カテゴリ: トランプ




And I'm Steve Inskeep with some of the top stories of this day. David, let's talk taxes.



OK, if you insist - it's what I want to talk about every time I wake up in the morning.




GREENE: Taxes, yeah. So President Trump teased this tax announcement on Twitter over the weekend. And a lot of people in Washington were speculating this would be part of his agenda before he hits his hundredth-day mark in office. But then his administration scaled it back and said it would just be broad principles. This is Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin at the White House on Monday.



STEVEN MNUCHIN: We've been clear on what the president's objectives are for tax reform - middle income tax cut, a priority of the president's - simplification. The average American should be able to do their taxes on a large postcard. Business tax reform, we need to make business taxes competitive. And we expect with doing that we will bring back trillions of dollars from offshore.


INSKEEP: OK, Domenico Montanaro of NPR's Politics team is in our studios to talk about this. Hi, Domenico.




INSKEEP: OK, broad principles, large postcards - what are we getting here?


MONTANARO: Well, essentially those are guidelines in the same way that you would get in a campaign. There's this 15 percent business tax rate cut that Trump had laid out during the campaign. And it includes...


INSKEEP: Much lower taxes for corporations, OK.


MONTANARO: Far lower - they pay, you know, 35 percent or so, 39.6 if you're a company that pays it through your own income, like most private businesses or small businesses. And the key there is because that actually would directly benefit Donald Trump. It would save him tens of millions of dollars a year because that's how his businesses are set up. There would be tax cuts across the board, including a modest one for those considered middle-class. It would seek to simplify the tax code.


But, you know, people talk about the idea of putting taxes on a postcard, like Mnuchin did there, but it can also mean doing away with popular deductions, like the home mortgage interest deduction, something that Mnuchin promised Trump would scale back in December.


INSKEEP: And a good reminder here - I mean, your principle, your idea can be unicorns. But you've got to figure out how to make unicorns come true. And let's pick up on one of the things you mentioned, Domenico, because while campaigning, now-President Trump repeatedly made this promise.

「あることを思い出しましたが、その考えは、理想論に終わることはありませんか? 理想を現実のものにする方法を考えなければいけないと思うのですが…。選挙期間中に、今は大統領になっているトランプ氏が繰り返し言っていたことがありますので、それについて考えてみたいと思います」


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Under my plan, no American company will pay more than 15 percent of their business income in taxes.


INSKEEP: OK, that's a big cut because it's 35 percent now...


MONTANARO: It sure is.


INSKEEP: ...Which is pretty high compared to some other countries, which is why they want to do it. But if you cut taxes that much, it would cost trillions of dollars in revenue to the government. Has the president said how he wants to replace the money?


MONTANARO: In one ambiguous word, growth. You know, experts, though, during the campaign said that Trump's various iterations of his tax plan would blow a huge hole in the budget - trillions of dollars, even bigger than the Bush tax cuts. And that was true even using something called dynamic scoring, which takes growth into account.


INSKEEP: And so is this a serious tax plan?


MONTANARO: You know, it's a serious tax plan in the sense that he's bringing it forward. It's not in the form of legislation at this point. But he's going to have to work out a lot of things with Congress, with Democrats as well. And at this point, it's at the infant stages.








  We’re now in the process of rebuilding America, and there’s a new optimism sweeping across our country like people have not seen in many, many decades.  


 We’re here today to continue this great economic revival.  


 I will be signing three presidential directives to further protect our workers and our taxpayers.


 The first executive action instructs Secretary Mnuchin to begin the process of tax simplification.  


 Such a big thing.


 People can’t do their returns.  


 They have no idea what they’re doing.  


 They’re too complicated.  


 This regulatory reduction is the first step toward a tax reform that reduces rates, provides relief to our middle class, and lowers our business tax, which is one of the highest in the world and has stopped us from so much wealth and productivity.










WHITE HOUSE — The U.S. sought to assure allies Wednesday that the USS Carl Vinson naval strike group is indeed headed to the northern Pacific as a deterrent to North Korea's nuclear weapons program. But this came after days of misleading statements that the aircraft carrier and other ships had already been headed there.


