The TOI correspondent from Washington: US President Donald Trump has long treated numbers the way a toddler treats Lego blocks: useful, colorful, and fungible – depending on the story he wants to weave. The latest example comes from “Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump,” a new book by New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, which portrays a White House where official statistics sometimes have the life expectancy of a snowflake in a microwave, particularly if they happened to contradict the President’s imagination. According to the book, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick presented data from the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) during a White House meeting showing that India’s tariffs on American goods were significantly lower than Trump has long believed. The numbers simply did not support the sky-high tariffs Trump wanted to impose on India, among the many countries he has accused of “ripping off the US” Lutnick’s contention did not go well with the Prez.“Nobody has … given me any numbers…You give me bulls**t numbers,” Trump reportedly exploded. Lutnick patiently explained that the figures came from USTR, but Trump was unmoved. “No, these are bulls**t numbers. These are f*****g bulls**t,” he remonstrated. Lutnick then turned to US Trade Rep Jamieson Greer for backup, saying, “Right, Jamieson? Jamieson, say these numbers are real. Jamieson, speak up.” Greer, choosing professional longevity over statistical integrity, allegedly said absolutely nothing. Lutnick then turned to White House economic adviser and tariff attack-dog Peter Navarro, pleading, “tell him you agree with him.” Navarro, naturally, sided with Trump.House Speaker Mike Johnson was the lone voice of sanity, warning that unchecked tariffs would decimate the American automotive sector. “Okay, fine, I’ll own it,” Trump reportedly replied, and own it he did. The result was a tariff regime that eventually slapped a staggering 50 percent rate on New Delhi, the highest imposed on any major trading partner and a move that sent U.S-India relations into a tailspin.It was not the first time Trump was trying to nail India with fake numbers whose origins no one knew of. During an earlier meeting of the Technology CEO Council in the Roosevelt Room, Trump tried to pressure tech executives from major firms like IBM, Dell, and Intel to build factories domestically. To illustrate how poorly he believed the US was treated by trading partners, he claimed: “We’re treated so unfairly. China tariffs us over 150 to 200 per cent, India 175 per cent.“On its part, New Delhi never really challenged Trump’s numbers, perhaps reluctant to take him on directly. The reality is India’s average applied tariff rate sits nowhere near 175%. According to the World Trade Organization (WTO), India’s standard trade-weighted average tariff rate generally hovers around 10% to 12%. While India does maintain notoriously high tariffs on very specific, isolated luxury items (such as a 150% tariff on imported alcoholic spirits), claiming a blanket 175% rate across American trade was a total fabrication, but no one could convince Trump of this – not even official U.S trade data. Government statistics are often challenged in America – by economists who publish papers contesting them, think tanks that issue reports parsing them, and lawmakers who commission studies to understand them. Trump often chooses Option D: Yell at the numbers until they change. This is the same president who has repeatedly claimed that 25 million illegal immigrants flooded into the US under former President Joe Biden, a figure that would have increased the US population by 8 per cent in just four years. It is also the same president who has boasted that his policies reduced drug prices by 600, 700, or even 800 percent — mathematically impossible unless pharma companies pay patients to consume medication.The book also reveals that Trump’s warped view of India isn’t limited to the trade floor; it also extends to international peacekeeping. Just ten days after the inauguration, during a January 30 Oval Office meeting to establish “commander’s intent” for ending the Russia-Ukraine war, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg presented the “America First Plan.” The proposal suggested deploying peacekeeping troops from France, Britain, and the Netherlands to enforce a ceasefire.Vice President JD Vance raised concerns, noting that putting Nato boots on the ground would poke the Russian bear; he asked if non-European nations could step up, specifically name-dropping Saudi Arabia or India. According to Haberman and Swan, “Trump chuckled.”“The Indians won’t do that. They won’t pay for something like that,” the President reportedly said, noting that while PM Modi “really liked him” and wanted to visit the White House, “the Indians do not ever pay for anything.” He added he had no problem if Britain or France wanted to send their own troops to the slaughter, as long as the US didn’t have to foot the bill.Ultimately, the book suggests that the administration’s “feelings over facts” foreign policy has achieved the near-impossible: plunging US-India ties to their lowest point since the Cold War, while a parallel trade war with China spectacularly backfired due to Beijing’s monopoly on rare earth minerals. But as history shows, when you can invent your own percentages, every disaster can be calculated as an absolute win.
