♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ announcer: funding for presentation of this program

is provided by... nicole: at bdo i feel like a true individual, people value me for me, they care about what i want, my needs, my career path, i matter here. announcer: funding was also provided by, the freeman foundation. and by judy and peter blum kovler foundation, pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs. announcer: and now, "bbc news" ♪ christian: hello. i'm christian fraser sumi somaskanda. this is "the context" from washington on bbc news. >> if the price came down, the russia-ukraine war would end

immediately. right now the price is high enough that the war will continue. >> it was really strong message and strong signal. we needed to increase pressure on russia and force russia to negotiate. >> when an election is stolen from the american people by an illegitimate regime, drastic times call for drastic measures. sumi: joining us on the panel, former speechwriter for president obama to my right and former u.s. federal prosecutor. hello, and welcome to our special edition of "the context" live from washington. a reminder that at this hour and every day at this time, we will be focused on donald trump's second term. today the president was in a bullish mood, speaking to the world economic forum in davos, he warned against companies -- unless companies produce goods in america, they would face

trillions of dollars in tariffs, with a much feared universal tariff that the president had been promising during the campaign. christian: there is little cheer in this for the europeans. the president criticized the eu for perceived unfair practices. he complained about the regulations which he said were slowing down investment. and once again he pressed partners within nato to increase their defense spending to 5%. many of them are nowhere near that mark. pres. trump: i'm also going to ask all nato nations to increase defense spending to 5% of gdp, which is what it should have been years ago. it was only 2%, and most nations didn't pay until i came along. i insisted that they pay, and they did because the united states was paying the difference at that time, and it was unfair to the united states. christian: meredith crowley is professor of economics at the university of cambridge. she has advised banks and

companies in the u.s., the u.k., and europe. he talked openly about tariffs today. by now we know that he means it. what we don't know is whether he is thinking of a universal baseline for tariffs or whether it is going to vacillate betting on which country you are in. do you think it is a negotiating tactic, or does he not really know? >> i think it is a negotiating tactic. i think he is threatening the universal tariff because he wants particular things from particular countries. he has long said he wants european union, nato members to increase their spending on defense. i think the threat is a high tariff on european imports, and he will back down from that. in the 2018 e ra he did threaten canada and mexico with high tariffs. he got some concessions from them in the revised trade agreement with canada and mexico, called the usmca, and so

he backed down on that that's a fire tariffs there. with china he put the tariffs on, the chinese retaliated. we have been basically in that same position since 2018, we still have a very high tariffs i china from the u.s. but there is room to put more on because some goods come to the u.s. from china still at very low tariffs. christian: it was an interesting line on energy. he said "absolutely we will make an energy with the rep and see it through," talking specifically about lng gas. the european union said in davos this week it is open to this idea of buying more gas from the united states. you think this might be one of the ways that they can see off tariffs as a tit-for-tat? meredith: actually, this is one were probably the european union and the united states would like more liquefied natural gas stations in europe. one of the issues was in the united states historically because of some sort of green

energy development initiatives, various funding sources weren't available for the creation of new liquefied natural gas decompression facilities. if you put gas in a boat in the u.s. and ship it somewhere to europe, you need a facility where they can decompress that gas out of a ship and into a pipeline, and that is expensive to build. some regulation in the u.s. side was restricting funding from that. so he could probably do something like that. that might be one solution. it sets back the climate mitigation goals that people might have in europe, but at the same time they would like less reliance on russian gas. christian: just looking at oil futures, they are down this afternoon because he is trying to put pressure on opec. he think the oil price is supporting the russian war in ukraine. how open do you think opec would be to cutting prices? meredith: that is a tough one.

