EventStatement
Jonah Goldberg (AEI), Los Angeles Times column: tariffs on allies are "forcing many countries to pursue trade agreements with China"
Column of Apr 8, 2026, reposted by AEI, where Goldberg is a senior fellow: 'Trump abrogated trade agreements with our allies to levy massive tariffs on nearly all of them, forcing many countries to pursue trade agreements with China.'
- Date
- Kind
- Statement
- Where
- United States
- Evidence
- Statement: Something was said. Weighted lowest: words cost less than actions. How evidence is weighed
- Who
- American Enterprise Institute (AEI) (acted); Jonah Goldberg (acted)
Latest articles
No article cites this record yet.
Sources
- AEI (reprinted from the Los Angeles Times), “Trump Is Burning Every Bridge America Had Left” (external site), . source record
Quotes
“Trump abrogated trade agreements with our allies to levy massive tariffs on nearly all of them, forcing many countries to pursue trade agreements with China.”
From AEI (reprinted from the Los Angeles Times): Trump Is Burning Every Bridge America Had Left
Tested hypotheses: a thought experiment
Suppose Washington foresaw and wanted this. Would this event look any different than under the rival readings? This is a deliberately contrarian test, explained here, not the author’s belief. Judgments, not measurements.
Non-discriminating: this event fits the plain self-interest reading and the foresight reading equally. It does not tell them apart. What this means
| Reading | Fit | Why |
|---|---|---|
| I0a Accident Tested hypothesis (intent) | Neutral weak | A columnist's claim that tariffs push allies toward China fits all readings equally; it is commentary, not evidence of US intent. |
| I0b Plain self-interest; Canada's response not considered Tested hypothesis (intent) | Neutral weak | A columnist's claim that tariffs push allies toward China fits all readings equally; it is commentary, not evidence of US intent. |
| I1 Foreseen and welcomed, not the reason Tested hypothesis (intent) | Neutral weak | A columnist's claim that tariffs push allies toward China fits all readings equally; it is commentary, not evidence of US intent. |
| I2 Foreseen and wanted (this level or higher) Tested hypothesis (intent) | Neutral weak | A columnist's claim that tariffs push allies toward China fits all readings equally; it is commentary, not evidence of US intent. |
| I3 Worked-out plan with specific targets Tested hypothesis (intent) | Neutral weak | A columnist's claim that tariffs push allies toward China fits all readings equally; it is commentary, not evidence of US intent. |
| R-annex Annexation Rival reading | Neutral weak | A columnist's claim that tariffs push allies toward China fits all readings equally; it is commentary, not evidence of US intent. |
| R-frag Fragmentation Rival reading | Neutral weak | A columnist's claim that tariffs push allies toward China fits all readings equally; it is commentary, not evidence of US intent. |
| R-weaken Weaken-Canada rivals (annexation or fragmentation) Rival reading | Neutral weak | A columnist's claim that tariffs push allies toward China fits all readings equally; it is commentary, not evidence of US intent. |