Transcript of Greenland Emergency Summit, New World Order, SCOTUS Justices Hear Fed Case

President Trump says a framework of a deal has been worked out with NATO on Greenland.

His announcement comes after a speech in Davos where he attacked NATO and scolded allies. What do we know about this supposed compromise?

I'm Ian Martinez. That's Layla Fadel. And this is up first from NPR News. The World Economic Forum showed just how much President Trump has angered US Allies. Canada's prime minister basically declared the US Led world order dead. And Trump then addressed him directly in his speech.

They should be grateful to US Canada. Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark the next time you make your statements.

Is the US Isolating itself?

And Supreme Court justices had tough questions for Trump's lawyers as they weigh whether the president can fire a Federal Reserve governor. Stay with us. We'll give you the news you need to start your day.

At Radiolab. We love nothing more than nerding out.

About science, neuroscience, chemistry, but but we do also like to get into other.

Kinds of stories, stories about policing or politics, country music, hockey, sex of bugs.

Regardless of whether we're looking at science or not science, we bring a rigorous.

Curiosity to get you the answers and.

Hopefully make you see the world anew.

Radiolab Adventures on the edge of what.

We Think, think we know.

Wherever you get your podcasts this year on NPR's throughline, Life, Liberty, the pursuit of happiness. For centuries, America's pursuit has changed the world. Now, 250 years later, who are we?

Where are we headed?

Join us every Tuesday for a brand.

New series, America in Pursuit on Throughline.

Listen on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts.

This year's Oscar nominations are here and we are unpacking record breaking nominations for Sinners, plus nominations for Marty supreme and One Battle after Another. And we'll talk about some of the surprises and snubs. Listen to Pop Culture Happy hour in the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts.

European leaders meet in Brussels tonight for a summit that was called urgently as a reaction to President Trump's previous statements about possible military action to take Greenland, the semi autonomous Danish territory.

Trump also had said he would impose new tariffs on countries that opposed him. But then the president spoke Wednesday in Davos.

We probably won't get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be frankly unstoppable. But I won't do that.

He ruled out military force in an otherwise threatening speech. And on Wednesday he said that a long term agreement on Greenland had been reached and that it would be good for everybody.

Terry Schultz joins us from Brussels to discuss European reaction and what happens next. Good morning, Terry.

Hi, Layla.

Okay, so do we know any details of this long term agreement?

We really don't know the details yet. And I've been scanning Danish media this morning and there are a lot of questions being raised there. It's just been hours since we got word that there had been a compromise at all after this fiery speech by President Trump at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and he hadn't indicated any such thing was coming. So while the details haven't been made public, there are reports in the New York Times, for example, that it could include giving the US Sovereignty over small pieces of Greenlandic territory, perhaps for building up more military bases there, possibly for participation in the eventual Golden Dome missile defense system. Now, Leila, the US Already has the right to expand its military presence under existing agreements with Greenland and Denmark, but the land on which these bases would sit does not belong to the US under current arrangements. And ownership has been such a big issue for Trump, and he repeated that multiple times in Davos. Let's listen to one example.

All we're asking for is to get Greenland, including right title and ownership, because you need the ownership to defend it. You can't defend it on a lease.

So Trump's obvious satisfaction with the compromise indicates it could very well include some limited transfer of land ownership. And it's also expected to address US Access to mineral rights.

How are European leaders reacting to the developments in Davos?

Well, there's definitely the feeling of being able to breathe a bit more easily after Trump walked back. These threats of military force and imminent tariffs, which have been a feature of daily discussion here in Brussels recently. Danish Foreign Minister Lars Likke Rasmussen summed up Wednesday by saying it ended better than it started, as there'd been so much apprehension about what might happen in Davos.

Now we've seen protests in Denmark and Greenland against Trump's ambitions. Is this new framework something their governments are likely to accept? Or as much as we know about it, yeah.

We're getting some early reactions from Danish and Greenlandic leaders now, and their comments are reinforcing the fact that the details of this deal, as we discussed, are very slim. Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has issued a statement now underscoring that things like security, investment and economy can be discussed politically, but not sovereignty, that, quote, only Denmark and Greenland can make decisions on issues relating to Denmark and Greenland. So it's quite interesting that these talks in Davos were not led by Danes and Greenlanders. But by the NATO Secretary General Mark Rute. Ruta is known for his constant flattery of Trump and the two get along well. But a Greenlandic member of Parliament has already written on social media that, quote, NATO in no way has a mandate to negotiate without Greenland.

