WSJ What’s News - President Trump’s Sudden U-Turn on Greenland

Episode Date: January 21, 2026

P.M. Edition for Jan. 21. President Trump dials down the rhetoric with Europe, calling off threatened tariffs on several European nations after saying he wouldn’t use force to take Greenland. We hear from WSJ national security reporter Robbie Gramer about how European leaders are responding. Plus, U.S. stocks jump in response to Trump’s de-escalation. And, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in the case of Fed governor Lisa Cook. The Journal’s chief economics correspondent Nick Timiraos says the court seemed skeptical of the Trump administration’s attempt to fire her and discusses what that means for the central bank’s independence. Alex Ossola hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How are the U.S. businesses of Philip Morris International invested in America? We're invested in advancing science, giving adults who smoke better options. We're invested in American manufacturing, helping local economies thrive. We're invested in community, supporting military veterans and their families, disaster relief, and economic empowerment. Because we're proud to be invested in America. See how at uspMI.com. President Trump makes a head-spinning U-turn on Greenland,

calling off tariffs on Europe and saying he won't use force to take the island. How is Europe responding? A lot of European officials that I've been speaking to in recent days are somewhere between days shocked and confused. And even though this is now a new de-escalation, they're still just as shocked, just as confused, and just about as anxious as they were before. Trump's comments about a framework for a Greenland deal in the afternoon

sent stock markets searching. Plus, Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook seems likely to keep her job after a hearing at the Supreme Court. It's Wednesday, January 21st. I'm Alex Osala for the Wall Street Journal. This is the PM edition of What's News, the top headlines and business stories

that move the world today. A day that started with high tensions between the U.S. and Europe has taken on a more conciliatory tone. President Trump said this afternoon that he wouldn't impose tariffs on several European countries after he reached the, quote, framework of a future deal on Greenland and the Arctic region with NATO Secretary General Mark Ruta. Trump's de-escalating had started earlier today in a speech at Davos when he ruled out the use of force in his pursuit of Greenland.

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. Okay? Now everyone's saying, oh, good. That's probably the biggest statement I made because people thought I would use force. I don't have to use force. I don't want to use force.

I won't use force. For more, I'm joined now by WSJ National Security Reporter, Robbie Grammer. Well, Robbie, we spoke earlier this afternoon about how Europeans were reacting to Trump speech at Davos. Now we're talking again because he's canceled the tariff threat. How is this going over in Europe? In his speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, he said, we're not going to take it by force, but we really need this Arctic Island. It's vital for our security. It's vital for NATO security. And NATO should stop opposing this. And then the threat of new tariffs on European countries, which triggered a bit of a shock in the markets and a lot of backlash in Europe, he has now taken those threats back.

A lot of European officials that I've been speaking to in recent days are somewhere between days shocked and confused. And even though this is now a new de-escalation, they're still just as shocked, just as confused, and just about as anxious as they were before. One I spoke to said, you know, obviously it's a relief here. Trump said there's a framework for a deal. He's taken off the threat of tariffs. But just as easily, he could put them on again tomorrow if his mood changes again. Do we know any details about this framework of a future deal, as he says? So the news just broke. We're still waiting for more details on what this framework looks like.

This was proposed after Trump took a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Ruta. Many in Europe see him sort of as a Trump whisperer. There's a lot of really complicated legal questions here. And it's one that European officials, legal experts, didn't really have to think of before this. because no one thought that an American leader would try to buy an island in the same way that countries did in the 17th, 18th, 19th centuries here. There is a framework that the United States has proposed. It's called COFA or compact of free association.

And that's a model that the United States has used with a few small Pacific islands, including Micronesia and the Marshall Islands. These islands are allowed to self-govern, and the U.S. pays them underwrites a lot of their their governance services. And in exchange, the U.S. basically has free reign to be in charge of its defense and security. But again, anything that undermines Greenland and Denmark's sovereignty over Greenland, these Danish and Greenlandic leaders say is an absolute red line. They're not willing to cede Greenland's territory or sovereignty. They're saying this island, our people are not for sale. And these are just two irreconcilable differences between the American side and the European side here.

and we don't know how or if this framework that Trump proposes, have we really addressed that yet. That was WSJ National Security Reporter, Robbie Grammer. Thanks, Robbie. Thanks for having me. The U.S. Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in a case of Lisa Cook, the member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors who President Trump tried to fire last year. And the session was rough going for the Trump administration. The court's decision could have consequences beyond Cook's indifference.

case, determining whether the Fed will keep setting monetary policy independent of presidential meddling, a huge matter of concern for investors and the broader economy. For more on the hearing, I'm joined now by WSJ Chief Economics correspondent, Nick Temerose. Nick, coming into today's hearing, the Supreme Court had signaled that it wanted to protect the Fed from political interference. For example, there was a decision last May in which the court said Trump could fire federal commissioners but made it clear that the Fed was off limits. How did this play out during today's arguments?