i'm not really an expert on opec. i think, again, trump likes to do these one-for-one deals. if there is something he can offer one of the big opec members, maybe they will be willing to increase supply to get that price down. he's a negotiator. i don't know specifically what he is offering different countries in opec, though. christian: clearly the overall message was comeo and do business in the united states, and if you come, you will benefit from a very low corporate tax rate. at the same time he is saying we are going to obliterate debt. the debt is pretty high in the united states, and the last time he cut taxes it went up another $2 trillion. can you cut taxes to the extent he wants to do and also reduce debt? meredith: i think his tax policy is he is throwing out a lot of numbers that don't make sense. he keeps telling americans that we are going to raise a lot of money from tariff revenue, and

this tariff revenue money will raise is going to come from china. we 100% no that is not the case. the taxes he is raising are just taxing american consumers. lots of studies have proven that. you lower taxes, you can induce some investment to shift into the united states, but getting into a tax competition war is not a great position for the u.s. to be. if you cut taxes, it is pretty hard to pay back the debt. it's a trade-off -- if you cut taxes, you get a short sugar rush of economic growth and a could be some tax benefit there. christian: meredith crowley, good to talk to you. thank you very much for that. there were gasps of horror in the hall when he said that canada could become a state of the united states. he said it is a good way of relating the trade deficit with canada. is that a negotiating

tactic? >> when donald trump points to traditional republicans like george w. bush and mitt romney, he would say those are globalists. he is a nationalist nes touch on the curve of his voting base that it is america first first first, the bad guys are europe, china, canada, and mexico come and if he could enact tariffs or trade shields or undo nafta and trade deals that go from the 1990's backward, he could somehow fix this problem. that may have got him votes. now he has to come through, and his vernacular is going to be a lot harder to get to results than simply please a voting base. sumi: it's a little bit of a carrot and a lot of a stick, isn't it? he's essentially saying come do business in the u.s., but if you don't, you will face terrace. >> the thing about trump fundamentally as a person, he's a bully and he has enjoyed bullying people and now he gets to bully nations, and i imagine for him that is even more fun. but part of that is in the short

term he might get results because it is scary. in the long-term it is very difficult, it is unpredictable, and he is not trustworthy. we will see a lot of countries trying to deal frankly in the same way a lot of americans and states are trying to deal with this, this blitz of things he is doing in his political honeymoon, but there's this question of longer-term he is never going to be satisfied, so how do you ride that out and how do you figure out a different type of structure to push back? sumi: donald trump say he is not a bully, but a businessman who knows how to make a good deal. joe, 15% corporate tax rate, is that possible? joe: if you could solve the deficit crisis by reducing taxes can we would've done it a long time ago. you can spur a certain amount of additional investment and create some jobs, but you are going to cut into revenues ultimately and you are going to drive up the deficit and the national debt. you can't do both. notice how originally he was blustery about we will cut $2 trillion from the budget, and i

was quickly backed off. when you put aside defense spending and entitlements and debt service, you look at discretionary spending, there is not a lot you can do with that without really getting to the american public. cutting taxes, cutting spending, it sounds great, but it is going to be really difficult to actually get some results based on this political rhetoric that sounds great during the campaign but when you do the math doesn't add up. christian: but just in terms of american interests and security, i think jamie dimon, top financier, was saying today that the question about whether this is inflationary if you put tariffs on goods coming into the united states, he says it may be, but if it gets europeans to move on regulation, if it gets countries to shift in the direction the white house wants countries to go in, then what's wrong with that. joe: i think what jamie dimon was essentially saying was please, president trump, don't get mad at me, jamie dimon. he is good at that. i think that again, tariffs as a

general rule are not something that is off-limits. the president has a lot of power over them. the biggest issue that trump is facing right now, and this is part of the turning rhetoric into action, is most voters who put trump over the edge did so because of the economy. they didn't really like a lot of the other stuff he talked about and they hoped he wouldn't do it, or at least hoped the economic stuff would cancel that out. tariffs are not going to be good for american consumers, almost no one things that. they will not be good for the debt or deficit. now trump says i have this tool, it is going to hurt the people i said i'm going to help, but i don't have the dexterity to walk away from it. we are in this precarious spot. christian: of all the executive orders he signed in the last week, the bold statements about the golden age returning to the united states, what would you put your finger on that is going to bring down grocery prices for people in america?