That's Terry Schultz reporting in Brussels. Thank you, Terry.

You're welcome.

As the drama over Greenland plays out, this much is clear. President Trump has greatly antagonized US Allies in Europe and beyond.

That became most clear in Trump's and Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney's remarks at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

More.

We're joined by NPR national security correspondent Greg Myhrey. Hey, Greg.

Hi, Layla.

Okay, so let's get right to it. Just break down how this spat between Trump and Canada's leader, Mark Carney came to be.

Yeah, Carney spoke Tuesday, the day before Trump and his remarks went viral, as this usually low key politician made this sweeping claim, saying that the global order built and led by the US for 80 years was not just strained, it had actually come apart.

Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition. Great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons, tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.

And so Carney didn't mention Trump by name, but the implication was clear. And we should note Carney visited China last week and signed an agreement for his country to buy electric vehicles from China. To drive home that point, Carney said China is now a more reliable partner than the U.S. how did Trump respond.

To the Canadian leader?

Well, Trump did mention Carney by name and he actually took a swipe at him and all of Canada in his speech on Wednesday.

I watched your prime minister yesterday. He wasn't so grateful. They should be grateful to us Canada. Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.

So over the past year, Trump has threatened tariffs on Canada, imposed tariffs on Canada, paused tariffs on Canada. So we've seen lots of tension over trade. And of course, Canada is close to Greenland and it's a key player in any discussion on Arctic security. Just hard to recall any time when we've seen this level of friction between the leaders of the US And Canada.

Now, Trump singled out Canada, but didn't he also have some harsh words for Europe and NATO?

Yes, absolutely. Trump insulted Europe as weak and in decline. And he also repeated a statement he often makes about NATO that just doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

The United States is treated very unfairly by NATO, I want to tell you that. And when you think about it, nobody can dispute it. We give so much and we get so little in return.

Now, of course, back in 2001, after the Al Qaeda terrorist attacks in the U.S. nazi NATO countries rushed to join the U.S. in the war in Afghanistan. This was the first and only time that NATO's Article 5 was triggered. The section saying an attack on one is an attack on all. And Overall, more than 1,000 NATO troops from other countries, Europe and Canada were killed in that war.

Now, Trump did alienate allies in his first term as well. Right, Greg? So can we point to something that's really different in this term?

Yeah.

Trump has really gone from a lot of tough talk to taking stronger actions when it comes to tariffs or economic cooperation or military cooperation. And remember, Trump talked about acquiring Greenland in his first term, drawing mostly eye rolls. This time he got everyone's attention and perhaps even some sort of a deal, though. We're still waiting for the details.

That's NPR's Greg Myhre. Thank you, Greg.

Sure thing, Layla.

President Trump is meeting some resistance in his attempt to fire a member of the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors.

The Supreme Court heard arguments in a case about Fed Governor Lisa Cook on Wednesday and had tough questions for the president's lawyer. Trump has been critical of the Fed for not lowering interest rates more aggressively.

We should be paying a much lower interest rate than we are. We should be paying the lowest interest rate of any country in the world because without the United States, you don't have a country.

Politicians often want lower interest rates to boost the economy before the next election. But Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to push the central bank in that direction.

NPR's Scott Horsley joins us now to discuss. Hey, Scott, Good morning. Good morning. So the Supreme Court heard arguments on Wednesday over Trump's attempt to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook. How did it go?

This Supreme Court has generally given Trump a lot of latitude to fire officials from other independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission. But justices have signaled the Federal Reserve is a special case. And Lisa Cook's lawyer, Paul Clement really stressed that during oral arguments yesterday. He said Congress deliberately set up the Fed to be insulated from political pressure. And Clement said for more than a century other presidents have generally respected those boundaries.

No president from Woodrow Wilson to Joseph Biden has ever even tried to remove a governor for cause, despite the ever present temptation for lower rates and easier money.

