Then not speaking was "good for trade", now speaking is "good for the trade war".
We tolerated it for a little bit (i.e. the last decade and a half) while there was still some delusion that they might stop being jerks but those days are over.
If China wasn't bullying everyone it thinks it can and wasn't engaging in domestic ethnic cleansing and wasn't trying to create 1984 we'd have no problem being economically joined at the hip with them. But they are. So we got beef.
No, it's because the US don't want to be beholden to anyone, period. It's about keeping control (and profit, greed, and other less high ideals), not about moral contempt for the CCP.
>and wasn't engaging in domestic ethnic cleansing and wasn't trying to create 1984 we'd have no problem being economically joined at the hip with them.
Somehow that was never a problem with people from Pinochet to Suharto and from Nicaraguan death squads to Saddam (when he was still a handy ally), or when there are "homemade" bombs doing the killing...
>If China wasn't bullying everyone it thinks it can
This is beyond ironic. The US has been bullying and strong-arming the whole globe for over century, toppled democratic regimes (from Mossadeq to Allende and on), had supported countless dictators in their countries with funds and arms, treated Latin American countries as banana republics, has invaded and occupied four countries just in the last 20 years (plus countless bombings), keeps torture camps (from Abu Graib to Guantanamo), and maintains hundreds of army bases all over the world, not to mention global surveillance. It's only the only country that used nuclear bombs in wars ever (on civilians non the less).
It's only the idea that their shit doesn't stink, and the belief in some "manifest destiny" of the US to carry the light and lead the rest 96% of humanity (in need of guidance), that gives people in the US the gal to dare to criticize another country...
It's more the case of a pitch black pot calling a new and upcoming black kettle black, case...
It's not like Trump would have had a problem escalating the situation years ago. And if anything, it would have had more political value for him to do it pre-election.
I haven't seen anyone in media seriously attack the claim itself. Which shows that political cost wasn't really a concern (even if the Biden admin didn't like the timing of the statement).
Again, if it was personal / selfishness, pre-election or earlier would have made more sense.
Even as far back as being a distraction from the (1st) impeachment would have been high benefit, low/no cost.
People are quick to presume the worst with Trump's motives for a particular action, without necessarily thinking what the preferred/likely action would be, given a particular motive.