalist, you’re welcome to cover this White House. 

Q    And secondly, Karoline, you sa- — you laid out several of the actions that President Trump has taken.  Obviously, it’s a stark contrast to the previous administration and a breakneck speed from President Trump.  Can we expect that pace to continue as the hun- — the — you know, the first 100 days moves along here and beyond that?

MS. LEAVITT:  Absolutely.  There is no doubt President Trump has always been the hardest working man in politics.  I think that’s been proven over the past week.  This president has, again, signed more than 300 executive orders.  He’s taken historic action. 

I gaggled aboard Air Force One to mark the first 100 days of this administration — 4:00 p.m. last Friday — first 100 hours, rather.  And this president did more in the first 100 hours than the previous president did in the first 100 days. 

So, President Trump, I think you can all expect to — for him to continue to work at this breakneck speed.  So, I hope you’re all ready to work very hard.  I know that we are.

Zeke Miller.

Q    Thanks, Karoline.  A question that we’ve asked your predecessors of both parties in this job.  When you’re up here in this briefing room speaking to the American public, do you view yourself and your role as speaking on — advocating on behalf of the president, or providing the unvarnished truth that is, you know, not to lie, not to obfuscate to the American people?

MS. LEAVITT:  I commit to telling the truth from this podium every single day.  I commit to speaking on behalf of the president of the United States.  That is my job. 

And I will say it’s very easy to speak truth from this podium when you have a president who is implementing policies that are wildly popular with the American people, and that’s exactly what this administration is doing.  It’s correcting the lies and the wrongs of the past four years, many of the lies that have been told to your faces in this very briefing room.  I will not do that.

But since you brought up truth, Zeke, I would like to point out, while I vow to provide the truth from this podium, we ask that all of you in this room hold yourselves to that same standard.  We know for a fact there have been lies that have been pushed by many legacy media outlets in this country about this president, about his family, and we will not accept that.  We will call you out when we feel that your reporting is wrong or there is misinformation about this White House. 

So, yes, I will hold myself to the truth, and I expect everyone in this room to do the same. 

Q    And, Karoline, just on a substantive question.  Yesterday, the White House Office of Management and Budget directed an across-the-board freeze with — with some exceptions for individual assistance.  We understand just federal grants.

MS. LEAVITT:  Right.

Q    It’s caused a lot of confusion around the country among Head Start providers, among providers — from services to homeless veterans, provid- — you know, Medicaid providers, states saying they’re having trouble accessing the portal.  Could you put — help us clear up some confusion —

MS. LEAVITT:  Yes.

Q    — give some certainty to folks?  And then also, is that uncertainty — how does that uncertainty service the president’s voters?

MS. LEAVITT:  Well, I think there’s only uncertainty in this room amongst the media.  There’s no uncertainty in this building. 

So, let me provide the certainty and the clarity that all of you need.  This is not a blanket pause on federal assistance in grant programs from the Trump administration.  Individual assistance, that includes — I’m not naming everything that’s included, but just to give you a few examples — Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, food stamps, welfare benefits — assistance that is going directly to individuals will not be impacted by this pause. 

And I want to make that very clear to any Americans who are watching at home who may be a little bit confused about some of the media reporting: This administration — if you are receiving individual assistance from the federal government, you will still continue to receive that. 

However, it is the responsibility of this president and this administration to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars.  That is something that President Trump campaigned on.  That’s why he has launched DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, who is working alongside OMB.  And that’s why OMB sent out this memo last night, because the president signed an executive order directing OMB to do just this.  And the reason for this is to ensure that every penny that is going out the door is not conflicting with the executive orders and actions that this president has taken. 

So, what does this pause mean?  It means no more funding for illegal DEI programs.  It means no more funding for the Green New Scam that has ta- — cost American taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.  It means no more funding for transgenderism and wokeness across our federal bureaucracy and agencies.  No more funding for Green New Deal social engineering policies.  Again, people who are receiving individual asintan- — assistance, you will continue to receive that.

And President Trump is looking out for you by issuing this pause because he is being good steward of your taxpayer dollars.

Q    Thanks, Karoline. 

MS. LEAVITT:  Sure.

Q    How long is this pause going to last?  And how is the Trump administration recommending that organizations that rely on federal funding make payroll, pay their rent in the meantime?

