Peter Navarro Talks Trade, Tariff Vote

Summary

Bloomberg Talks

Episode: Peter Navarro Talks Trade, Tariff Vote

Date: February 12, 2026
Host: Tom Keene (and Paul Sweeney)
Guest: Dr. Peter Navarro (Senior Counselor to President Trump for Trade and Manufacturing Policy)

---

Episode Overview

This episode features a candid and combative discussion with Peter Navarro, Senior Counselor to the President for Trade and Manufacturing, focusing on the Trump administration's trade policies, tariffs, recent legislative battles, and broader economic strategy. Navarro addresses criticisms of tariff policies, responds to recent House votes targeting tariffs against Canada, and discusses the broader political and economic stakes of current trade debates.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Historical Context & the "Buffalo Pivot"

• Background: Tom Keene introduces Navarro as a foundational voice on U.S.-China trade issues, referencing Navarro’s 1994 book and historical figures like McKinley, Lincoln, and Hamilton.
• Main Theme: The show opens with Keene asking if the current administration is making a "buffalo pivot" by opening up, similar to McKinley's partial shift from protectionism.
• Navarro’s Response:

  “We are not in any pivot away from [protectionism]. We are fully embracing a structural shift engineered by Donald Trump in the entire international global trading system in a way which will make that system better and more prosperous.” (01:51)
  Navarro criticizes the World Trade Organization’s rules—especially “most favored nation” status—arguing these have enabled widespread “cheating” against the U.S. to the cost of hundreds of thousands of factories and millions of jobs.

2. Re-Evaluating NAFTA and USMCA

• Key Question: Is President Trump seeking to withdraw from key agreements (NAFTA/USMCA)?
• Navarro’s Position:

  “USMCA has some significant flaws in it and it’s going to be reevaluated in July... Mexico and to an extent Canada are basically being used as staging areas for countries like China... to get into our markets in a way which is tariff avoidance at best and tariff evasion at worst. We have to deal with that.” (03:50)
  Navarro does not confirm an intent to withdraw but insists the status quo is unacceptable, particularly due to indirect trade by China and others via Mexico and Canada.

3. House Vote Against Tariffs and Party Discipline

• Recent Development: The House of Representatives voted to end parts of the president's tariff agenda against Canada.
• Navarro’s Take:

  “It’s highly ironic, Paul, that the Democrat Party is opposing tariffs on behalf of working class Americans when it was the Democrat Party, which is supposed to be the party of the working class, simply because they hate Donald Trump. Now they’re anti tariffs.” (05:32)
  Navarro criticizes the three Republican defectors, stating party unity is crucial for delivering on protectionist policies.

4. Politics: The Stakes for 2026 & Working-Class Appeal

• Electoral Stakes: Navarro is pressed on how Republicans can hold onto districts with wavering support for tariffs.
• Quote:

  “The stakes have never been higher... If we lose the House in 2020 16, we will see a repeat of the impeachment circus craziness that we saw beginning in 2018 that really was tremendously harmful. The Democrats, they hate Trump more than they love this country.” (07:04)
  Navarro outlines the administration’s priorities: fighting inflation “cow by cow, fish by fish, gallon by gallon” and focusing on “the four pillars of Trumpnomics: tax cuts, strategic energy dominance, deregulation, and fair trade.”

5. Immigration, Jobs, and Economic Growth

• Economic Report: Record jobs report prompts Paul Sweeney to ask if immigration policy should change to bolster labor force growth.
• Navarro’s Argument:

  “The best answer to your question is increase the labor force participation. Oh, it went up yesterday in the report. Even as the unemployment rate went down. How many times do you see that?” (09:34)
  He doubles down on stringent immigration controls, linking illegal immigration to crime, and rejects the premise that immigration reform is needed for economic growth.

6. Tariffs, Farmers, and Congressional Districts

• Regional Concerns: Keene challenges Navarro, citing Iowa farmers upset by tariff-induced retaliations.
• Navarro’s Defense:

  “Iowa loves Donald Trump. And by the way, farmers love Donald Trump. Farmers above all, understand the necessity for tariffs. And every time there’s been retaliation... guess who’s had the farmers back? I’ve personally been involved... in making sure that farmers are made whole and can't be used as bargaining chips and pawns in a bigger game.” (11:13)
  Navarro asserts unwavering farmer support and the administration’s commitment to their well-being during trade disputes.