"We're sending an armada, very powerful," President Donald Trump declared April 11, three days after the strike group left Singapore.


Admiral Harry Harris, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, had announced April 9 he was ordering the strike group to sail north after leaving Singapore and that it would not be making previously planned port visits in Australia.


However the strike group instead stayed in the western Pacific and conducted an abbreviated set of exercises with Australian forces. By last Saturday, the Vinson was sailing through the Sunda Strait, which separates the Indonesian islands of Java and Sumatra, thousands of kilometers from the Korean peninsula.


On Wednesday, U.S. officials attempted to clarify the conflicting statements about the strike group's whereabouts.


White House spokesman Sean Spicer noted Trump's comment "that we have an armada going towards the peninsula. That's a fact, it's happened. It is happening rather."


“What part is misleading? I’m trying to figure that out…I’m not the one who commented on timing,” said Spicer.

「どの部分が誤解を生んだのか? 解明しようとしたが、私は、時期について述べた者ではない、とスパイサーは述べた」

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, on a visit to Saudi Arabia, told reporters, "The Vinson, as I’ve said on the record, was operating up and down the western Pacific. And we’re doing exactly what we said. And that is, we’re shifting her, instead of continuing one direction as she pulled out of Singapore she’s going to continue part of our cruise down in that region but she was on her way up to Korea."


Mattis then said, "She will be on her way. And I’ll determine when she gets there and where she actually operates. But the Vinson is going to be part of our ensuring that we stand by our allies in the northwest Pacific."


The mixed messaging is being viewed by some as undermining the United States' credible threat of military force against North Korea.


‘Duped by Trump: U.S. Taunted Over Carl Vinson Aircraft Carrier Tale,’ was the headline in the conservative business daily Wall Street Journal, which noted “ridicule in some corners of Asia and wariness in others.”


The headline in China’s Global Times read ‘Tricked Badly,’ while the Korea Times in Seoul bluntly declared ‘US lied about carrier strike group.’


Carrier to spend extra month off Korean Peninsula


After the initial U.S. Pacific Command announcement on April 9 stated that the Carl Vinson Strike Group was headed north toward the Western Pacific Ocean, a spokesman for the command told VOA and other news organizations this was motivated by North Korea’s “reckless, irresponsible and destabilizing program of missile tests and pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability.”


This raised concerns that Trump might launch a unilateral military strike to prevent or retaliate against a possible North Korean nuclear test on April 15, the birth anniversary of the nation’s founder Kim Il Sung, often marked by a provocative weapons test.


North Korea did not conduct a nuclear test that weekend but held a massive military parade and attempted a missile test at or near its key submarine base at Sinpo.


The Vinson and its strike force is believed to still be in the Indian Ocean, engaged in training exercises with Australia and is now expected to arrive in waters off the Korean peninsula around April 25, when North Korea marks an important holiday: Military Foundation Day.



Ambiguous messaging damages credibility


The perceived communications mix-up discredits some of the tough rhetoric coming from the Trump administration.


"If you threaten them and your threat is not credible, it's only going to undermine whatever your policy toward them is," said North Korea expert Joel Wit at the 38 North monitoring group, run by Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies.

「彼らを脅かそうとしても、その脅かしが信じられなければ、彼らに対して米国がどんな政策に打って出ようとも効果が弱くなってしまうと、北朝鮮の専門家のJoe Wit は言う」

Analyst Daniel Pinkston with Troy University in Seoul, said this policy of increased military pressure is not only weakened by mixed messages over deploying a naval strike force, but also by widespread opposition among important allies such as Japan and South Korea.

「ソウルにあるトロイ大学のアナリストのDanierl Pinkstonは、攻撃部隊を派遣したことに関するメッセージが違ったように理解されるのであれば、北朝鮮に対し圧力をかけるという作戦の効果が弱まるだけではなく、日本や韓国などの同盟国からの反発を招くことにもなると言う」


U.S. Vice President Mike Pence did not mention the delay in sending the Vinson group Wednesday when he addressed American military forces aboard the USS Ronald Reagan, a Nimitz class aircraft carrier undergoing maintenance in Yokosuka, Japan.


Pence instead repeated stern warnings to Pyongyang that he made earlier in Seoul and Tokyo, not to test America’s resolve. He again referenced Trump’s decisions to launch missile strikes in Syria and Afghanistan, and said the United States is fully prepared to use military force if needed.







Trumpbuy ameri

We're going to do everything in our power to make sure more products are stamped with those wonderful words, “Made in the USA.”












Last year, Trump got approval to hire 64 foreign workers for his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida through the government's H-2B visa program, according to the Palm Beach Post.


Trump has heavily criticized the H-1B program, but not the H-2B, which applies to seasonal or temporary workers.


Trump defended the hiring move in a presidential debate last March, saying it is "very, very hard" to find workers to fill those jobs — which included positions for waiters, cooks and housekeepers, according to the Post report.



NBC News found that shipments of Chinese-made dresses bearing the brand of Trump's daughter Ivanka have continued to be shipped into the United States since Trump took office.


 Ivanka Trump, who recently took a White House job, has said she no longer has a management role in the brand.





































































 I think our dollar is getting too strong, and partially that’s my fault because people have confidence in me.




 安倍総理とchemistry が合うというのが分かるような気もします。


















President Trump made the biggest move of his presidency so far Thursday night — he struck Syrian military targets after an apparent chemical weapons attack allegedly ordered by Syria's Bashar Assad against his own people.


Trump — who said it was in the "vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons" — can use this politically to paint himself as a strong leader who will act decisively. The move also came at a low point in his presidency, which has been marred lately by infighting in his White House and a lack of action on his domestic agenda. Between this Syria action, which his team is painting as a leadership moment, and the Senate's confirmation of Neil Gorsuch, Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court, Trump hopes to get his presidency on track.


But the strike leaves more questions than answers, like how does it square with Trump's "America First" policy; does this mean a change in approach toward Syria and Russia; and, most importantly, what's next? Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle are supporting the decision, even if with reservations on the Democratic side. As it is, the legal justification for the bombing is murky — as are all unilateral military actions by an American president without congressional approval. And, any wider effort would seem to demand action from Congress.


We asked NPR reporters, from the political team to the international desk, to explore those and some other key questions below:


1. Is this a one-off or is there more to come and what would that mean?

「今回の攻撃は1回限りのものなのか、それとも続きがあるのか? そして、それは何を意味するのか?」

Tom Bowman, NPR Pentagon correspondent: There's no indication of further action. It was a narrowly focused mission. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is advocating for taking out the entire Syrian air force, but there's no indication the Trump administration will do that. The White House is likely to forge ahead with trying to defeat ISIS as the focus in Syria — with the help of the Turkish arm of the Kurds. The political solution that has been talked about is turning Syria into a confederated state, split into various parts only partially governed by Assad.

「ペンタゴン担当のトムバウマン: さらなる攻撃があるとは示されていない。この任務の目的は限定されていた。マケイン上院議員は、シリアの空軍の壊滅を主張しているが、トランプ政権がそうするという兆しはない。ホワイトハウスは、トルコ軍の助けを得てシリアにいるISISを負かすことに力を注ぐとみられる。これまで語られてきた政治的な解決策は、シリアを連合政府に転換させることである。アサドにより部分的に統治されるものなどへ区分けするのだ」

This action is a feel-good kind of thing for Trump. Blow away aircraft; you don't kill any Russians, and that's it. It's good optics, like the Carrier deal. But there's a big question here. Trump saw those pictures of children suffering and killed from the attack, and everyone was obviously disgusted. But if you're someone in Syria, you might be asking, you got really upset over roughly 80 people being killed, but if they hit me with a conventional bomb, that's OK? Thousands have already been killed and millions displaced.


2. Does this limited bombing then change Assad's actions?


Michelle Kelemen, State Department correspondent: That's a hard one to answer since he has crossed so many red lines without facing any consequences.


Remember, President Obama threatened action if Assad used chemical weapons. Chemical weapons were used, and Obama ultimately didn't act militarily. Trump said this attack was "beyond a red line." But, as Will Dobson, NPR's senior supervising editor for the International Desk points out, what if this was a provocation from Assad?


Bassma Kodmani, a Syrian opposition negotiator and former spokesperson for the Syrian National Council, in fact, told Kelemen in a story that aired Wednesday that the apparent use of chemical weapons by Assad was exactly that — a "provocation and a test."


On whether this will change Assad's actions, Dobson says ask the Russians. Whether or not it changes Assad's action may be determined by Moscow, who will be asked to rein him in and are best positioned to do so.


3. Speaking of the Russians, they have been harshly critical of this move by the United States. What does their response mean and are there potential ramifications for the relationship with Moscow?


Lucian Kim, NPR Moscow correspondent: The Russians cutting off the "deconfliction" line is pretty serious. (The U.S. and Russia set up a line between the Pentagon and Moscow to make sure they get out of each other's way in Syria, to alert the other if they will be operating on turf where the other country is.) Moscow viewed it as an accomplishment when they got it. It put them on a level with the Pentagon, where they were talking. It was a big shift. At the beginning of Russia's getting involved there, even to have one-on-one-contact with the U.S. was a prize. But now they cut that off.


Their response was quite tough. What does it mean? The rhetorical cease-fire is officially over. Their response was really fast. They had a statement up at 9 a.m. in five different languages. They never act that fast. They're really, really, really upset. They had such high hopes when Trump was elected.

「ロシア側の反応は厳しかった。それが何を意味するのか? 停戦は終わったのだ。彼らの反応は非常に早かった。彼らは、午前9時に5か国語で声明文を発表した。そのように素早く行動することはこれまでなかった。本当に怒っている。トランプが大統領になったとき、希望を抱いていたのに」

4. Secretary of State Tillerson is slated to go to Moscow next week. He's someone who got a medal of "friendship" from Russian President Putin, but is now talking tough about Russia's role in all this. How much pressure is he facing and can he prove his mettle on this upcoming trip?


Kelemen: Already, U.S. officials said that the chemical weapons attack was going to "cloud" Tillerson's discussions. He was going to explore the possibility of cooperating with Russia in the fight against ISIS. Now, the Russians have cut off the "deconfliction" talks with the U.S. There was already something of a showdown at the United Nations Friday.


U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley called the bombing a "measured step" but warned that the U.S. is "prepared to do more, but we hope that will not be necessary." Syria's ambassador said it "strongly condemns the act of aggression," and Russia's ambassador called on the U.S. "to immediately cease its aggression" and instead to join efforts to find a political settlement in Syria and combat terrorism.


Russia, which as Kim notes, had high hopes for the U.S. relationship, is in a bind. Dobson points out that Russia was not only upset with the U.S., but with Assad for carrying out the apparent chemical weapons attack.


5. Given the tensions, was it the right thing to tell the Russians beforehand?


Kelemen: The U.S. had to let the Russians know because there were apparently some Russian service members there. One of the arguments in the past for not striking Syria was that it would draw the U.S. into direct conflict with Russia.


Dobson: Yes, agree with Michele. Russian troops are intermingled with Syrian troops. It was essential to warn the Russians or risk escalating the strike into a wider conflict. Plus, if you want Moscow to assist in any way, you must give them this notice. Shortly before the strike, Putin's spokesman said that Russia's support for Assad wasn't "unconditional."


6. How does this change Trump's calculus going forward?


This is a key question, because being interventionist runs counter to much of how Trump campaigned. Not only did he say in 2013 that Obama should not attack Syria, but he said of Hillary Clinton in a statement on his website during the 2016 campaign:


"We're spending $6 trillion dollars on wars in the Middle East, while our own country falls into total disrepair. Now Hillary wants to start a shooting war in Syria, in conflict with a nuclear-armed Russia, which could lead to World War 3. As her own team has said in WikiLeaks emails, she has 'terrible' instincts."


On Thursday night, Clinton called for bombing the airfields from where the chemical attacks were allegedly launched. And that's exactly what Trump authorized.


Tamara Keith, NPR White House correspondent: It's unclear how this will affect Trump's calculus. His ideology was not only more isolationist on the campaign trail, but as recently as Tuesday of this week, he told the Building Trades Unions National Legislative Conference: "We enriched foreign countries at the expense of our own country, the great United States of America. But those days are over. I'm not — and I don't want to be — the president of the world. I'm the president of the United States. And from now on, it's going to be America First."