MS. LEAVITT:  It is a temporary pause, and the Office of Management and Budget is reviewing the federal funding that has been going out the door, again, not for individual assistance, but for all of these other programs that I mentioned.

I also spoke with the incoming director of OMB this morning, and he told me to tell all of you that the line to his office is open for other federal government agencies across the board, and if they feel that programs are necessary and in line with the president’s agenda, then the Office of Management and Budget will review those policies. 

I think this is a very responsible measure.  Again, the past four years, we’ve seen the Biden administration spend money like drunken sailors.  It’s a big reason we’ve had an inflation crisis in this country, and it’s incumbent upon this administration to make sure, again, that every penny is being accounted for honestly.

Q    Why impose this pause with so little notice?  Why not give organizations more time to plan for the fact that they are about to lose, in some cases, really crucial federal funding —

MS. LEAVITT:  There was —

Q    — at least for a — for a period of time?

MS. LEAVITT:  There was notice.  It was the executive order that the president signed. 

There’s also a freeze on hiring, as you know; a regulatory freeze; and there’s also a freeze on foreign aid.  And this is a — again, incredibly important to ensure that this administration is taking into consideration how hard the American people are working.  And their tax dollars actually matter to this administration. 

You know, just during this pause, DOGE and OMB have actually found that there was $37 million that was about to go out the door to the World Health Organization, which is an organization, as you all know, that President Trump, with the swipe of his pen in that executive order, is — no longer wants the United States to be a part of.  So, that wouldn’t be in line with the president’s agenda. 

DOGE and OMB also found that there was about to be 50 million taxpayer dollars that went out the door to fund condoms in Gaza.  That is a preposterous waste of taxpayer money. 

So, that’s what this pause is focused on: being good stewards of tax dollars. 

Q    And so, this doesn’t affect —

MS. LEAVITT:  Jennifer.

Q    — Meals on Wheels or Head Start or disaster aid?

MS. LEAVITT:  Again, it does not affect individual assistance that’s going to Americans.

Q    To follow up on Nancy, do you think there will be a list of who is affected and how much money is affected?  How — how will these contractors and organizations know if they are actually being — having their funding frozen?

And then, secondly, if you’re willing, can you just clarify, is the end goal of this to essentially challenge Congress or to — to prove that the president can withhold federal funding?  Is — in other words, is this an attempt to pick a fight to prove that he can do this?

MS. LEAVITT:  No, absolutely not.  As it says right here in the memo, which I have — and I’d encourage all of you to read it — it says, “The American people elected President Trump to be the president of the United States and gave him a mandate to increase the impact of every federal dollar.”  “This memo requires federal agencies to identify and review all Federal financial assistance programs and supporting activities consistent with the president’s policies and requirements.” 

The American people gave President Trump an overwhelming mandate on November 5th, and he’s just trying to ensure that the tax money going out the door in this very bankrupt city actually aligns with the will and the priorities of the American people. 

(Cross-talk.)

Brian Glenn.

Q    Yes.  Welcome. 

MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.

Q    You look great.  You’re doing a great job. 

MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.

Q    You talked about transparency.  And some of us in this room know how just transparent President Trump has been the last five or six years; I think you’ll do the same. 

My question is, do you think this latest incident with the president of Colombia is indicative of the global, powerful respect they have for President Trump moving forward not only to engage in — in economic diplomacy with these countries but also world peace?

MS. LEAVITT:  Absolutely.  I’ll echo the answer that the president gave on Air Force One last night when he was asked a very similar question by one of your colleagues in the media: This signifies peace through strength is back, and this president will not tolerate illegal immigration into America’s interior. 

And he expects every nation on this planet, again, to cooperate with the repatriation of their citizens who illegally entered into our country and broke America’s laws.  Won’t be tolerated. 

And as you saw, the Colombian government quickly folded and agreed to all of President Trump’s demands.  Flights are underway once again.

(Cross-talk.)

Diana.

Q    Two questions on deportations, if I may.  President Trump had said on the campaign trail that he would deport pro-Hamas students who are here on visas, and on his first day in office, he signed an executive order that said, quote, “The U.S. must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the U.S. do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles.”  So, should we take this executive order as Trump saying he would be open to de- — deporting those students who are here on visas, but, you know, hold pro-Hamas sympathies?

