You Want To Understand Trump And Tariffs? Look To The Salt And Pepper...
An Unusual Lesson in "Trump Speak"
I was in Washington, DC on “Liberation Day” last week where the mood was distinctly different from that in New York City, where the derogatory talk about President Trump has predictably been on steroids: He’s a moron. A dictator. He’s destroying America and the World etcetera….
The summit of derogatory expression was possibly reached for me at least, on Tuesday night, even before the tariff mayhem was upon us. I sat in the audience at the New York Public Library listening to Timothy L. Snyder - the historian and author of On Tyranny - deliver the annual Bob Silvers lecture, after which he gravely answered questions about the possibility that the US would invade Canada.
“There are people not very far from here geographically who are making very practical preparations for that eventuality… There are conversations to be had now about the kind of rhetoric we're using towards Canada, which is shockingly, shockingly similar to the rhetoric that Putin used before the invasion of Crimea in 2013, 2014,” Snyder said.
(Snyder and two other Yale professors have left the US for Canada, citing Trump fears - that’s a whole rabbit hole I won’t go down here.)
The crowd, which was noticeably absent of the billionaire capitalists who comprise the board of the New York Public Library, roared its applause.
And then the next morning, I headed to Washington, D.C.
Even the Acela train ride wasn’t without excitement.
En route I had a quick call with the law professor Alan Dershowitz, who will be doing a q and a video chat with me next Wednesday, in which we will, of course, talk about Trump’s executive orders and law firms. When I finished, the guy opposite me, told me he was a partner at Skadden Arps; next, the guy at the table across the way volunteered he was a senior partner at Greenberg Traurig - and next thing you know the entire compartment had turned into an excited corporate law convention, as each passenger identified themselves and then mulled aloud which law firms would fold in the manner of Paul, Weiss, and which would stand and fight in the manner of Perkins Coie.
There was a lot of chatter about the role played by the co-chair of law firm Sullivan and Cromwell, Bob Giuffra, whom Trump put on the phone whilst negotiating in the Oval office with Brad Karp, the managing partner of competitor, Paul, Weiss. The symbolism of that was obvious: Giuffra was not only ready to eat Karp’s lunch if Karp didn’t cut a deal, he was in a position to choose the menu, too. I suspect that if there had been a lawyers’ popularity contest in that train carriage, Giuffra might not have won it.
Anyway, I got off the train, reminding oneself that one should never say anything aloud on the Acela, unless one wants it to be spread far and wide, a bit like Mike Waltz’s group chat on Signal….
That evening, I described the alarm expressed by Timothy Snyder and the crowd at the New York Public Library at a dinner party in Georgetown, and, fascinatingly, I was met not only with skepticism - but props: the salt and pepper.
Snyder and the rest simply do not understand Trump Speak, I was told by a Trump-supporting senior State Department official who works in the sanctions area - and there were two others at the table in agreement with her.
Oh?
She picked up the salt and pepper to explain.
I was told that all of Trump’s detractors including the leaders of Canada, Denmark, Greenland - and more recently almost every CEO brave enough to speak in public, needs to understand the following: If Trump asks for the salt (banged on the table for emphasis) it’s because he wants… the pepper (also banged for emphasis). And he will continue to ask for the salt, (banged again) until you give him the pepper (also banged, but now a few inches away from the salt). So what these leaders need to do is stop whining about the salt, (bang!) and figure out how much pepper (bang! but now approaching the vicinity of the salt) he wants.
In other words, I was told, as the salt and pepper were happily reunited, he will, of course negotiate around the tariffs. And everything else. (It occurs to me, given the state of the markets, I should have written this newsletter a few days ago, but I’ve been busy proofing The Idaho Four and it’s possible you all would have ignored me).
But Trump Translators: they do actually exist.
Separately on my trip to DC, someone close to Trump, who shall remain nameless because he’s a (VIS) as in “very important source”, told me he met with Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky 24 hours ahead of his Oval Office meeting with Trump and told him, “You need to do three things for this meeting to go well: 1. Wear a suit, 2. Say Thank you and then 3. Say Thank you again.
When you think about what went wrong in that meeting, you could make the argument that it was the absence of those three exact things appeared to be what set Trump and JD Vance off.
Notwithstanding this and the panic on Wall Street, the President, I am told is in a very good mood.
I’m told one reason he’s not concerned by the roiling markets is that he’s no longer so interested in things that typically interest his friends of yore, namely the billionaires in finance and real estate. It’s why they weren’t visible at the Inauguration.
He’s “outgrown those people” I was told. His mind is elsewhere.
Last week he invited reporters in for an interview which turned into a hours-long hang fest and musings on his favorite opera singer, Luciano Pavarotti. At one point he needed to go speak to US oil company CEOs and he told the reporters in the room he needed to go “bullshit” for a few minutes.
What to make of all this?
Well, tomorrow at 5pm EST, my first guest on the new weekly TV Show of this newsletter is probably the best Trump Translator in existence: the author Michael Wolff. He and I will discuss his new book: All or Nothing.
Remember, you’ll need to download the substack app to tune in.
The q and a is open to everyone while it’s live, so I look forward to seeing those who can make it tomorrow. Paid subscribers can also send in questions on the chat ahead of time, and during our conversation.
Meanwhile, perhaps, you’ll look at your salt and pepper in an entirely new light.
I know I do.
Vicky: Do you really feel that the salt and pepper analogy is that insightful? Seems pretty standard negotiating tactic to me. Hardly a genius move. More like a reality TV version of the Art of the Deal!
What is unique though is Trump’s willingness to ‘credibly’ threaten to blow everything up. But that only works in real estate if you inherit half a $billion; or, in international relations if (1) you have a history of recklessness in the private sector and (2) you luck into running the largest economy in the world.
Trump has always been too big to fail. But that had nothing to do with innate talent - just being born on third base combined with his appetite for irrational risk.
Nope, if he wore a suit and said, thank you, it would've been something else. Notice that Elon Musk doesn't wear a suit and doesn't say thank you! It sounds like you're trying to normalize what isn't normal. A better analogy Is he's trying to run the presidency like it's another reality tv show, but he's on the wrong sound stage.