US Tariffs: Who Is Lindsey Graham, Senator Who Warned Trump Would 'Crush' India's Economy?
In an explicit warning to India, China and Brazil, US Senator Lindsey Graham has cautioned that President Donald Trump plans to enforce hefty tariffs on nations that keep importing oil from Russia. In a recent Fox News interview, Graham said: 'Trump is going to impose tariffs on people that buy Russian oil—China, India, and Brazil," arguing that the countries were helping fund the war in Ukraine as they accounted for around 80 per cent of Russia's crude exports.
Graham, while addressing Putin directly, said: 'You have played President Trump at your own peril. You made a major league mistake, and your economy is going to continue to be crushed. We're flowing weapons to Ukraine, so Ukraine will have the weapons to fight Putin back."
WHO IS LINDSEY GRAHAM?
Graham graduated from the University of South Carolina in 1977, with a Bachelor in Arts degree in psychology. He also holds a law degree from the University of South Carolina School of Law with a Juris Doctor in 1981, the Hindustan Times reported.
From 1982-1988, Graham actively served in the United States Air Force as a member of the Judge Advocate General's Corps. He served as both a defence attorney and chief prosecutor before being assigned to Rhein-Main Air Base in Frankfurt. In 2014, Graham was honoured with the prestigious Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service and was promoted to the rank of colonel.
Graham's political journey began in the US House of Representatives, where he made history in 1994 as the first Republican to win South Carolina's Third Congressional District since 1877.
A Republican Senator from South Carolina, Graham has been a well-known figure in Washington since his election to the Senate in 2002. He also secured re-election in 2008, 2014 and 2020.
At present, Graham serves as chairman of the senate budget committee and is a part of several other influential panels, including the senate appropriations, judiciary, and environment and public works committees.
Graham was a vocal critic of Donald Trump's earlier presidential campaign and openly stated that he did not support him. In a tweet on X in May 2016, he said: 'If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed…and we will deserve it." The dynamic shifted in 2017 after a meeting with the President, marking a turning point for Graham. From that point on, he emerged as one of Trump's most steadfast allies, frequently speaking out in his support.
view comments
First Published:
July 22, 2025, 15:04 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
19 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump plans to rescind scientific finding that allows US fund fight against climate change threats: Report
The Trump administration is preparing to eliminate the legal and scientific cornerstone of the federal government's climate change policy. A draft Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposal, not yet public, would rescind the 2009 'endangerment finding' that identified greenhouse gas emissions as a threat to human health and welfare. Legal foundation of climate policy targeted As reported by The New York Times, two individuals familiar with the draft explained that the EPA intends to roll back the finding without directly challenging the scientific consensus that emissions from fossil fuels contribute to global warming. Instead, the administration reportedly plans to argue that the EPA exceeded its legal authority when it issued a sweeping declaration under the Clean Air Act. The endangerment finding, developed during the Obama administration in response to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, provided the legal basis for federal rules limiting emissions from vehicles, power plants and industrial sources. If repealed, the decision would not only nullify existing environmental protections but also prevent future administrations from reinstating similar measures without starting over legally and scientifically. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Tailpipe emission rules also in crosshairs The draft rule also includes a proposal to revoke federal limits on vehicle emissions that were designed to speed up the transition to electric cars. The transportation sector is currently the largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in the US. The EPA is expected to argue that such regulations, based on the endangerment finding, cause harm to consumers by limiting vehicle choice and increasing prices rather than improving public health. Reports described the EPA's framing as an economic one—suggesting that federal efforts to reduce carbon emissions come at too great a financial cost. Administrator Lee Zeldin, in earlier remarks reported by The Washington Post, emphasised the need to balance environmental goals with energy security and economic freedom, framing the review of the endangerment finding as part of the administration's broader deregulatory agenda. Environmental and legal experts cited by both newspapers have expressed deep concern over the proposed rollback. The New York Times noted that critics see this move as a direct challenge to the Supreme Court's Massachusetts vs EPA decision, which concluded that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Legal analysts told The Washington Post that any attempt to withdraw the endangerment finding could unravel the EPA's authority to act on climate altogether. Some believe the rule is unlikely to survive in court but warn that even temporary setbacks could paralyse climate action. Political motives? Behind the scenes, the proposal appears to have been shaped by former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, according to The Washington Post. Clark, who was involved in legal opposition to greenhouse gas regulations during the Bush administration, is believed to be a principal architect of the repeal. His past criticisms of the endangerment finding, especially its alleged failure to weigh economic consequences, have reportedly informed the draft rule's legal strategy. Instead of contesting climate science outright, the rule reportedly focusses on legal technicalities—arguing that the EPA's authority should be limited to addressing specific pollutants in narrowly defined contexts. This approach is designed to bypass the robust scientific basis of the original finding while aiming to avoid direct confrontation with the broader consensus on climate change. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A coordinated deregulatory effort The attempt to repeal the endangerment finding is one of many efforts by the Trump administration to reverse environmental protections. As The New York Times reported, the administration has already rolled back rules targeting emissions from fossil fuels, discouraged electric vehicle development and withdrawn the US from international climate commitments. David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defence Council, speaking to The Washington Post, was one of several legal experts who characterised the move as a strategy to weaken the Clean Air Act by denying the well-documented risks of climate pollution. Others noted that this rule could become the centrepiece of the administration's climate legacy—one that seeks to neutralise not just current regulations, but future ones as well. While the draft rule has not yet been formally released, the EPA was submitted to the White House for review on June 30. Once published, it will undergo a period of public comment, and potentially litigation, before becoming final. The outcome of this regulatory shift could have lasting consequences not only for current efforts to reduce emissions but also for America's long-term ability to respond to the growing climate crisis.
