Share This Podcast

• Call Congress – 202-224-3121
• Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8
• What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcast

Follow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/

TRANSCRIPT

Jane Coaston: It’s Friday, October 31st, Happy Halloween, I’m Jane Coaston, and this is What a Day, the show reminding you that actually, it’s very easy to avoid obviously haunted homes, haunted forests, splitting up while running away from a serial killer, going to a camp haunted by a serial killer who may be undead, and literally any other horror scenario. If you’re ever in a situation and think, wow, this seems like the start of a horror movie, just leave. [music break] On today’s show, trick or treat, or if you’re in Chicago, tear gas? As immigration and customs enforcement refuses to pause operations during Halloween festivities. And the Trump administration is restricting the number of refugees allowed into the US every year by a lot. But let’s start with China. On Thursday, President Donald Trump announced a trade truce with Chinese President Xi Jinping after a 90-minute meeting in Busan, South Korea. Following the meeting, President Trump said on Air Force One it was the greatest meeting in the history of meetings. 

[clip of President Donald Trump] We’re going to issue a statement on some of the details, but overall, I guess on the scale of from zero to ten, with ten being the best, I would say the meeting was a twelve. 

Jane Coaston: But what actually came out of the truce seems less than meets the eye. According to Axios, Trump reduced tariffs against China in exchange for promises from the Chinese president to buy American soybeans and oil. However, the deal appears to be largely temporary, with few actual binding details that would make this agreement any different from those made during Trump’s first term in office or even earlier this year. It’s also worth mentioning that the decision by the Chinese government to stop buying American agricultural products came in response to Trump’s Liberation Day tariff adventure in April. Notably, even Trump’s optimism about his wonderful time with President Xi seemed to lack specifics. Here’s some vagueness he shared with reporters on Air Force One about just how nice President Xi was. 

[clip of President Donald Trump] They congratulated me on the tremendous success that we’ve had, because there’s never been a country that has had so much money come into it for purposes of investment, for building, for auto plans, for AI, etc. So he was very strong on congratulating me for that. 

[clip of unnamed news reporter] But he didn’t commit to any additional uh investment or outflow? 

[clip of President Donald Trump] We didn’t really discuss it.

Jane Coaston: So for more on what they did discuss and what the US may have gotten in a deal with China, I spoke to Evan Madeiros. He’s the Penner Family Chair in Asia Studies at Georgetown University, with a focus on East Asia and US-China relations. Evan Madeiros, welcome to What a Day. 

Evan Madeiros: Great to be here. 

Jane Coaston: So President Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday and walked away with a one-year trade truce. So what’s in this deal? What did each country agree to? 

Evan Madeiros: So this deal is very limited, it’s full of a bunch of short-term tactical concessions that essentially de-escalated the trade war. Basically, we agreed to lower tariffs on China, we agreed to suspend some of our export control actions and in exchange, we got China agreeing to buy some more of our soybeans and sorghum and other grains and the Chinese sort of suspended their own export control actions. So we’re talking about pretty narrow, pretty wonky stuff. The most important thing to know about this meeting was that it opened the door to 10 months, maybe 12 months of very high level diplomacy. Trump said that he’s going to visit China in April of next year, and then subsequently Xi Jinping would visit the United States when we host the G20, a major multilateral economics meeting. So what that means is we will have a lot more deal making for the next the next few months. 

Jane Coaston: But I’m curious from your view, is this actually a good deal for the US? I’ve been seeing a lot of criticism from people basically saying that China got everything it wanted. 

Evan Madeiros: China didn’t get everything it wanted because China for example wanted access to very advanced chips 

Jane Coaston: And when we’re talking about chips, what are we talking about like AI chips? 

Evan Madeiros: Exactly the most advanced chips we have that are used for training LLM’s. An LLM is a large language model basically the kinds of things that allow us to do our research on chatGPT etc. 

Jane Coaston: And just out of curiosity, why do they want our chips? Because I was under the impression that they are also very advanced on that particular front. 