MS. LEAVITT:  The president is open to deporting individuals who have broken our nation’s immigrations laws.  So, if they are here illegally, then certainly he is open to deporting them, and that’s what this administration is hard at work at doing. 

We receive data from DHS and from ICE every single day.  From what we hear on the ground, ICE agents are feeling incredibly empowered right now because they actually have a leader in this building who is supporting them in doing their jobs that they were hired to do, which is to detain, arrest, and deport illegal criminals who have invaded our nation’s borders over the past four years.  That’s what the president is committed to seeing. 

Q    One more. 

MS. LEAVITT:  Peter.

    

     Q    Just following up on that, Karoline —

Q    Karoline, if I could ask you very quickly, just following up on the question on immigration.  First, President Trump, during the course of the campaign in 2024, said the following about illegal im- — immigration.  He said, “They’re going back home where they belong, and we start with the criminals.  There are many, many criminals.”  NBC News has learned that ICE arrested 1,179 undocumented immigrants on Sunday, but nearly half of them — 566 of the migrants — appear to have no prior criminal record besides entering the country illegally. 

MS. LEAVITT:  (Laughs.)

Q    Is the president still focused exclusiv- — which is a civil crime, not a — not a — it’s not criminal —

MS. LEAVITT:  It’s a federal crime. 

Q    It’s a fed- — so, I’m asking though, he said he was going to focus on those violent offenders first.  So, is violent offenders no longer the predicate for these people to be deported?

MS. LEAVITT:  The president has said countless times on the campaign trail — I’ve been with him at the rallies; I know you’ve been there covering them too, Peter — that he is focused on launching the largest mass deportation operation in American history of illegal criminals. 

And if you are an individual, a foreign national, who illegally enters the United States of America, you are, by definition, a criminal.  And so, therefore —

Q    So, to be clear, it’s not exclusively —

MS. LEAVITT:  — you are subject deportation. 

Q    I apologize for interrupting.  So, to be clear, it’s not — violent criminals do not receive precedence in terms of the deportations taking place?

MS. LEAVITT:  The president has also said — two things can be true at the same time.  We want to deport illegal criminals, illegal immigrants from this country.  But the president has said that, of course, the illegal dr- — criminal drug dealers, the rapists, the murderers, the individuals who have committed heinous acts on the interior of our country and who have terrorized law-abiding American citizens, absolutely, those should be the priority of ICE.  But that doesn’t mean that the other illegal criminals who entered our nation’s borders are off the table. 

Q    Understood.  Then let me ask you a separate question about the confusion that still exists across the country right now as it relates to the — the freeze — or the pause, as it’s described.  President Trump, of course, ran — one of the key policy items was that he was going to lower prices, lower the cost of everything from groceries, as he often said.  But in many of the cases, it would seem that some of these moves could raise prices for real Americans on everything from low-income heating — that program; childcare programs.  Will nothing that the president is doing here, in terms of the freeze in these programs, raise prices on ordinary Americans?

MS. LEAVITT:  What particular actions are you referring to that would —

Q    I’m referring to LHEAP right now.  That’s the low-income heating program, for example.  We can talk about — there’s no clarity, so I could refer to a lot of them.  We don’t know what they are specifically.  Can you tell us that LHEAP — that LIHEAP is not one of those affected?

MS. LEAVITT:  So, you’re asking a hypoc- — -thetical based on programs that you can’t even identify?

Q    No, I just identified — I —

MS. LEAVITT:  What I can tell you is that the —

Q    Well, just to be — just to be clear, since you guys haven’t identified, let’s do it together, just for Americans at home.  Medicaid, is that affected?

MS. LEAVITT:  I gave you a list of examples — Social Security, Medicare, welfare benefits —

Q    Medicaid too, correct?

MS. LEAVITT:  — food stamps — that will not be impacted by this federal pause.  I can get you the full list after this briefing from the Office of Management and Budget.

But I do want to address the cost cutting, because that’s certainly very important, and — and cutting the cost of living in this country.  President Trump has taken historic action over the past week to do that.  He actually signed a memorandum to deliver emergency price relief for American families, which took a number of actions.  I can walk you through those. 

He also repealed many onerous Biden administration regulations.  We know, over the past four years, American households has been essentially taxed $55,000 in regulations from the previous administration.  President Trump, with the swipe of his pen, rescinded those, which will ultimately put more money back in the pockets of the American people.  So, deregulation is a big deal. 