The Wire
23 minutes ago
- The Wire
The Gujarat Model: At a Dangerous Crossing
'He is incorruptible'; the middle-aged founder of a well-known chartered accountancy firm in Mumbai looked palpably thrilled. It was another of Mumbai's social get togethers following a business conference where India's supposedly best minds exchanged political gossip and fulminated on the state of the nation, including its celebrated potholes. 'He is ushering in changes. He looks like a man on a mission.', the exuberant gentleman continued, like a rollercoaster on steroids. I saw a Narendra Modi 'bhakt' long before that dodgy sobriquet became a national meme. The year was 2004. The Gujarat chief minister had already assiduously created a political narrative about himself, even as an ageing PM Atal Behari Vajpayee was selling the chimera of India Shining. But I am not easy pickings; we are not an argumentative nation for nothing. 'These things don't matter. They happen all the time' 'Do you endorse what happened in Gujarat in 2002? Is that okay? Does that not alone disqualify Modi from holding such an august office?'. The gentleman was unperturbed. If at all, he seemed stunned at my apparent naivete. He looked at me with a bemused expression of a laboratory scientist who was about to do a surgery on a trapped cockroach: "These things don't matter. They happen all the time'. Whataboutery would go on to become India's favorite sport on prime-time TV to rationalise the worst of shenanigans, corruption, violence, sectarianism and riots. Fast forward to 2014: Modi was the presumptive prime ministerial candidate of the BJP. He had graduated from being a regional satrap ( as TV anchors brand ambitious provincial leaders) into a national alternative. By that time, I had morphed from being a part-time, quasi-back-office analyst for the Congress to becoming its ubiquitous face on television networks. Modi willy-nilly would become the surname I encountered at every nook and corner. And on every show. 'Mr Jha, Modi stands for development', the popular bespectacled face who had mesmerised the nation with his trademark theatrics, was implacable. 'India needs his Gujarat model'. He sounded like the saffron party's campaigner-in-chief himself. ' Seriously? ', I pushed back. 'Are we saying that we have become a $ 2 trillion economy without development? Are you aware that India has grown at nearly 7.8% average GDP during 2004-14 and lifted over 140 million people out of poverty ? Yes, there are problems, but we are the global sweet spot after China. So what new 'development' are we talking about?'. It was my early discovery that facts, data, statistics and evidence mattered little in the noisy public discourse. Modi's Acche Din ( Happy days) was a precursor to what would be Donald Trump's astonishingly successful Make America Great Again ( MAGA) shibboleth that would transmogrify into a movement, a neo-Republican vote bloc. On every parameter, America was the dominant superpower in 2016, but Trump had altered the political conversation. Both Modi and Trump would go on to annihilate their beleaguered and stunned opponents. On July 11, 2025 , a bridge in Vadodara district of Gujarat collapsed. It killed 20 innocent people for no fault of theirs. Barring a tiny fleeting mention, the news cycle cursorily buried it. They cannot be blamed. When the Morbi bridge fell in October 2022, its death toll of 135 people did not affect the electorate whatsoever. The BJP returned to power in the assembly elections that were held just a few months later with a massive mandate. In Uttar Pradesh's Lakhimpur-Kheri, the son of the local Member of Parliament was arrested for driving his jeep mercilessly into protesting farmers in October 2021. In the assembly elections just five months later, the BJP won all 8 assembly seats in the Lok Sabha constituency with handsome margins. I was reminded of my unforgettable confabulation with the suited-booted corporate schmoozer in 2004: 'These things don't matter. They happen all the time'. But do they? And just because they happened in the past, true or exaggerated, must we silently condone the brazen dismantling of what was once a democratic and secular role model to the world? We were once a newly independent country that had boldly resurrected itself from a pulverised economy and a harrowing bloody partition, to embrace religious diversity and inclusive growth, and become a lighthouse to new societies battling seemingly irreconcilable contradictions. Societies pay a huge price for not just bad choices but even for temporary blind-sidedness. The Congress's underwhelming defense of itself led to an unprecedented wave of support for Modi, enough for its people to shockingly ignore the deadly pogrom of 2002, fake encounter killings, rise of crony capitalism, the ruthless decimation of dissenting voices, the unrelenting intimidation of brutalised minorities. A manufactured cult A cult was born, or more appropriately, manufactured. The Gujarat model is now trumpeted as Modi's India by his acolytes. In his model, all you do is build highways, expressways, metro lines, trains, ports