joe: i mean, look, again -- i agree with david that the number one thing trump voters voted on was the economy. i'm not sure i agree with him on not anything else. that is going to be the most challenging. enacting tariffs, talking about closing the borders, talking by favoring american workers, i don't see how any of that reduces inflation and reduces prices. that is going to require congressional action, going to require time. but again, probably the number one issue he is going to be judged on over time. sumi: obviously inflation is sticky. to bring it down in case is not easy. -- days is not easy. democrats are looking at the number of days he has been in office and has not brought down the price of eggs. that is policy with a much longer runway. david: it is fun for democrats who are not having fun these

days. sumi: fair. david: and in fairness, trump said he is going to bring down prices on day one, so let's judge him by the promises he made that helped him win votes. when you look at the long-term policy, it is hard to protect what will happen with inflation and everything else. it is the nature of life. but if you look at what trump is proposing, there is a reason the big consumer--based companies, not tech companies, are not all in on trump right now. they are worried about the stuff they don't want to be public about it, but they are not celebrating him. they are scared of what he's going to do to american consumers and the economy. christian: incidentally, we talk about bullying, and the moment when one of the moderators, when and, --moynahan, the ceo, and he said it would be good if your bank wasn't debanking conservatives. it was this flavor of if you tangle with donald trump, he will come for you. david: he's not saying it would

be good if your bank get things that would be good for the economy. all that he is focused on is his movement,'s ideology, is hard-core base. christian: certainly get support from nigel farajge, no doubt. we will take a short break. around the world and across the u.k., you are watching bbc news.

christian: one aspect of the trump agenda which we focused on a lot this week which may have a detrimental impact on the companies gathered in davos is the president's policies on immigration. one reason the american economy has been growing is the availability of cheap labor, foreign workers that accounted for 88% of the growth in the workforce over the past 45 years. sumi: but president trump was elected to deal with illegal immigration, and he has moved very quickly. yesterday he ordered 1500

troops to the border to reinforce security. illegal migrants entering the u.s. will no longer be able to seek asylum. they no longer have access to immigration judges or asylum officers, despite the obligations the u.s. has under domestic and international law. from now on foreigners deemed detrimental to the bus from countries with communicable diseases will be blocked from entry. let's talk about that now with the president and ceo of the u.s. committee for refugees and immigrantss. welcome to "the context," thank you for joining us. can you give us a sense of the real impact it would have on people to not be able to apply for asylum at the u.s. border? >> well, i think beside the asylum question of the border, mostly from texas border, it is significant. in terms of there is also the suspension of the refugee program. we have resettled over 3 million refugees since 1980, and a lot

of these refugees have been going through the process waiting to come to the united states. effective january 21, all flights, all processing has been stopped. you have the asylum issue and then you have the refugee issues. refugees spent decades in refugee camps and sometimes the average refugee stayed 17 years in refugee camp. we bring maybe .1% of the global refugee to the u.s. that program is as of -- sumi: eskinder, can i ask you in particular on the question of refugees, what donald trump is that is the u.s. does not have resources to provide for these refugees because they are needed for americans what is your response to that? eskinder repo: the response for refugees usually comes from the community, from the volunteers from the community. the u.s. government's

contribution to the refugee program in terms of dollars is very small. i will give you one example, the refugee program gets $2000 to resettle a single refugee with housing, providing clothing, including transportation. the public partnership we have with the administration since 1980 is the public actually provide a lot of services. most of the refugees is with the help of local institutions. sumi: right, there is a lot of community help on that. on the question of asylum and seeking asylum, the argument that has been made by donald trump's supporters and indeed in other countries, europe we should cite, is that the asylum system is being abused by people who want to enter the country and aren't necessarily facing persecution, onto necessarily facing violence at home. is that the case? does the asylum system itself need to be reformed?

eskinder: i don't think the sound system doesn't need to be reformed --the asylum system doesn't need to be reformed. but the process is you have the right to apply for asylum and the host country has discretion to determine whether you have credible fears to go back to your country. we are not saying that every asylum application should be approved, but we are saying every asylum application should be reviewed and go through the due process that we have. sumi: andy trump administration is saying with the remaining mexico policy-- remain in mexico policy, those applications can be processed, just not in the u.s. do you think that would be a good pathway for some of those people seeking to access asylum? eskinder: well, i don't believe so. sickle has its o -- mexico has its own migration. have offices in mexico and we see a lot of migrants coming to

mexico and staying in mexico. so the question is since the asylum-seekers are coming not just from central america, we have clients from all over the world, they should be given due process. mexico is not the best place or best solution for asylum application. people should be granted to apply asylum. it's our government's responsibility to determine when and how they might want to make a decision. we have a system that has been around for many, many decades. whether it needs additional resources, it is a different story. sumi: very good to have you on "the context" on bbc news. thank you very much. and joe, you could certainly say that the economy was the number one issue in the polls, donald trump and many of his supporters in the inner circle believe it was immigration that won the election. joe: it's possible. there is no doubt that donald