And then, when it comes to energy, I mean, the president signed an executive order to declare a national energy emergency here at home, which is going to make America energy dominant.  We know that energy is one of the number-one drivers of inflation, and so that’s why the president wants to increase our energy supply: to bring down costs for Americans.  The Trump energy boom is incoming, and Americans can expect that.

Q    Please share that memo.  Thank you.

MS. LEAVITT:  I will.

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Karoline, I think — some of the confusion, I think, may be here with this pause on federal funding.  You’ve made it clear you’re not stopping funds that go directly to individuals, but there certainly are lots of organizations that receive funding and then may pass along a benefit — Meals on Wheels, for one.  They provide meals for over 2.2 million seniors. 

What is the president’s message to Americans out there, many of whom supported him and voted for him, who are concerned that this is going to impact them directly, even if, as you said, the funding isn’t coming directly to their wallet?

MS. LEAVITT:  I have now been asked and answered this question four times.  To individuals at home who receive direct assistance from the federal government, you will not be impacted by this federal freeze.  In fact, OMB just sent out a memo to Capitol Hill with Q and A to — to clarify some of the questions and the answers that all of you are a- — are asking me right now. 

Again, direct assistance will not be impacted.  I’ve been asked and answered about this OMB memo.  There’s many other topics of the day. 

Jacqui Heinrich. 

Q    But on indirect assistance, Karoline —

Q    Thank you, Karoline.

Q    — if it’s going to another organization and then trickling down?

MS. LEAVITT:  Direct assistance that is in the hands of the American people will not be impacted. 

Again, as I said to Peter, we will continue to provide that list as it comes to fruition.  But OMB right now is focused on analyzing the federal government’s spending, which is exactly what the American people elected President Trump to do. 

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Thank you, Karoline.

Q    And one question on immigration, Karoline.  On immigration. 

Q    Thank you, Karo- —

Q    Of the 3,500 arrests ICE has made so far since President Trump came back into office, can you just tell us the numbers?  How many have a criminal record versus those who are just in the country illegally.

MS. LEAVITT:  All of them, because they illegally broke our nation’s laws, and, therefore, they are criminals, as far as this administration goes.  I know the last administration didn’t see it that way, so it’s a big culture shift in our nation to view someone who breaks our immigration laws as a criminal.  But that’s exactly what they are. 

Jacqui.

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Karoline, on tariffs.

Q    But you made a point of going with the worst first. 

Q    On tariffs.

Q    They all have a criminal record?

Q    And welcome to the briefing room.

MS. LEAVITT:  If they broke our nation’s laws, yes, they are a criminal. 

Yes.

Q    Thank you.  On stripping security details for figures like John Bolton, Pompeo, Brian Hook.  Senator Tom Cotton said that he’s seen the intelligence and the threat from Iran is real for anyone who played a role in the Soleimani strike.  He voiced concern it wouldn’t just impact those individuals but potentially their family, innocent bystanders, friends — anyone who is near them when they’re out in public.  Is the president open to reconsidering his decision?

MS. LEAVITT:  The president was asked and answered this yesterday, and he was firm in his decision, despite some of the comments that you had referenced.  And he’s made it very clear that he does not believe American taxpayers should fund security details for individuals who have served in the government for the rest of their lives.  And there’s nothing stopping these individuals that you mentioned from obtaining private security. 

That’s where the president stands on it.  I have no updates on that. 

Q    Is there any concern that this decision might jeopardize the administration’s ability to hire the best advisers for these kinds of positions in the future?

MS. LEAVITT:  No.  In fact, I’ve talked to the Presidential Personnel Office who has told me directly that there is such an influx of resumes for this administration that it’s incredibly overwhelming.  There is no lack of talent for the Trump administration. 

Reagan Ree- —

Q    And would he — would he take any responsibility —

Q    Thanks, Karoline.

Q    — if anything happened to these people?  Would he feel at all that his decision was a factor in that?

MS. LEAVITT:  The president was asked and answered this yesterday.  I’d defer you to his comments.

Q    Thanks, Karoline.

Q    Karoline —

MS. LEAVITT:  Reagan, since you’re in the back row, I hear y- — the back row hasn’t gotten much attention in the last four years —

Q    Yes, thank you.