and highways. And even have an eponymous cricket stadium. In her Pulitzer Prize winning book Autocracy Inc, author Anne Applebaum talks of disinformation, surveillance and propaganda as the trifecta of modern-day autocracies, democratically elected leaders who surreptitiously through regulatory and media capture change the destinies of nations. As I write, the Supreme Court calling out India's police state (Why are you fighting political battles, ED?) , and the alleged attempt by the Election Commission to disenfranchise voters in Bihar are a warning; Politicians may love power, but despots will never give it up. Even as Modi continues to boast about his infrastructure push, he has not yet understood the core principle of political leadership; societies need a bridge between communities before they pay their toll-tax for a shimmering patch of concrete. And tragically for Modi, even they are crumbling. And broken. Sanjay Jha is an author and former national spokesperson for the Congress. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Mint
26 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump to outline AI priorities amid tech battle with China
Trump to deliver what aides call a major speech on AI priorities White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks will join his co-hosts on the 'All-In' podcast to highlight AI efforts Trump expected to take more actions in upcoming weeks to help tech giants power AI industry By Jarrett Renshaw and Alexandra Alper July 23 - The Trump administration is set to release a new artificial intelligence blueprint on Wednesday that aims to relax American rules governing the industry at the center of a technological arms race between economic rivals the U.S. and China. President Donald Trump will mark the plan's release with a speech outlining the importance of winning an AI race that is increasingly seen as a defining feature of 21st-century geopolitics, with both China and the U.S. investing heavily in the industry to secure economic and military superiority. According to a summary seen by Reuters, the plan calls for the export of U.S. AI technology abroad and a crackdown on state laws deemed too restrictive to let it flourish, a marked departure from former President Joe Biden's "high fence" approach that limited global access to coveted AI chips. Top administration officials such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House National Economic Adviser Kevin Hassett are also expected to join the event titled "Winning the AI Race," organized by White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks and his co-hosts on the "All-In" podcast, according to an event schedule reviewed by Reuters. Trump may incorporate some of the plan's recommendations into executive orders that will be signed ahead of his speech, according to two sources familiar with the plans. Trump directed his administration in January to develop the plan. The event will be hosted by the Hill and Valley Forum, an informal supper club whose deep-pocketed members helped propel Trump's campaign and sketched out a road map for his AI policy long before he was elected. Trump is expected to take additional actions in the upcoming weeks that will help Big Tech secure the vast amounts of electricity it needs to power the energy-guzzling data centers needed for the rapid expansion of AI, Reuters previously reported. U.S. power demand is hitting record highs this year after nearly two decades of stagnation as AI and cloud computing data centers balloon in number and size across the country. The new AI plan will seek to bar federal AI funding from going to states with tough AI rules and ask the Federal Communications Commission to assess whether state laws conflict with its mandate, according to the summary. The Trump administration will also promote open-source and open-weight AI development and "export American AI technologies through full-stack deployment packages" and data center initiatives led by the Commerce Department, according to the summary. Trump is laser-focused on removing barriers to AI expansion, in stark contrast to Biden, who feared U.S. adversaries like China could harness AI chips produced by companies like Nvidia and AMD to supercharge its military and harm allies. Biden, who left office in January, imposed a raft of restrictions on U.S. exports of AI chips to China and other countries that it feared could divert the semiconductors to America's top global rival. Trump rescinded Biden's executive order aimed at promoting competition, protecting consumers and ensuring AI was not used for misinformation. He also rescinded Biden's so-called AI diffusion rule, which capped the amount of American AI computing capacity that some countries were allowed to obtain via U.S. AI chip imports. In May, Trump announced deals with the United Arab Emirates that gave the Gulf country expanded access to advanced artificial intelligence chips from the U.S. after previously facing restrictions over Washington's concerns that China could access the technology. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