Well, the arguments today were unusual because they focused a lot on sort of technical elements of Lisa Cook's dismissal. So the president attempted to fire Cook in August. He did it in a letter that he posted on his truth social media account. So that was something the president's attorney was asked about today. Was the nature with which you did this satisfying what the law says? You can fire somebody for cause. Was Lisa Cook given a chance to defend? offend herself? Was she given a hearing? Should she have been given a hearing? Which way does it seem like the justices are leaning right now? Well, the legal analysts that I spoke with after the hearing thought the justices sounded inclined to let Lisa Cook stay in her job, at least while her broader legal challenge plays out. So this has all unfolded on what's known as the emergency docket or kind of an expedited process. And so at a minimum, even if Lisa Cook ultimately loses, her case, it sounds like she has another year or two before you would get there because they just

weren't inclined to rule against her at this moment. The most skeptical questions were targeted towards the Solicitor General, the Trump administration's envoy at the Supreme Court. Brett Kavanaugh asked him about concerns around independence and the Fed and what is to stop a Democratic president in 2029 or 233 from doing exactly what Donald Trump has done here. And so you could see concerns at kind of a policy level, what this would mean for an interest rate policy in the markets. That was WSJ Chief Economics correspondent, Nick Timrose. Thanks, Nick.

Thanks for having me. A House committee has voted to find former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress. After the Clinton's declined to appear for depositions regarding sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The committee is led by Republicans, but the vote drew significant Democratic support to pass. The measure now goes to the full House. The Clintons have said that the subpoenas demanding their appearance were invalid and that they had no personal knowledge of Epstein's criminal activities. Coming up, why struggling white-collar workers might want to consider switching

to blue-collar careers, and Amazon goes big on big box stores. That's after the break. Some of the best lessons don't come from a classroom. They come from experience. On The Power of Advice, a new podcast series from Capital Group, you'll hear from CEOs, investors, and founders about how they built careers, took risks, and reinvented themselves. If you're starting your own journey, this is the kind of advice you won't want to miss. Available wherever you get your podcast.

Published by Capital Client Group, Inc. U.S. Stocks rallied in the afternoon. after Trump called off the tariffs on Europe. Major U.S. indexes ended the day higher, with the Dow, the S&P, and the NASDAQ, all adding 1.2%. Speaking of Wall Street, we've got a special bonus episode that dropped earlier today. In the latest what's news and earnings, we dive into what's behind the booming Wall Street operations of the country's biggest banks. And the risks bankers are looking at this year.

That's in your what's news feed now. In other earnings news, Charles Schwab says its fourth quarter profit rose 34% to almost $2.5 billion. A surge in activity from individual investors, particularly young ones, helped boost Schwab's trading revenue by 22% for the quarter. While Johnson & Johnson reported higher revenue and profit for the latest quarter, with a boost from higher sales of drugs that treat cancer and autoimmune conditions. The company also issued a forecast for 2026 that topped Wall Street expectations. And Amazon is going big on bricks and mortar, launching its largest ever store. The proposed store will be outside Chicago and at 230,000 square feet will dwarf the average

Walmart and fit almost two whole average-sized target stores. It'll sell groceries and other goods in half the store, and the other half will be used for fulfilling orders, which shoppers can make online or in the store itself. The store could open as soon as next year, and people familiar with the matter say Amazon is also planning to open other big box stores in the U.S. A tough job market has a lot of white-collar workers feeling stuck. At the same time, America's traditional blue-collar industries are facing a labor shortage. So is it time for some white-collar workers to consider another path? Our producer Daniel Bach asked the journal's on-the-clock columnist Calimborsers about what it would take to make the switch.

So I think people know that you can be a master electrician or plumber and make good money, but you're thinking, oh, geez, I have to put in so much time to get there. That's not a realistic path for me. You take an example instead of being, say, a service advisor at an auto repair shop like this Crash Champions that I looked at, right? So this is a PE-backed, fast-growing company. They had something like 13 shops, you know, five or six years ago. Now they got over 600. They're growing so fast that people get promoted quickly. And if you're a service advisor, you have to know a lot about the cars, but you're not the one who's sweating under the hood doing the repairs yourself.

So you basically go through a six-month apprenticeship. You're making $60,000 a year during that period, that's a step back probably for a lot of white-collar workers, but you could double those earnings within a year and a half. That can be a path into management. And I'm told that those are jobs that pay over $200,000 a year. So if you're a white-collar worker who's feeling kind of stalled, you might say, well, geez, am I willing to take a little step back in the short run to really boost my earnings in the longer term? And the artificial intelligence factor plays in here too, right, where blue-collar jobs may be seen as more AI-proof? That's a big factor that I think the youngest workers are waking up to. They do see AI's potential to automate a lot of entry-level

white-collar jobs, and they're concerned about that. I think it's a tougher kind of mental hurdle to get over, though, when you're 30 or 40 versus 20, right? Like, it's one thing when you're 20 to say, I'm going to bypass college. It's a different kind of thing to have already invested in college, and then sometime into your career take a different path. That was on the clock columnist Callum Borshers, speaking to producer, Daniel And that's what's news for this Wednesday afternoon. Today's show is produced by Pierre Bienname with supervising producer Tali Arbell. I'm Alex Oslo for the Wall Street Journal. We'll be back with the new show tomorrow morning. Thanks for listening.

As companies seek to close growing gaps in skills and talent, Deloitte US CEO Jason Garzadas believes it's important for organizations to understand their baseline of skills. There's so many organizations that can't ask and answer the fundamental questions about how much computer science or data management skills do I have or AI development skills in a given domain. By performing a skills inventory, leaders can truly understand where their efforts should be focused. Being blind to those gaps is the real miss. Visit Deloitte.com to learn how your enterprise can help successfully cultivate talent.