Evan Madeiros: I mean, the Chinese want our chips because they’re the best, they’re the fastest, they are the most powerful. They’re the most energy efficient. The Chinese can’t build these chips. They’re trying, but until they build them, they need our chips. China wants to be the world leader in AI because the Chinese are convinced that AI is the key to innovation and prosperity, but going back to a Biden administration decision from October 2023, we’re not selling the most advanced chips and we’re not selling them the uh equipment to produce those chips. So what the Chinese really wanted from this was a major reduction in our export control so they can get more access to our technology. Um. The Chinese wanted a reduction in some of their tariffs. They got that. They got a 10% reduction in tariffs. And bringing those tariffs down matters because it means Chinese exports to the US start to become more competitive with the exports of other countries, like Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, et cetera. So actually bringing down relative tariff rates, you know, really matters. And so the Chinese didn’t get a lot, but we didn’t really get a a lot either. 

Jane Coaston: Does any of that surprise you given how the president approached China during his first term? And actually, what was Trump’s approach to China during his first term and how does his approach now seem to differ? 

Evan Madeiros: Well, it both surprises me and it doesn’t. It doesn’t surprise me in the sense that Trump is not ideological on China. Trump is not a China hawk, either an economic hawk or a security hawk. And his approach to foreign affairs appears to be doing big deals with big leaders. Big leaders meaning, you know, basically autocratic leaders. That’s why he, you, know, he likes Putin. You know, and he clearly likes Xi Jinping. So it doesn’ surprise me from that perspective. But what does surprise me is in his first term, he basically wrote the first version of the script on strategic competition with China. And now he’s basically flipping the script and saying, I’m not going to compete with China. I’m going to defund American science and tech, and I’m gonna focus on just doing commercial deals with Xi Jinping. And by the way, I am also going to pick fights with American allies and partners who theoretically should be critical assets in the long-term competition between the US and China. 

Jane Coaston: Now, before his meeting with President Xi Jinping. 

Evan Madeiros: Yeah. 

Jane Coaston: Trump announced on Truth Social that he’s asked the Pentagon to start testing nuclear weapons, quote, “on an equal basis with Russia and China.” Uh. What was your reaction to that news? 

Evan Madeiros: I mean, to sum it up in three letters, WTF. 

Jane Coaston: Funny, that was my reaction too! 

Evan Madeiros: Yeah, since the US signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in the 1990s, it’s been decades since we’ve conducted nuclear tests. So if we start conducting nuclear tests, the Russians and the Chinese are going to do the same thing, which has the very high probability of initiating a nuclear arms race. I mean, the reality is, as of today, the Chinese are on track to pretty substantially increase the size of their nuclear arsenal, tripling, if not quadrupling it. And that’s a huge problem for the United States if we face a Russia that has 1,500 nuclear warheads and a China that has 1,500 nuclear war heads and we, under the current START agreement, are capped at 1,500 nuclear warheads. You know if you think the U.S.-China relationship is complicated today as we compete on trade issues, supply chain issues, and technology issues, just imagining sprinkling nuclear weapons on the top and you have something that makes the cold war look a bit like a garden party. 

Jane Coaston: I don’t like that at all. During this trip, the Trump administration announced trade agreements or frameworks of agreements with several other countries, including South Korea, Thailand, and Malaysia. What’s new or notable about these agreements? Are there any patterns we should be paying attention to? 

Evan Madeiros: Well, the agreements with Japan and South Korea are not new. They were essentially hammered out in bilateral negotiations a few weeks ago. And what Trump did was he sort of clarified one of the biggest dimensions of those trade deals, which is Japan’s commitment to invest 550 billion in the US and South Korea’s agreement to invest 350 billion in the US. So wasn’t anything new in those agreements, just a clarification. With Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam, Thailand, and Malaysia, it was about reducing tariff levels. So on Liberation Day, we imposed a certain level of tariff on all of those countries, and we basically negotiated it down um based on what access they would give us. 

Jane Coaston: I’m curious, with regard to those tariffs, did the U.S. come out in a better spot than before the president’s trip? 

Evan Madeiros: I mean, now we face lower barriers to entry in those economies. Right, but you know at the same time we we created this entire problem. Right?

Jane Coaston: Yeah, we did kind of invent this problem and then try to find solutions to it. 

Evan Madeiros: Yeah, exactly. I mean, the bigger problem here is Trump’s whole approach to trade is to basically use access to the US market as a source of coercion. In other words, going to our trading partners, largely in violation of the WTO and say, if you want to continue to have access to our market, we want to see X, Y, and Z concessions from you. And if you don’t, we’re going to raise tariffs high. And that’s what he did on liberation day. Right? He sort of imposed tariffs on all of these countries and said, if you want us to reduce this tariff, you know if you want us to diffuse this ticking time bomb, you need to agree to enhanced market access. So it’s a very transactional and a very coercive way to get better access to countries markets. So yes, the US is doing better, but the question is, is what is the long-term costs if the United States is constantly using these coercive measures? I mean, it creates incentives for economies in Southeast Asia to trade more with China than with the United States. That’s the real problem that we face. 

Jane Coaston: What else will you be watching for next when it comes to U.S. relations with China and the other countries Trump met with on his trip? 

Evan Madeiros: Yes, so the big things I’ll be watching for number one, does the US get everything that Trump and his team claim that we got? Right? There’s ambiguity about how much agriculture the Chinese are going to buy. Trump tweeted that the Chinese had agreed to buy a bunch of American oil and gas, the Chinese haven’t said anything about that. Trump said we’re not going to give the Chinese the blackwell chips the most advanced Nvidia chips but the question is are we going to give them second and third tier chips which still will give them an advantage and the fact that they can sort of turn on or off the spigot of whether or not they buy American grains as well. So on the on the outcomes, the deliverables from this meeting, there’s actually quite a bit that needs to be followed up on. Number two are policy issues. You know, Trump claims that he raised concerns with Xi Jinping about Chinese purchases of Russian oil, which helps the Russian civilian economy and feeds the Russian war machine, is Trump going to be willing to follow up and try and put pressure on China to reduce its purchases of Russian oil? Trump said that Taiwan never came up, uh which is entirely possible, but it’s hard for me to believe that the Chinese are going to just let Taiwan go. The worst kept secret in Washington is that Trump is at best ambivalent about Taiwan. He’s much more interested in dealing with China, you know, as the second largest economy in the world. And so the question is between now and the state visit, will the Chinese gradually bring up the Taiwan issue and sort of throw it in the mix and begin linking the Taiwan issue to things like commercial deliverables in the relationship. 

Jane Coaston: When you say the Taiwan issue, I assume you mean the fact that China thinks Taiwan is part of China and Taiwan says no, it is not. 

Evan Madeiros: That’s correct. And even though the Taiwan issue didn’t come up in this meeting, the Chinese are not going to drop it. So that’s the other thing I’ll be watching. 

Jane Coaston: Evan, thank you so much for joining me. 

Evan Madeiros: Always great to be here. 

Jane Coaston: That was my conversation with Evan Madeiros, Penner family chair in Asia studies with a focus on East Asia and US-China relations. We’ll get to more of the news in a moment, but if you like the show, make sure to subscribe, leave a five-star review on Apple Podcasts, watch us on YouTube, and share with your friends. More to come after some ads. [music break]

[AD BREAK]

Jane Coaston: Here’s what else we’re following today. 

[sung] Headlines.

[clip of J.B. Pritzker] No child in America should have to go trick or treating in fear that they might be confronted with armed federal agents and have to inhale tear gas. I honestly can’t even believe that I have to make this plea. 

Jane Coaston: Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker appealed to Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino on Thursday to pause ICE operations on Halloween. The Governor also sent a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem making the same request. And just when you thought the scariest thing on your porch was a decoration of a demented clown, Kristi Noem said, hold my pumpkin spice latte. 

[clip of Kristi Noem] We’re absolutely not willing to put on pause any work that we will do to keep communities safe. The fact that Governor Pritzker is asking for that is um shameful. 

Jane Coaston: Is it? So Halloween will proceed with spooky figures roaming the streets and also all the kids dressed up in their Halloween costumes. Pritzker noted an incident last weekend in Chicago where border patrol agents reportedly used tear gas to disrupt a children’s Halloween parade. In a statement to The Hill, Homeland Security accused Pritzkar of, quote, “going out of his way to smear the law enforcement officers of DHS who are attempting to clean up the rampant crime he facilitated.” Honestly, it’s understandable why ICE wants to take part in Halloween. It’s the one night a year when it’s acceptable to wear a mask. 

[clip of Aaron Ford] The SNAP benefits are on the chopping block. And you know the lawsuit says in layman’s terms, the federal government has money, use it. That’s the bottom line, right? 