MS. LEAVITT:  — so I’m happy to answer your question. 

Q    And I can project.  (Laughter.)

Does the president intend to permanently cut off funding to NGOs that are bringing illegal foreign nationals to the country, such as Catholic Charities?

     MS. LEAVITT:  I am actually quite certain that the president signed an executive order that did just that, and I can point you to that.

     Q    One more, Karoline.

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

Q    President Trump issued an executive order on increased vetting for refugees in visa applications. 

MS. LEAVITT:  That’s right.

Q    Part of that order was considering an outright ban for countries that have deficient screening processes.  Has the president considered yet which countries might fall into this category?  Are countries like Afghanistan or Syria under consideration for a full ban?

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.  So, the president signed an executive order to streamline the vetting for visa applicants and for illegal immigrants in this country who are coming, of course, from other nations. 

It also directed the secretary of State to review the process and make sure that other countries around the world are being completely transparent with our nation and the individuals that they are sending here.  And so, the secretary of State has been directed to report back to the president.  I haven’t seen that report yet.  We’ve only been here for a few days.

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Karoline, two questions for you.  One on the freeze in federal funding.  Who advised the president on the legality of telling government agencies that they don’t have to spend money that was already appropriated by Congress?

MS. LEAVITT:  Well, as the OMB memo states, this is certainly within the confines of the law. 

So, White House Counsel’s Office believes that this is within the pe- — president’s power to do it, and therefore, he’s doing it.

Q    Okay.  So, they disagree with lawmakers who say that they don’t have the power to — to freeze this funding?

MS. LEAVITT:  Again, I would point you to the language in the memo that clearly states this is within the law.

Q    And on what happened on Friday night.  The — the administration fired several inspectors general without giving Congress the 30-day legally required notification that they were being fired.  I think only two were left at DO- — DHS and the DOJ.  And then, yesterday, we saw several prosecutors — I believe 12 — fired from the Justice Department who worked on the investigations into the president.  As you know, they are career prosecutors; therefore, they are afforded civil service protections.  How is the administration deciding which laws to follow and which ones to ignore?

MS. LEAVITT:  So, it is the belief of this White House and the White House Counsel’s Office that the president was within his exe- — executive authority to do that.  He is the executive of the executive branch, and, therefore, he has the power to fire anyone within the executive branch that he wishes to. 

There’s also a case that went before the Supreme Court in 2020: Scaila [Seila] Law LLC, v. the Customs — the [Consumer Financial Protection] Bureau Protection.  I would advise you to look at that case, and that’s the legality that this White House has rested on. 

Q    So, you’re confident that if they bring lawsuits against you — those prosecutors who were fired — that — that they will succeed?

MS. LEAVITT:  We will win in court, yes.

Q    And did he personally direct this, given they worked on the classified documents investigation and the election interference investigation?

MS. LEAVITT:  This was a memo that went out by the Presidential Personnel Office, and the president is the leader of this White House.  So, yes.

Q    So, it did come from him?

MS. LEAVITT:  Yes, it came from this White House.

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Karoline.

MS. LEAVITT:  Sir.

Q    Thank you.  Congrats on your first day behind the podium.

MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.

Q    President Trump ended funding for UNRWA and also designated the Houthis a foreign terrorist organization.

MS. LEAVITT:  That’s right.

Q    Both were decisions that the previous administration had reversed.  So, here’s my question: Will there be an investigation into who gave the previous administration this terrible advice?

MS. LEAVITT:  Well, that’s a very good point.  I haven’t heard discussions about such an ins- — investigation, but it wouldn’t be a bad idea, considering that the Houthis cer- — certainly are terrorists.  They have launched attacks on U.S. naval ships across this world, and so I think it was a very wise move by this administration to redesignate them as a terrorist group, because they are.  And I think it was a foolish decision by the previous administration to do so. 

As for an investigation, I’m not sure about that, but it’s not a bad idea.

(Cross-talk.)

Josh.

Q    Thank you for the question.  I appreciate it.  Can you give us an update on the president’s plan for his tariff agenda?  He spoke a lot about this yesterday, and there’s a couple of dates coming up that —

MS. LEAVITT:  Sure.

Q    — he’s spoken to.  Number one, February 1st.  He’s alluded to both the potential for tariffs for Canada and Mexico but also China to take effect on those days.  Where is — what’s he thinking about that?

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

Q    Should those countries expect that on the 1st?

MS. LEAVITT:  Again, he was asked and answered this question this past weekend when he took a lot of questions from the press, and he said that the February 1st date for Canada and Mexico still holds.

Q    And what about the China 10 percent tariff that he also had mused about last Tuesday going into effect on the same date?

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah, the president has said that he is very much still considering that for February 1st.

Q    And then, separately, yesterday, he talked also about sectoral tariffs on, for instance, pharmaceuticals, as well as semiconductor computer chips.  He talked about steel, aluminum, and copper.  What’s the timeline on those?  Is that a similar sort of “coming days” thing or —

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah, so when the president talked about that in his speech yesterday, that actually wasn’t a new announcement.  That was within a presidential memorandum that he signed in one of the first days here in the White House on his America First trade agenda.  So, there’s more details on those tariffs in there.

As far as a date, I don’t have a specific date to read out to you, but the president is committed to implementing tariffs effectively, just like he did in his first term.

Q    And then — and then, finally, he also was asked on the plane when he gaggled about the potential for a universal tariff.  He was asked maybe about two and a half percent.

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

Q    There was a report about that.  He said he wanted “much bigger than that.”  Should we understand that these tariffs would add up?  You know, in other words, you might have country-specific tariffs like Canada, Mexico, China.  You might have sectoral tariffs, like on pharmaceuticals, as well as a potential universal tariff on top of that.  Do these stack on one or the other, or would one sort of take precedence over another?

MS. LEAVITT:  All I can point you to is what the president has said on this front: the February 1st date for Canada and Mexico and also the China tariff that he has discussed.

He rejected the 2.5 percent tariff.  He said that was a little bit too low.  He wants it to be higher. 

I’ll leave it to him to make any decisions on that front.

Q    Do you have any comment on what the —

(Cross-talk.)

Q    — what the Mexicans and Canadians —

MS. LEAVITT:  Phil.

Q    — have done so far?  Do you have any comment on whether that has met the bar of what he wants to see on fentanyl?  Thank you.

MS. LEAVITT:   I — I won’t get ahead of the president, again, on advocating to foreign nations on what they should or shouldn’t do to get away from these tariffs.  The president has made it very clear, again, that he expects every nation around this world to cooperate with the repatriation of their citizens.  And the president has also put out specific statements in terms of Canada and Mexico when it comes to what he expects in terms of border security.

We have seen a historic level of cooperation from Mexico.  But, again, as far as I’m still tracking — and that was last night talking to the president directly — February 1st is still on the books.

Q    Thank you.

MS. LEAVITT:  Phil.

Q    Thank you, Karoline.  Quick programming note, and then a question on taxes.

MS. LEAVITT:  A programming note.

Q    Well, in terms of programming, should —

MS. LEAVITT:  That sounds fun. 

Q    — we expect to see you here every day?  How frequently will these —

Q    That’s a good question.

Q    — press briefings be?

MS. LEAVITT:  It is a good question, April.

So, look, the president, as you know, is incredibly accessible.  First day here, he wanted all of you in the Oval Office.  You got a 60-minute press conference with the leader of the free world — while he was simultaneously signing executive orders, I may add.  That’s pretty impressive.  I don’t think the previous office holder would be able to pull such a thing off. 

So, look, the president is the best spokesperson that this White House has, and I can assure you that you will be hearing from both him and me as much as possible.

Q    And then a question about tax cuts.  You know, the president has promised to extend the tax cuts from the previous term.  I’m curious, you know, does the president support corresponding spending cuts, as some Republicans have called for in Congress?  And will the new Treasury secretary be leading those negotiations with the Hill, as Mnuchin did during the first administration?

MS. LEAVITT:  The president is committed to both tax cuts and spending cuts.

And he has a great team negotiating on his behalf, but there’s no better negotiator than Donald Trump, and I’m sure he’ll be involved in this reconciliation process as it moves forward.

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Karoline, in the announcement that you made last night on the Iron Dome, it said the president had directed that the United States will build this Iron Dome.