The whole idea is the Fed sometimes has to make decisions that are unpopular in the short run, like keeping interest rates high to fight inflation in order to achieve the best economic outcome in the long run.

Are interest rates the reason Trump wants.

To fire Cook, not the stated reason? Trump and his allies have accused Cook of making false statements on mortgage applications, although she denies any wrongdoing. Justices seem skeptical that Cook could be dismissed over that without having any opportunity to make her own case. Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested if the bar for firing a Fed governor were set that low, it would weaken or shatter the central bank's independence.

If this were set as a precedent, it seems to me what goes around comes around. All the current president's appointees would likely be removed for cause on January 20, 2029. If there's a Democratic president or January 20, 2033, then where are we?

So far, courts have allowed Cook to keep her job at the Fed while this case plays out.

The Fed has been cutting interest rates, but not as quickly as the president would like. Where does the central bank go from here?

Most forecasters think the Fed's going to hold interest rates steady when policymakers meet next week. They have cut rates three times since last September out of concern over the softening job market. But you know, inflation is still higher than the Fed would like, and policymakers have signaled they're going to be cautious about additional rate cuts going forward. Now Trump has not only tried to fire Cook, he's threatened to fire the Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and the Justice Department even launched an investigation of the central bank. But all that pressure could be backfiring. Powell, who attended yesterday's Supreme Court hearing, said in a video statement this month he and his colleagues will not be bullied.

This is about whether the Fed will.

Be able to continue to set interest.

Rates based on evidence and economic conditions, or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.

Now, Powell's term as Fed chairman ends in May, but he has the option to keep his seat on the Fed's governing board for another couple of years. He hasn't said whether he'll do so, but if he did, that would deny Trump the opportunity to appoint another, more compliant fed governor.

Our NPR's Scott Horsley. Thank you, Scott.

You're welcome.

The voices on NPR today include longtime Democratic insider Rahm Emanuel. Emanuel has held many political jobs, serving as a member of Congress, President Obama's chief of staff, mayor of Chicago, and most recently ambassador to Japan.

As he considers a run for president in 2028. He sat for a video interview with our co host Steve and He talked of corporate America enabling the Trump admin administration.

I think corporate America, they've sold out America. And what I mean by that is you benefit from a nation built on laws and you're watching from the sideline, a nation being destroyed and walking away from the rule of law. Everything you have is built on the premise of the rule of law number two, the president's declared war on the greatest research system in the world has ever seen. And you are your company is a direct beneficiary of that. And you're like the three monkeys, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. You are timid souls.

Is there something having to do with.

Corporate America where Democrats, something about your approach to social issues or taxes or business or regulation drove corporate America?

I'm saying this shorthand, but the Republican parties are dominated by a monopolist mindset, and our party started to get dominated by a bunch of Marxists. And both Marxism and monopolists don't serve the economy well.

You can hear Steve's full interview with Rahm Emanuel on a bonus episode of up first later today. And you can watch the full video interview on the NPR app. And that's up first for Thursday, January 22nd. I'm Layla Faulded.

And I'm Amy Martinez. You can listen to this podcast sponsor free, while financially supporting public media with Up first plus, your subscription will help keep the NPR network network strong and support local public radio stations through a recurring monthly donation. Learn more at plus.NPR.org that's P L U S.NPR.org Today's episode of Up first.

Was edited by Miguel Macias, Andrew Sussman, Rafael Naam, Mohammed Al Radisi and Alice Wolfley. It was produced by Ziad Buch, Nia Dumas and Christopher Thomas. We get engineering support from Misha Heines. Our technical director is Carly Strange. And our deputy executive producer is Kelly Dickens. Join us again tomorrow.

There is a lot of fear these days that AI could be a bubble. So, Nick, is it? I don't know. Right. It is hard to tell. But there are some clues that economists say might kind of sort of help us predict bubbles on the Planet Money podcast, the dark art of bubble detection. Listen on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts this week on the NPR Politics podcast, President Trump's First Year.

You know, it's not just that there aren't really the guardrails on Trump's presidency this term. It's that he's doing things that are just not conservative.

We unpack the ongoing transformation of the Republican Party on the NPR Politics podcast. Listen on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts.