The bus Trump will throw someone under
What if “Liberation Day”, when President Trump announced sweeping worldwide tariffs, proves to be the giant misstep that many economists are predicting. Trump won’t accept the blame when it does – he’ll find a scapegoat. His history and rhetoric provide some clues.
Trump has a well-documented pattern of deflecting responsibility when policies face criticism or fail to deliver promised results. Based on his past behaviour, the current political climate, and the specific context of these tariffs, here’s a list of likely candidates I speculate he might point the finger at:
Trump has already framed these tariffs as a response to countries “taking advantage” of the U.S. economically. China, Canada, Mexico, the European Union, Japan, and others facing high tariff rates, e.g. China at 34%, the EU at 20%, and Japan at 24% are prime targets for blame. He might claim these retaliated unfairly with their own tariffs or failed to “play fair” in trade negotiations, thus causing economic fallout in the U.S.
Trump has consistently blamed his predecessor for economic challenges, as seen in his recent statements where he attributed stock market slides and inflation to Biden’s policies, despite evidence to the contrary. He might argue that Biden left the economy in such a “mess” that his tariffs, meant to fix things, couldn’t overcome the inherited damage.
Trump has history in blaming the Democrats of obstructing his agenda. He might claim that Democratic resistance in Congress undermined his ability to implement the tariffs effectively.
Trump has already shown disdain for global trade bodies, as evidenced by the U.S. suspending contributions to the WTO in March. He might blame the WTO or similar organisations for creating a “rigged” system that prevents his tariffs from succeeding, claiming they favour other nations over the U.S.
Though less likely, Trump could indirectly blame American businesses for not adapting quickly enough to his “America First” policies, or even consumers for not buying American-made goods, thus failing to support his vision of re-shoring manufacturing.
Economists have warned that these tariffs – such as the 10% baseline on all imports, 34% on China, and 25% on autos – will likely raise prices for American consumers, reduce GDP and lead to job losses. Retaliatory tariffs from other nations could further hurt U.S. exporters, especially in agriculture, as seen with China’s response.
Trump’s deflection is predictable because admitting fault would undermine his “America First” narrative, which hinges on the idea that he alone can fix the economy through bold, unilateral action. By blaming external forces – whether foreign nations, Biden, or global institutions – he can maintain his image as a strong leader fighting against a world that’s “out to get” the U.S. However, this strategy risks alienating his base if the economic pain becomes too severe.
In summary, Trump is most likely to blame foreign countries like China, Canada, and the EU, alongside Biden and domestic political opponents, for any tariff-related economic fallout. His excuse will probably centre on unfair retaliation, an inherited economic mess, or a rigged global system, allowing him to avoid taking responsibility while doubling down on his protectionist stance.
Trump could also shift blame onto members of his own administration if the tariffs announced on “Liberation Day” lead to the predicted negative economic outcomes. Trump has a history of publicly criticising his own appointees when policies falter, often positioning himself as the visionary leader betrayed or undermined by subordinates.
Trump’s excuse would likely focus on incompetence or disloyalty within his administration, while emphasising that the tariffs themselves remain a good idea. He might say something like:
“I had a great plan with these tariffs – everyone knows I’m the best at trade deals. But some people in my administration didn’t do their jobs. They didn’t prepare properly, they didn’t negotiate hard enough, and they let me down. I’m fixing it now, and we’ll make America great again, despite their mistakes.”
This framing allows Trump to distance himself from the policy’s failures while reinforcing his narrative of being a strong leader who overcomes obstacles. However, it risks creating internal friction within his administration, as appointees may push back against being scapegoated, potentially leading to resignations or leaks that could further complicate his agenda.
He’d likely frame the blame as a failure of execution or advice, not a flaw in the tariffs themselves, to preserve his image as a trade policy genius. Who are these potential scapegoats within his administration, and why they might be targeted, and how Trump could frame the blame?
The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) is directly responsible for negotiating trade deals and implementing tariff policies. He could argue that the USTR didn’t secure enough concessions or exemptions, leading to economic blowback.
The Treasury Secretary oversees economic policy, including the financial implications of tariffs. If the tariffs lead to a stronger dollar, hurting U.S. exporters, Trump might claim the Treasury failed to mitigate currency fluctuations or support affected industries such as agriculture and manufacturing.
The Commerce Secretary is responsible for promoting American businesses and managing trade policy impacts on domestic industries. If American manufacturers struggle with higher input costs (e.g., a 10% tariff on all imports increases the cost of raw materials), Trump could argue that the Commerce Department didn’t provide enough support or incentives to re-shore production.
The Director of the National Economic Council (NEC) advises the President on economic policy. He could blame them for providing faulty economic projections or failing to anticipate the tariffs’ downsides. Trump might claim he was given bad advice, leading to unintended consequences such as job losses.
The Chief of Staff oversees the administration’s operations and ensures policy alignment. If Trump feels the tariff rollout was poorly coordinated or communicated, he might blame his Chief of Staff for not ensuring that other departments (such as Commerce or Treasury) were prepared for the economic impacts, or for failing to manage internal dissent within the administration about the tariffs’ wisdom.
Trump has a history of turning on his own appointees when things go wrong. During his first term, he publicly criticised figures such as Attorney General Jeff Sessions (for recusing himself from the Russia investigation) and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson (for disagreements on foreign policy). This pattern suggests Trump is comfortable blaming subordinates to protect his own image, especially on a signature issue like tariffs, which are central to his “America First” agenda.
Blaming someone in his administration allows Trump to maintain the narrative that the tariffs were a brilliant idea in theory, but their execution was botched by others. This approach also appeals to his base by reinforcing his image as a decisive leader who takes action to correct others’ mistakes.
Bottom line: Someone is going to be thrown under the bus.
The Truth About Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day”, John Cassidy, The New Yorker
Trump announces sweeping tariffs on major trade partners – some as high as 54%, Rob Wile, NBC News
Trump’s tariff war – a timeline of key announcements and events, Richard Partington and Lucy Swan, The Guardian
Trump Mentioned Biden 316 Times in 50 Days, Mostly to Blame Him for Things, Shawn McCreesh and Dylan Freedman, The New York Times
Exclusive: US pauses financial contributions to WTO, trade sources say, Emma Farge, Reuters
US Attorney General Jeff Sessions resigns at Trump’s request, Al Jazeera
Tillerson’s relationship with Trump fraught from the start, Justin Fishel and Conor Finnegan, ABC News
A-Z index of U.S. government departments and agencies, usa.gov
See also: Closed for Business: The Oddities of Trump’s Tariffs
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
As eligible voters make their way to the polling booths on May 3, 2025, a…
By Denis Hay Description Truth discernment. Uncover why some spot lies and others fall for…
Australia’s Policies Under Fire: Trump’s Displeasure with the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, Biosecurity Laws, and Media…
Liberation Day, as April 2 was described by US President Donald Trump, had all the…
The Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Media Release The Victorian Chamber of Commerce and…
Australian Workers Union (AWU) Media Release The Australian Workers’ Union has commended the Albanese Government…
View Comments
The only person we know will be absolutely blameless will be Donald Trump.
When will the people that deliberately voted for this abomination realise they have thrown themselves under a very large bus?
Harry, as a friend back in America said; “Trump wants to keep the stupid people stupid so they stay stupid enough to vote for him.”
Roswell,
Isn't that what Temu Trump desperately wants as well for Australia?
"half" of Trump supporters fit into a "basket of deplorables,"
Hillary Clinton 2016
GL, page 1 in the Howard playbook.
The Dumpster at his headache inducing best: "I think it’s going very well. It was an operation like when a patient gets operated on and it’s a big thing. I said this would be exactly the way it is … We’ve never seen anything like it. The markets are going to boom. The stock is going to boom. The country is going to boom." He left out one extremely important word before the multiple uses of the word "boom" and that is "go".
When it all falls over and lands in the Donnie outhouse I can picture a large proportion of the sycophants, leeches and haemorrhoids attached to the Orange Emperor being removed posthaste as he, as usual, attempts to duck, weave, and dodge any of blame.
The rhetorical nature of the header to this essay, 'What if Liberation Day goes pear shaped?' is, arguably, comfortably resolved.
The NYSE suffered a multi-trillion dollar wipeout. The 500 richest people in the world lost a combined $208bn today as stock markets plunged... boo hoo, so sad for Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg. The roving philosopher, JD Vance, said, in an effort to invoke relativity, "it could be worse." The big guy himself, renowned burger muncher Trump said "I think it’s going very well."
Amidst a million other commentators on this vexed subject of whether America is a responsible country or - to quote Trump again - just another shithole, here's Seth Myers with an at least comprehensible take on this unfolding SNAFU cum FUBAR cum "Welcome folks to the end of serious adult behaviour and the beginning of 'let's all get into the pit and jelly wrestle'.
Responses to the questions in the title.
Not "IF", but "WHEN".
Everyone but himself.
He's going to be worse than 'Joliet' Jake Blues talking to Carrie Fisher.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U9Yl5CXvcQ
How big is the pear going to grow is a neccesary additional.question
I've thought of a new nickname for The Donald, "Ol' Turkey Neck".