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

Q    When you read into the executive order, it seemed short of that.  It asked for a series of studies —

MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

Q    — and reports back on — can you tell us whether the president has directed this and, if he is this concerned on this issue, why the suspensions that we saw listed by OMB included so many different nuclear programs, nonproliferation programs, programs to blend down nuclear weapons, and s- — and so forth?

MS. LEAVITT:  First of all, when it comes to the Iron Dome, the executive order directed the implementation of the — of an Iron Dome.  It also, as you said, kind of directed research and studies to see if — or — or how the United States can go about doing this, particularly the Department of Defense.

When it comes to the other question that you asked about those specific programs, again, I would say, this is not a — a ban; this is a temporary pause and a freeze to ensure that all of the money going out from Washington, D.C., is in align with the president’s agenda.

And as the Office of Management and Budget has updates on what will be kick-started, once again, I will provide those to you. 

Q    Can you clarify for a sec what you were saying before on Medicaid?  It wasn’t clear to me whether you were saying that no Medicaid would be cut off.  Obviously, a lot of this goes to states before it goes to individuals and so forth.  So, are you guaranteeing here that no individual now on Medicaid would see a cutoff because of the pause?

MS. LEAVITT:  I’ll check back on that and get back to you. 

Jon.

Q    Thanks a lot, Karoline.  As you know, in the first week that the president was in office, signed an executive order as it relates to birthright citizenship — trying to eliminate that.  Now, 22 state attorney generals have said that this is unconstitutional.  A federal judge has just agreed with their argument.  What’s the administration’s argument for doing away with birthright citizenship?

MS. LEAVITT:  The folks that you mentioned have a right to have that legal opinion, but it is in disagreement with the legal opinion of this administration. 

This administration believes that birthright citizenship is unconstitutional, and that is why President Trump signed that executive order.  Illegal immigrants who come to this country and have a child are not subject to the laws of this jurisdiction.  That’s the opinion of this administration. 

We have already appealed the rul- — the lawsuit that was filed against this administration, and we are prepared to fight this all the way to the Supreme Court if we have to, because President Trump believes that this is a necessary step to secure our nation’s borders and protect our homeland. 

Monica.

Q    And then on foreign policy — on foreign policy, Karoline —

Q    Thank you, Karoline.  It’s great to see you, and you’re doing a great —

Q    — on foreign policy, if I may.  The president’s commitment to the NATO defense Alliance, is it as strong as the prior administration?  Is it the same as when he served as president in his first term in office?

MS. LEAVITT:  As long as NATO pays their fair share.

And President Trump has called on NATO Allies to increase their defense spending to 5 percent.  You actually saw the head of NATO at Davos last week on Bloomberg Television saying that President Trump is right and if Europe wants to keep itself safe, they should increase their defense spending. 

I would just add that there was no greater ally to our European allies than President Trump in his first term.  The world, for all nations in Europe, and, of course, here at home was much safer because of Presidents Tru- — Trump’s peace through strength diplomatic approach. 

Monica.

Q    Karoline —

Q    Thank you.  Thank you, Karoline.  And it’s great to finally be called on as well in the briefing room.  I appreciate that. 

MS. LEAVITT:  You’re welcome. 

Q    Of course, we know President Trump just got back from North Carolina and California meeting with victims of natural disasters.  There’s the two-year anniversary of the East Palestine, Ohio, toxic train derailment.  Does the president have any plans to go visit the victims of that toxic spill or just visit in general?

MS. LEAVITT:  Not — no plans that I can read out for you here.  If that changes, I will certainly keep you posted. 

What I can tell you is that President Trump still talks about his visit to East Palestine, Ohio.  That was one of the turning points, I would say, in the previous election campaign, where Americans were reminded that President Trump is a man of the people.  And he, as a candidate, visited that town that was just derailed by the train derailment — no pun intended — and he offered support and hope, just like I saw the president do this past week. 

It was a purposeful decision by this president, on his first domestic trip, to go to North Carolina and to California to visit with Americans who were impacted by Hurricane Helene and also by the deadly fires — a red state and a blue state, both of which feel forgotten by the previous administration and the federal government.  That has now — that has now ended under President Trump. 

He will continue to put Americans first, whether they’re in East Palestine, in Pacific Palisades, or in North Carolina.

(Cross-talk.)

Sure.

Q    Thank you, Karoline.  On California, could you please clarify what the military did with the water last night, as referenced in the president’s Truth Social post?