7. Optimal Tariff Strategy – Bespoke, Not Blended

• Question: What is Navarro’s optimal “blended” tariff rate—should it be 2-3%, 7%, or higher?
• Navarro’s Framework:

  “When the trade deficit gets to zero, then you’ve got the right thing... The goal here is simply fair trade... what President Trump does... is he goes country by country... and he sets the tariffs according to how badly they’re cheating us. So there’s no blended tariff concept here. It’s like a country specific [approach].” (13:41, 15:14)
  He refuses to name a fixed optimal rate, calling instead for a strategic, tit-for-tat approach tailored to each nation’s trade practices.

8. Legal Front: Supreme Court and Tariffs

• Issue: The Supreme Court is reviewing President Trump’s tariff powers.
• Navarro’s Stance:

  “If the Supreme Court wants to rule in favor of President Trump, the law is clearly on the Supreme Court side... With respect to plan B, of course we have a plan B, but this is not the place for me to talk about it.” (16:28)
  He professes confidence in the legal case for tariffs, but hints at contingency plans if the ruling goes against the president.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On U.S. Trade History:
  “McKinley, Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln, Alexander Hamilton. These are like the four people on the Mount Rushmore of American tariffs and we are not in any pivot away from that.” —Peter Navarro (01:50)

• On Defining Tariff Policy:
  “Every country that we trade with is like fingerprints, right? They're unique. Which is to say they cheat us in their own way.” —Peter Navarro (15:03)

• On Democrats and Tariffs:
  “The Democrat Party is opposing tariffs on behalf of working class Americans... simply because they hate Donald Trump. Now they’re anti-tariffs.” —Peter Navarro (05:32)

• On Iowa and Farmers:
  “Iowa loves Donald Trump. And by the way, farmers love Donald Trump. Farmers above all, understanding the necessity for tariffs.” —Peter Navarro (11:09)

• On Confronting Wall Street:
  “Jamie Dimon, lower your friggin credit card interest rates. You are a criminal... So until Jamie, until you do that, please refrain from commenting on other public policies.” —Peter Navarro (14:57)

• On Economic Measures:
  “We’re taking a micro approach to the macro problem. Inflation. We're taking it cow by cow, fish by fish, gallon by gallon.” —Peter Navarro (07:39)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [00:37] Introduction & Context Setting by Tom Keene
• [01:43] Navarro on tariff history, WTO criticism, no “pivot” from protectionism
• [03:10] USMCA flaws, foreign tariff evasion via North America
• [05:17] House vote against tariffs; party discipline critique
• [06:57] Political stakes for the 2026 midterms and Republican strategy
• [08:31] Immigration, crime, and workforce participation
• [09:28] Jobs report, economic growth, and immigration debate
• [10:30] Challenging Iowa & farmer discontent narratives
• [12:01] Optimum blended tariff rate discussion
• [14:57] Navarro’s made-for-soundbite rebuke of Jamie Dimon
• [16:15] Supreme Court case on tariff authority; administration’s response

---

Tone and Language

The episode maintains the sharp, combative, and unapologetic tone typical of Peter Navarro’s communications. His language is direct and often confrontational—particularly towards political opponents, foreign competitors, and critics in finance. Both hosts engage energetically, probing for answers on political strategy, economic reasoning, and policy specifics.

---

Summary

Listeners gain a thorough insight into the Trump administration’s current trade thinking, with Navarro defending protectionism, rejecting “one size fits all” tariff rates, and doubling down on political and economic arguments in favor of aggressive trade action. The episode is dense with policy detail, electoral tactics, and rhetorical jabs, making it essential listening for those tracking the ongoing trade wars and their political fallout.

Transcript

[Apple Card Advertiser]

This message is brought to you by Apple Card. It's a great time to apply for an Apple Card. You'll love earning unlimited daily cash on every Purchase. That includes 3% daily cash when you buy the latest iPhone, AirPods and Apple. Watch at Apple through this special referral offer. When you get a new Apple Card, you can earn bonus daily cash. To qualify, you must apply at Apple Co getdailycash Apple Card issued by Goldman Sachs Bank USA Salt Lake City Branch offer may not be available elsewhere. Terms and limitations apply. Bloomberg Audio Studios Podcasts Radio News I.

[Tom Keene]

Have known Peter Navarro for decades. He's a pinata for so many in America. I want to reaffirm who Dr. Navarro is. In 1994 a bombshell of a book came out of University of California, Irvine. It was called the Coming China wars and Peter Navarro, agree or disagree, invented a franchise and conversation point on America. In China. A guy up in New York, Donald Trump Citizen looked at Mr. Navarro and said hey, I can agree with that. And of course Peter Navarro advises our second term President of the United States, a senior counselor to the President. Dr. Navarro, thank you so much for joining Bloomberg today. I want to get right to it, Peter. When you were at Irvine you lectured on McKinley's capitulation on tariffs. McKinley was the arch Trump like protectionist of the 19th century and he did the buffalo pivot where he said we've got to get more open. Are we in the process now of a modern buffalo pivot?

[Peter Navarro]

Tom first of all, I just want to let the Bloomberg audience know how much I admire you for years. I just love what you do. So let me get that out of the way. McKinley, Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln, Alexander Hamilton. These are like the four people on the Mount Rushmore of American tariffs and we are not in any pivot away from that. We are fully embracing a structural shift engineered by Donald Trump in the entire international global trading system in a way which will make that system better and more prosperous. The problem we've had Tom, is under the rules, the very rules of the World Trade Organization, specifically the most favored nation rule. Every other nation in the world has had a license to cheat us through higher tariffs, higher non tariff barriers and the cost, particularly after NAFTA and China joined the World trade organization in 2001 has been in the hundred thousands of factories and the millions of jobs and we are reversing that and you can see 50,000 on the Dow which I predicted in April. Okay, I'm going to give vacation.

[Tom Keene]

Either you or Kevin Hassett. I'm going to give credit for that. Peter Navarro, we're going to go with you on the sequence here. You mentioned the follow on from nafta. I spoke to our Josh Wingrove this morning and he made really clear what we need to know is the president actually thinking about moving away from our trade agreements with Mexico and Canada. Have you heard the president say I want out of NAFTA and everything that followed it?

[Peter Navarro]

Tom, I'm one of three people, Steven Miller, Dan Scavino being the other two, who was with the president from the 2016 campaign through all four years of the first term. And the reason why that happened, among other things, is I never get ahead of the President. I can tell you this, that USMCA has some significant flaws in it and it's going to be reevaluated in July. The great Jamison Greer, our US Trade representative, will be taking the lead on that. But nothing ever happens in the White House without the commander in chief, particularly on trade. So as the boss says, let's see what happens. But we're in a situation. One of the things I'm the senior counselor of trade and manufacturing and one of the things that's really troubling right now and should be troubling to the American people is that Mexico and to an extent Canada are basically being used by staging areas for countries like China, some of the European countries, many Asian countries, Japan, Korea. They come into Mexico and they leverage NAFTA and now USMCA to get into our markets in a way which essentially is terror avoidance at best and tariff evasion at worst. We have to deal with that, Tom.

[Tom Keene]

Across the nation and worldwide. Peter Navarro with us with the Trump administration. Our Paul Sweeney with Dr. Navarro.

[Paul Sweeney]

Mr. Navarro, I guess last night we saw in the House of Representatives they voted to end some of president's tariff agenda against Canada. Did they overstep the their bounds? What is the response of the administration?

[Peter Navarro]

Well, I think it's highly ironic, Paul, that the Democrat Party is opposing tariffs on behalf of working class Americans when it was the Democrat Party, which is supposed to be the party of the working class, simply because they hate Donald Trump. Now they're anti tariffs. I think the bigger story is the shame on the three Republicans who defected. Although Thomas Massie, I don't consider him of the be nice anymore. I'm being nice. I'm just telling it like it is. It's like Nancy, hang on, let me give a compliment to the Democrats, please. The Democrats hold ranks and we don't. And we got to stop not holding ranks. Sir.