trump secured a significant amount of support on his promise that he would be much tougher than joe biden on the border. going back to his own policies. like anything else with the american voter, it is a spectrum. if you tell the typical voter we are going to emphasize the deportation of criminal, illegal aliens convicted of violent crimes, everybody would say great. what about illegal aliens convicted of nonviolent crimes? ok. what about illegal aliens who had been deported once and came back? ok. what about an illegal alien who live here his whole life and obey the laws and had children in schools and got married? at some point people are going to say i am not so comfortable with his can i do not want donald trump to go that far. as far as asylum-seekers, one unfortunate thing that many of donald trump's detractors have kind of use that term too broadly to say basically anyone here who is undocumented is in asylum-seekers. that is not true, and it degrades the value of true

asylum-seekers, which is a completely legitimate process. most americans support that. if you see him eroding that ability or watering it down, eventually you will get pushback from people who say i voted for one thing -- christian: assuming that is right, we have seen the same debate in europe, people have been open to asylum-seekers and refugees. the complicated countries economic migrants coming in. that said, there is international law which protects asylum-seekers and refugees. is in breach --is the united states with his executive order in breach of that law? joe: possibly. you have to look at the asylum-seekers -- christian: they don't get access to a judge, they just go back. joe: that is where american law and international law incorporates executive orders can only go so far. what is done by an executive

order can be undone by a subsequent order. once the order starts encroaching into statute or court decisions, that is when someone can go to court and say this has to be reviewed. you might get a flurry of these executive orders from trump the first few days. the vast majority will probably be maintained, but there will be some like this that are ripe for challenge. christian: that is what has happened today in seattle. first legal challenges donald trump's attempts to end birthright citizenship, the judge said it was a blatant, flagrant breach of the constitution, amendment 14. david: i almost think that "bla grant" might be the right word. [laughter] sumi: we have created a new word here. david: but i think that is the point, that trump -- a good question if you are trying to understand donald trump's behavior is what does he think he can get away with. he is trying to get away with as much as he can, and i think that trump is taking an interesting

approach to the constitution -- christian: i think we have got it on the scene, "all persons born or naturalized in the united states and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the united states. no state shall make or enforce any law which will abridge those privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states." it is a blatant overwriting of the constitution. joe: it has always widely been considered as such. here's the tricky part, that language in the middle, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." the executive order is going to save that only covers one person born here if one parent is a legal resident or citizen. believe it or not, even though this has been around since 1865, the supreme court has never ruled on the depth and breadth of the 14th amendment. donald trump knew his executive order was going to be state. he is playing for a fight. christian: he's going all the

way. david: as far as i know, his executive orders interesting. they could've gone slightly smaller, still totally unconstitutional, but only say if both parents are unauthorized immigrants, their parents aren't a citizen. instead they cover people who are here with legal authorization. the argument that we say -- i am not a lawyer, but i'm a human. the idea that we say if you come here and we have authorized you to come here and you are under our jurisdiction, and also you are not under our jurisdiction by the constitution, i mean, it doesn't take a lot of imagination to see why that is a little ridiculous. i think it's an example of how far they are trying to go. this is not just about undocumented or unauthorized immigrants. this is about immigrants in general, including donald trump's father would not have been a citizen under this law, and neither would, i believe, usha vance. sumi: or kamala harris, for that

matter. david: i don't know if trump would have minded that one is much. joe: just because that is the way we have treated it since 1865, if my wife and i had a child in england, that child is not a citizen. no other country does this. what donald trump is saying -- is he being aggressive? absolutely. is he pulling for a fight? absolutely. maybe it is time our supreme court decides what this language means, and may be a means what it appears to be. sumi: much more to discuss on these ex announcer: funding for presentation of this program is provided by... announcer: funding was also provided by, the freeman foundation. and by judy and peter blum kovler foundation, pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs. ♪ ♪ announcer: "usa today" calls it,

"arguably the best bargain in streaming." that's because the free pbs app lets you watch the best of pbs anytime, anywhere.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ announcer: funding for presen