Mary Louise Kelly, NPR national security correspondent, makes a similar point: How do you square Thursday night's action with Trump's unilateralist, "America First" doctrine? This was a line from his big address to Congress on Feb. 28: "America must put its own citizens first, because only then can we truly make America great again."

「安全保障担当のマリールイースも同じことを指摘する: 木曜日のアメリカの行動とトランプのアメリカ第一主義はどうやって折り合いをつけるのか? 2月28日の彼の議会での演説の一節である。「アメリカは先ず国民を第一に考えなければならない。何故ならば、そうしてこそ再び偉大なアメリカにすることができるからだ」

Clearly, Trump, though, was affected by the pictures that were sprawled across cable news.


Kelemen: Tillerson's argument was that if the U.S. didn't act, it would normalize the use of chemical weapons.


One big, open question that NPR's national security correspondent David Welna asks is why the U.S. did not enlist any other allies in this strike. Trump spoke to European allies who backed the action, but Britain, for example, "said it would not participate if asked," the Washington Post reported.


What about Trump's refugee ban? Does this change anything with that? No. As NPR White House correspondent Scott Horsley points out, White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters before the strike that the president supports the creation of "safe zones" inside Syria.

「トランプの移民禁止については、どうか? これは、そのことに影響するのか? いいえ。政治部のスコットホースリーが指摘するように、スパイサー報道官は、この空爆の前に記者に対して、大統領はシリアの国内に安全地帯を作る案を支持すると述べている」

"Every country's No. 1 priority is to its own people and the protection of them," Spicer said. "We've got to do what we can to make sure that as we seek to root out ISIS and terrorism throughout the country — throughout the world, rather, that we don't, at the same time, do things that would bring those same threats to our country."


Spicer didn't respond to an email following up after the strike if Trump's view has changed at all.


7. Stepping back, was this lawful? Even if it was a one-off, what is the justification for it?

「この空爆は合法なのか? 1回限りのものだったとして、合法である根拠は何か?」

On the whole, Democrats and Republicans supported Trump's move. But almost everyone in Congress said Trump would have to go to Congress for approval of wider action. And, as NPR congressional correspondent Susan Davis said on the NPR podcast Up First, Trump would almost certainly want to get that approval from Congress since it has to appropriate funds.


"Assad's use of chemical weapons to slaughter civilians was a heinous crime as well as a violation of international norms and Syria's commitments to give up chemical weapons," Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., said in a statement Friday. "It could not go unpunished."


Davis: Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said on Good Morning America Friday morning that the president had the legal authority within the 2014 deal struck with Russia to rid Syria of chemical weapons.


"He was dealing with exigent circumstances, and as the commander in chief, not only does he have the right, he has an obligation to act," Rubio said.


He also said on CNN and Fox that American personnel in the region could have been at risk. But Bowman points out that U.S. troops are not anywhere near that area; they're many miles away, just north of Raqqa, where there are Marines, Green Berets and Army Rangers.


Bowman: The legal rationale is the responsibility-to-protect concept used in Libya and the Balkans. Essentially, that says, if a country sees genocide or slaughter, it should do what's necessary to protect innocent civilians. But an international body is supposed to approve. The U.N. Security Council signed off in Libya and NATO signed off in the Balkans.
































On Tuesday Syrian President Bashar al-Assad launched a horrible chemical attack on innocent civilians using a deadly nerve agent.


Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children.


It was a slow and brutal death for so many.


Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered at this very barbaric attack.


No child of God should ever suffer such horror.


Tonight I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched.


It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.


There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the U.N. Security Council.


Numerous previous attempts at changing Assad's behavior have all failed, and failed
very dramatically.


As a result, the refugee crisis continues to deepen and the region continues to destabilize, threatening the United States and its allies.


Tonight I call on all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types.


We ask for God's wisdom as we face the challenge of our very troubled world.


We pray for the lives of the wounded and for the souls of those who passed.


And we hope that as long as America stands for justice, that peace and harmony will, in the end, prevail.


Good night and God bless America and the entire world.