Video: Sen. Mark Warner Comments on Trump’s Across-the-Board Tariffs as Taxes That Will Sharply Raise Prices; the Crucial Importance of Nonpoliticization of the Military; Musk/Ramaswamy Attacking the Federal Workforce; etc.

fSee below for video of Sen. Mark Warner’s latest press availability, held earlier this afternoon. A few highlights include:

• “Second issue is the question of some of the new president’s policy proposals that he’s put out. [Trump]’s talked a lot about tariffs, and I know Mr. Trump has said tariffs is a great word. I hope Americans realize that a tariff is basically a tax on a good that comes from another country and on that product coming in, is simply passed on to the consumer. Now every party has a president has used tariffs in a selected way, so this is not Democrat, Republican, to go after select industries where there may be cheating or the balance of trade is so out of whack. But when President-elect Trump says he’s going to do across-the-board, in some cases 100%, 200% tariffs or even the 20%, 25% he’s talking about for example with Canada, our biggest trading partner, what that means is for example if you buy an iPhone for 650 bucks, it may end up being 800 bucks; if you buy your kid a bike, that maybe only cost 45 bucks if it’s imported, it’s now going to cost 60 bucks. And that’s at the low end of the the tariff proposals. So selected use, particularly against a country like China and some of the National Security areas, count me in. An across-the-board tariff, regardless of whether the country is an ally or a foe, that’s going to drive inflation, that’s going to drive costs up, and folks just need to understand what is potentially coming.”
• “I would argue the question you talk about Virginia’s military is critically important – and the independence of our military and the nonpolitification of our military. But I am also watching as chairman of the intelligence committee about an equal concern I have about the politicization of our intelligence community. I mean the role of the intelligence community is to speak truth to power even if the power doesn’t want to hear the truth. And if that gets politicized, we are in a heap of trouble. So… I’ve followed in the press the Secretary of
  Defense potential challenges; I think there’s a lot of my  Republican Senators who…are really unsettled. I don’t have the slightest idea who if he would withdraw who president Trump would pick…you know, I thought I would be used to his surprises, but a lot of these choices have literally surprised me…these jobs – Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence – they are extraordinarily serious jobs and they require serious people…you shouldn’t be ruled out for being a partisan by any means – both sides have appointed former Senators for example as Secretary of Defense – but once you take these positions, your obligation has to be to the constitution, in particular when we’re talking about the military and the intelligence community, to maintain its independence. That has been the strength of our nation. We see countries all over the world that I think, for a long time, Americans said could never happen here, where the military becomes the pawn of a political party and they usually end up with coup after coup. The American military has never been party to those kind of activities. I think it is probably the most essential characteristic of this new administration that we keep our military independent and that we keep our intelligence community independent and for that matter I should also put in obviously the Department of Justice. When those become simply tools of a political agenda, our country’s got real problems.”
• “…with the Speaker having such a small margin in the House and he has to get elected again as Speaker in early January, I hope that kind of internal House Republican politics does not delay this needed [Hurricane Helene] assistance. And again, I’ve said it a dozen times, this assistance to Virginia and Southwest Virginians in particular in need is not charity – it is your right as an American, it’s what we pay taxes for, and it would be disgraceful if that got kicked over into the new year.”
• “I was disappointed that President Biden went back on his own commitment [not to pardon Hunter Biden]. I understand that as a dad, those feelings. But you know he made so many times that he wasn’t going to do it. And the idea that we’re going to just do more to undermine the public’s faith in rule of law. Am I concerned about how president-elect Trump might weaponize the Justice Department? Yes. But I also am  concerned that having been in this Capitol on January 6th when it was brutally attacked and law enforcement officers were wounded and a few actually died in the aftermath, you do this and then suddenly there’s a blanket pardon to everybody on January 6th…That was an insurrection. And then going forward, a lot of folks in our country have lost faith that our federal government is really looking out in a fair way and that everybody ought to be treated the same under law. I think the pardon power should be only used in extraordinary circumstances. I had that power as as Governor…the notion of willy-nilly going out and pardoning or preemptively pardoning or back and forth for most Virginia for most Americans it just says some people get treated a totally different way than everyone else and that’s not good for our system.” [NOTE: New YouGov polling indicates that the *vast* majority of Democrats approve of the Hunter Biden pardon, while the vast majority of Republicans – and most independents – oppose it. Also note that, regardless of what President Biden does or doesn’t do, Trump’s going to be Trump, which means corruption, lawlessness, etc.]
• “First of all, you I’m an advocate for greater
  government efficiency; I’m very proud of the fact that when I was governor of Virginia, we got named best managed state. And we did a lot of things like changing our procurement processes, trying to bring more technology. Count me
  in on government efficiency. And I think there are clearly ways in the federal government where I’ve seen a lot of inefficiency. But the idea and you’ve heard Mr. Ramaswamy and Mr. Musk says, he’s not really looking for efficiency, he’s just trying to cut the federal government for the sake of cutting. That is the *opposite* of bringing efficiency. The vast majority of federal workers could make a lot more money if they had dedicated their careers maybe on the private sector side. They do this out of a sense of public service. The idea that you’re going to cut out wide swathes of the Justice Department or individuals who’ve worked the defense area, and we’re talking about not just federal workers but government contractors – that *undermines* efficiency. And the ridiculous idea, let’s take the intelligence community, which most of it is located in the greater Capital Area, the ability for somebody from the CIA to go to the NSA or get over to the NGO or NRO and do that with a 20-minute drive as opposed to flying across the country, and that ability to collaborate. You know, you look at successful companies, they’re more about collocating to bring about efficiency. This to me sounds like it’s political mischief, it sounds to me that it’s kind of an attack against the federal workforce. And if there’s not proven efficiency, me and others will stand up against this. And I’ve been urging my friends in the business community, who particularly were supporters of President Trump, to go to this Administration and say, dismiss what the effect it would have on our DMV region which would be devastating, or what effect it would have potentially on Hampton Roads which would be devastating, but just think from a business standpoint, eliminating some of your most experienced folks…you can’t replace that overnight…So
  efficiency, count me in. Hacking off a government workforce just to try to drive down numbers or because you’ve got a vendetta against people who’ve committed their life to public service, whether it be in the public sector as government workers, or for that matter I count a lot of folks particularly from the military who still support our nation on the private sector government contractor side, count me as a stalwart opponent against those.”
• “I think you got to treat a president’s picks with respect, but
  you’ve also got to do a due diligence process. It’s why on all these positions – and clearly [Loudoun County] Sheriff Chapman’s got a lot of good background in this area [to potentially lead DEA] – but that’s why in all of these, you’ve got to have an open process, you’ve got to do a background check, you’ve got to have a public hearing – not just for our job, but frankly the American public is owed that, particularly when we were talking about these major major positions…Donald Trump is always coming through with surprising picks, and I know the first individual dropped out um but I have worked well with Sheriff Chapman in his office over the years.”