Jane Coaston: Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford spoke to What a Day’s Matt Berg ahead of a federal judge’s decision on whether to fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, with emergency federal funds. At the time of our recording Thursday evening, a ruling had not been issued. Roughly two dozen Democratic attorneys general and governors, including Ford, sued the Trump administration to keep SNAP funding flowing during the shutdown. The goal? To ensure millions of Americans don’t go hungry just because Congress refuses to figure out how to reopen the government. The Trump administration tried to argue that it could suspend SNAP benefits for the first time in the food aid program’s history because of the shutdown. And on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani said in court, quote, “you are not going to make everyone drop dead because it’s a political game someplace.” She told lawyers that if the government can’t afford to cover the cost, there’s a process to follow rather than simply suspending all benefits. Even if the judge decides emergency funds must be used, some SNAP recipients might receive less money in November and that money could be delayed. When asked earlier in the day about funding, Vice President J.D. Vance in part told reporters: 

[clip of Vice President J.D. Vance] We’re gonna find out the hard way with SNAP benefits. The American people are already suffering and the suffering is gonna get a lot worse. 

Jane Coaston: So you agree? The American people are suffering. 

[clip of Senator Mark Warner] What the administration did in the last 24 hours is corrosive not only to our democracy, but downright dangerous for our national security. 

Jane Coaston: Virginia Democratic Senator Mark Warner was fuming on Capitol Hill after Trump administration officials held a classified briefing on the president’s escalating boat strike campaign and only invited Republicans. Lawmakers say the administration refuses to share its legal justification for the dozens of military strikes in the Caribbean and Pacific that have already killed at least 60 people. The White House claims the targets were, quote, “narco-terrorists,” but Pentagon officials admitted they don’t actually know who all the victims were. Just that some might be connected to cartels, quote, “three hops away” from a known member. That seems like a lot of hops. Democrats say the partisan briefing violates laws requiring bipartisan national security oversight and undermines Congress’s constitutional war powers. Even some Republicans were caught off guard. South Dakota Republican Senator Mike Rounds said he hoped Democrats would get the same intel, quote “because it was a very good briefing.” So much for decorum, due process, not to mention rules of engagement. Basically, it looks like the Caribbean’s got pirates again, but this time the flag they’re flying is red, white, and blue. 

[clip of Vice President J.D. Vance] Just because one person or ten people or 100 people came in legally and contributed to the United States of America, does that mean that we’re thereby committed to let in a million or ten million or 100 million people a year in the future? No, that’s not right. 

Jane Coaston: Vice President J.D. Vance shared his fascinating views on immigration at a Turning Point USA event at Ole Miss Thursday. The Trump administration is restricting the number of refugees it admits annually into the country to 7,500, and they will mostly be white South Africans, the Africans that most often pop to mind, you know, the white ones. No reason was given for the numbers, which are a substantial decrease from last year’s ceiling of 125,000 set under Democratic President Joe Biden. The memo said only that the admission of the 7,500 refugees during the 2026 fiscal year was quote, “justified by humanitarian concerns or is otherwise in the national interest.” Who’s national interest? Well, that’s up for interpretation. Apparently, America’s new motto is give us your tired, your poor, and actually just give us white South Africans. And that’s the news. [music break]

[AD BREAK]

Jane Coaston: That’s all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe, leave a review, introduce yourself to Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, previously known as Prince Andrew, and tell your friends to listen. And if you’re into reading, and not just about how Buckingham Palace announced Thursday that Prince Andrew has now lost the title of Prince, on top of all of the other titles I told you he lost this week, like me, What a Day is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and subscribe at Crooked.com/subscribe. I’m Jane Coaston. And now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor is just some guy named Andrew with horrible decision-making prowess. One of dozens. [music break] What a Day is a production of Crooked Media. It’s recorded and mixed by Desmond Taylor. Our associate producers are Emily Fohr and Chris Allport. Our video editor is Joseph Dutra. Our video producer is Johanna Case. We had production help today from Greg Walters, Matt Berg, Shawn Allee, Gina Pollack, and Caitlin Plummer. Our senior producer is Erica Morrison, and our senior vice president of news and politics is Adriene Hill. We had help today from the Associated Press. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East. [music break]

[AD BREAK]