Her response reframed the entire argument: not as a broken promise, but as a choice between short-term comfort and long-term sovereignty. To her, tariffs weren’t a quiet raid on Americans’ wallets; they were a loud warning shot at governments and corporations that had grown rich on American dependence. The discomfort, she implied, was real—but so was the cost of leaving things untouched. That status quo, she suggested, had already bled workers dry, just without the honesty of a line item on a tax form.

By tying tariffs to parallel efforts to cut taxes on overtime, tips, and Social Security benefits, Leavitt tried to redraw the moral map: pain now as protection later, pressure on importers as leverage for workers, confrontation abroad as relief at home. Whether one believed her or not, the question hung in the air: was this a pivot from promises—or their most radical completion?