MS. LEAVITT:  The water has been turned back on in California, and this comes just days after President Trump visited Pacific Palisades and, as you all saw, applied tremendous pressure on state and local officials in Pacific Palisades, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, to turn on the water and to direct that water to places in the south and in the middle of the state that have been incredibly dry, which has led to the expansion — the rapid expansion of these fires.

Q    So, could you clarify what the military’s role was, where the water came from, and how it got there?

MS. LEAVITT:  Again, the Army Corps of Engineers has been on the ground in California to respond to the devastation from these wildfires.  And I would point out that just days after President Trump visited the devastation from these fires, the water was turned on.  That is because of the pressure campaign he put on state and local officials there, who clearly lack all common sense. 

And I will never forget being at that round table with the president last week and hearing the frustration in the voices of Pacific Palisades residents who feel as though their government has just gone insane.  Before President Trump showed up on the scene, Karen Bass was telling private property owners that they would have to wait 18 months to access their private property.

So, this administration, the president and his team that’s on the ground in California — Ric Grenell, who he has designated to oversee this great crisis — ha- — will continue to put pressure on Karen Bass and state and local officials to allow residents to access their properties. 

This is a huge part of it.  These residents want to take part in their own clearing out of their properties.  They should be able to do that.  It’s the United States of America.  What happened to our freedom?  Clearly, it’s gone in California, but not anymore under President Trump.

Q    Karoline —

MS. LEAVITT:  April.

Q    Karoline, welcome to the briefing room.

MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.

Q    Several questions.  One on the pause.  Will minority-serving institutions, preferably colleges and universities, have those monies held back temporarily at this moment?

MS. LEAVITT:  Again, I have not seen the entire list, because this memo was just sent out.  So, I will provide you all with updates as we receive them.  Okay?

Q    Karoline —

Q    And secondly — als- —

Q    Karoline.

Q    Also, secondly, when it comes to immigration, there is this southern border focus.  What happens to those who have overstayed their visas?  That is part of the broken immigration system.  In 2023, there was a report by the Biden administration, the Homeland Security Department, that said overstays of visas were three times more than usual.  Will there be a focus on the overstays for visas as well?

MS. LEAVITT:  If an individual is overstaying their visa, they are therefore an illegal immigrant residing in this country, and they are subject to deportation.  

Q    And also, lastly —

MS. LEAVITT:  Yes.

Q    Lastly, as we’re dealing with anti-DEI, anti-woke efforts, we understand this administration could — is thinking about celebrating Black History Month.  Have you got any word on that?  Anything that you can offer to us?

MS. LEAVITT:  As far as I know, this White House certainly still intends to celebrate, and we will continue to celebrate American history and the contributions that all Americans, regardless of race, religion, or creed, have made to our great country.  And America is back.

Christian Datoc.

Q    Thanks, Karoline.  Just real quick.  You mentioned the inflation executive order the president signed, but egg prices have skyrocketed since President Trump took office.  So, what specifically is he doing to lower those costs for Americans?

MS. LEAVITT:  Really glad you brought this up, because there is a lot of reporting out there that is putting the onus on this White House for the increased cost of eggs.  I would like to point out to each and every one of you that, in 2024, when Joe Biden was in the Oval Office — or upstairs in the residence sleeping; I’m not so sure — egg prices increased 65 percent in this country.  We also have seen the cost of everything, not just eggs — bacon, groceries, gasoline — have increased because of the inflationary policies of the last administration.

As far as the egg shortage, what’s also contributing to that is that the Biden administration and the Department of Agriculture directed the mass killing of more than 100 million chickens, which has led to a lack of chicken supply in this country, therefore a lack of egg supply, which is leading to the shortage.

So, I will leave you with this point.  This is an example of why it’s so incredibly important that the Senate moves swiftly to confirm all of President Trump’s nominees, including his nominee for the United States Department of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, who is already speaking with Kevin Hassett, who is leading the economic team here at the White House, on how we can address the egg shortage in this country.

As for cots, I laid out — costs — I laid out the plethora of ways that President Trump has addressed saving costs for the American people over the past week.  He looks forward to continuing to doing that —

Q    Karoline, what —

MS. LEAVITT:  — in the days ahead.

(Cross-talk.)

Thank you, guys, so much.  I’ll see you soon.

END                1:52 P.M. EST