[Tom Keene]

Because, okay, Peter.

[Peter Navarro]

Very harmful to the party and to this country when we have that kind of thing going on.

[Tom Keene]

Okay, Peter, well said. But let's give two examples right now. Tom Barrett, who's the congressman from Lansing, Michigan, he's got two GM factories up here. His Republican working class constituents, who President Trump stole from the Democrats don't. Tom Barrett is going to fight for his life in that congressional district in Lansing, Michigan. What do you need to do to get Tom Barrett re elected?

[Peter Navarro]

Well, okay, so that's a bigger conversation. I can tell you this. The stakes have never been higher in a midterm congressional election. If we lose the House in 2020 16, we will see a repeat of the impeachment circus craziness that we saw beginning in 2018 that really was tremendously harmful. The Democrats, they hate Trump more than they love this country, as Corey Lewandowski once said. And our strategy now, look, they're coming at us on affordability, number one. We are turning that around as we speak. We're taking a micro approach to the macro problem. Inflation. We're taking it cow by cow, fish by fish, gallon by gallon. And nothing is more important to the President than strong growth in a deflationary environment following the four pillars of Trump nomics, tax cuts. We got strategic energy dominance. We got deregulation and of course, fair trade. So we're going to, first of all, address the affordability crisis head on. We're making great progress on that. The border issue remains troublesome. I've got a piece out in.

[Paul Sweeney]

A.

[Peter Navarro]

Rival network thing today that does the body count when you let millions of illegal aliens into this country. I mean, we lost two Americans in Minneapolis because of what was going on there. But by my calculations, tens of thousands of Americans are going to be either murdered, burgled, raped or assaulted by the illegal aliens unless we deport them. So that's going to be, I guess.

[Paul Sweeney]

On that bounds here. You know, one of the things, we saw a very strong jobs report yesterday, but a lot of economists will say this is an economy that is kind of slow hiring or no hiring, but slow or no cuts in jobs, it's just kind of hanging out there. If you want this economy to grow, many economists would argue you need a larger workforce.

[Tom Keene]

This.

[Paul Sweeney]

Does that suggest the Trump administration should maybe rethink their immigration policy?

[Peter Navarro]

Hang on. We had 170,000 private sector jobs created last month. 170,000. And by the way, Paul, the best answer to your question is increase the labor force participation. Oh, it went up yesterday in the report. Even as the unemployment rate went down. How many times do you see that we're looking at 5% GDP, GDP growth and we're looking at earnings which are off the charts. And back in April, April 7, to be exact, when the futures for the dow were at 38,000, my friend, 38,000 on reciprocal terror panic. I said 50,000 on the Dow.

[Tom Keene]

Try not to have it, that's all.

[Peter Navarro]

Look, Peter Navarro, Kevin wrote a book like years ago. He never said 50,000 on the Dow this year. Just to be clear.

[Tom Keene]

Peter Navarro with us here nationwide and of course from is Irvine, California as well. Peter, you mentioned the midterm elections. Here's the reality for the president right now. You go out I 80 across Illinois, you run into the big river and there's Davenport, Iowa. The Republican in the 1st congressional district won that district by six votes last time around. They didn't cross the aisle yesterday to vote with the Democrats, but they've had it with the Navarro Trump trade. What do you need to amend to get Republicans reelected in November?

[Peter Navarro]

I just so disagree with that. We, Iowa loves Donald Trump. And by the way, farmers love Donald Trump. Farmers above all, understanding the necessity for tariffs. And every time there's been retaliation by China or the Europeans or by the Canadians, guess who's had the farmers back? I've personally been involved with the great Brooke Rawlings over at the Department of Agriculture in making sure that farmers are made whole and can't be used as bargaining chips and pawns in a bigger game. So I, you know, Iowa is Trump country. And I just, it's like you're making assertions that I just, I mean, if you start with an assertion that's wrong, then everything that else that follows is.

[Tom Keene]

Peter, I want to get, we're talking about this is too important. And Paul wants to talk about the legal background as well. Peter Navarro, we had a 2 to 3% tariff regime for whatever reasons and you were providing leadership on this. We had Liberation Day in the Rose Garden and we went up, up and away. And Toby Nangle at the FT brilliantly shown that we've pulled back our blended tariff rate right now, I'm guessing to 10 to 11%. Where is Peter Navarro's optimum blended tariff rate if it's not the 2 to 3% that President Biden and others had before you?

[Peter Navarro]

Great question. And the way I like to think about it is the trade deficit. The trade deficit, when it's chronic like it has been, and large like it has been, is toxic to the future of this country. First of All a big trade deficit that's chronic as opposed to occasional is a proxy for all the factories and jobs and supply chains that go offshore. When that happens, that not only hurts us economically, it hurts us from a national security point of view, as the pandemic underscored. So there is that. Secondly, when you run a chronic trade deficit, you're basically shipping your wealth offshore. And we've done that. By the last calculation, I made something like $15 trillion of our property.

[Tom Keene]

Peter, I don't mean to interrupt, but I'm going to interrupt you. But Peter.

[Peter Navarro]

Bottom line, Tom, is when the trade deficit gets to zero, then you've got the right thing. Well, but by the way, by the way, the goal here is simply fair trade. And what we're doing, what the President is doing, what Jameson Greer, Scott Bessen, Howard Lutnick are doing, is working with our allies and countries around the world to get them to lower their tariffs and trade barriers. And who in Bloomberg land could disagree with that as a principle? Disagree with the results, Tom, I got.

[Tom Keene]

To get this in because Sweeney is like all Supreme Court right now. Peter Navarro, you didn't answer my question. We came up, we had Liberation Day. No you did not.

[Peter Navarro]

We said your question was what will satisfy Peter Navarro? And I said when the train.

[Tom Keene]

What is optimum, what is the optimum blended tariff rate? James Dimon wants to know that. Brian Moynihan wants to know that. Solomon over at Goldman Sachs wants to know that. In the people in the 1st congressional district of Iowa, where are we heading as these exemptions come in? Do you see a 7% optimal tariff rate? 4%? Do we capitulate and go right back to 2 to 3%?

[Peter Navarro]

So here's a Kevin Spacey aside here. Jamie Dimon, lower your friggin credit card interest rates. You are a criminal. The way you charge the American people at 22, 25 and 30%. And the president wants you to lower that. So until Jamie, until you do that, please refrain from commenting on other public policies. Got that off my chest. Now, with respect to your question, please, the way we think about it, Tom, this is important, is that every country that we trade with is like fingerprints, right? They're unique. Which is to say they cheat us in their own way. It's like some countries like India have had the highest tariffs, some countries like Japan have had the highest non tariff barriers, some countries like China have all of that stuff going on. So when you ask me what the appropriate tariff would be, it's bespoke. It's like what President Trump does. He goes country by by country by country, and he sets the tariffs according to how badly they're cheating us. So there's no, there's no blended tariff concept here. It's like a country specific.

[Tom Keene]

Thank you for that. Let's get Paul Sweeney in here.

[Paul Sweeney]

Peter, just real quickly, there's some of President Trump's tariff policies in front of the Supreme Court. To the extent the Supreme Court rules against the administration, what will be its response?

[Peter Navarro]

Well, first of all, let's talk about the law and the use of ia. If the Supreme Court wants to rule in favor of President Trump, the law is clearly on the Supreme Court side. I mean, you have is it tariff a tax? No, it's a tariff on foreigners. And is a tariff a form of restriction on imports? Of course it is, just like quotas and other things and embargoes. So those are the two points of law which this case is about. And if the Supreme Court wants to rule in the president's favor, clearly the law is on their side. With respect to plan B, of course we have a plan B, but this is not the place for me to talk about it. If the decision comes out next Friday, which would be the next time the Supreme Court is going to be releasing decisions, then the president will speak first on what's going to happen, and then folks like me will come in behind him and explain the details.

[Tom Keene]

Peter, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you for commenting on the realities for the 1st congressional district of Iowa. The I believe it's the 8th congressional district of Michigan as well, and on the world of trade. Peter Navarro, senior Counselor to the President for Trade and Manufacturing for the President of the United States.