a lot of people would be interested, 25% on mexico and canada, canada is a bad abuser.ng huge numbers and drugs. china charges us tariffs, until i came along china never paid $.10 to this country. we need people and i'm fine with it, we want to have it, we need it. we're the only country that does this with birthright. ridiculous. tom: some of president trump's borders during the signing ceremony engage with volatility around tariffs. this is the roller coaster ride, big drop when it became clear and then a spike and comments around canada and mexico so continue to watch the dollar as markets try to understand the tariff agenda. out of the u.k. focus on wages and unemployment going up, wages is expected to take up. this will not derail the boe cut coming fru in february. alternative data suggests a cooling. let's look at netflix, close to 30%. subscription rate you've got squid game, numbers coming through. a flurry of measures from trump and we continue that analysis next. opening trade is next, this is bloomberg. the way i approach work post fatherhood, has really try

. . , goods coming in exco and canada. ., , ., canada. _ canada. that is about $19 billion per month - canada. that is about $19 billion per month in - canada. that is about $19 | billion per month in tariffs paid. that will be paid by us consumers, us businesses, some will be played by the exporter. bit of a mix. this is on top, some on top of existing tariffs. it is not always linear. as tariffs increase, sometimes be passed through to consumers gets bigger and bigger. people forget theirs. —— abyss. we cannotjust take what happened in the past and so it happen again. it can be even more inflationary force of already hearing from some industries that they were able to absorb some tariffs in the first round, they won't be able to do that moving forward. it might be pretty hard to save us consumers from further tariffs on key consumer goods industries. t on key consumer goods industries.— on key consumer goods industries. ., ~' ., industries. i would like to get our industries. i would like to get your take _ industries. i would like to g

to an excess of $900000000000.00, which is a huge sum cap or canada. that's about 43 percent of annual g, p o. so for the us however, a trade with canada is about 13.6 percent of g d p and us has trading partners that are roughly equal importance to canada like a china and mexico one another. so we are much more vulnerable to trade sanctions from the united states than the united states as vulnerable to us 1st. and as i say, this is a result of decades of needing and government policy. what we should have done was we should have diversified our trade relationships, even particularly with the major countries in bricks. but instead we just got more and more reliant upon and vulnerable to united states. and i think trump is quite cognizant of this vulnerability, and he's going to use it in order to make the gun, the country more subservient than the number of ways, including militarize in our border. which is precisely what a true though did with the support of a number of provincial premier's as soon as trump. yeah. making noises about a 25 percent tarif

i think canada in particular— implement? i think canada in particular is _ implement?articular is feeling _ implement? i think canada in particular is feeling a - implement? i think canada in particular is feeling a bit - particular is feeling a bit annoyed, because they are being accused of allowing too much immigration and too much fentanyl, another one of which seems to be an issue for canada in particular. so here you have been a long—standing best friend of the united states, deeply integrated 3—way markers, now you're going to be had with a 25% tariff, first, actually, and that feels i think deeply alarming and unsettling for canada, of course for mexico, other allies of the united states. so if you're heading adversaries and allies, what does that mean? the date of 1 allies, what does that mean? the date of1 february is the one that has been mooted by donald trump himself. it doesn't leave a lot of room or time for any form of negotiation.- time for any form of negotiation. time for any form of neuotiation. ., ~ , , ., negotiation. no. any question ou negotiatio

and mexico are going — what canada and mexico are going to _ what canada and mexico are going to do is in fact we go with— his fire and is in fact we go with the _ his fire and is in fact we go with the ist of february 20 5% tariffs — with the ist of february 20 5% tariffs on _ with the ist of february 20 5% tariffs on canada and mexico, again. — tariffs on canada and mexico, again. i— tariffs on canada and mexico, again, ithink tariffs on canada and mexico, again, i think they will be negotiable and that markets won't — negotiable and that markets won't necessarily assume that these — won't necessarily assume that these things are here to stay. -- 25% — these things are here to stay. —— 25% tariffs. if these things are here to stay. -- 25% tariffs.— -- 25% tariffs. if the focus is ownin: -- 25% tariffs. if the focus is owning season, _ -- 25% tariffs. if the focus is owning season, as _ -- 25% tariffs. if the focus is owning season, as you - -- 25% tariffs. if the focus is owning season, as you say, | -- 25% tariffs. if the focus is i owning season, as you say, we had the banks rep

canada's very bad abuser. vast numbers of people to come in and fentanyl to come in. >> when would you enact that? >> i think february 1st. i think we'll do it february 1st. >>> the president directing federal agencies to study tariff policy on two of the top u.s. trading partners. >> we will build our automobiles in america at a rate nobody could have dreamt possible a few years ago. >> the president sharing his vision for the u.s. manufacturing renaissance with the u.s. car production front and center. the global reaction ahead. >>> markets are trading higher as america braces for the next four years. it is tuesday, january 21st, 2025. you are watching "worldwide exchange" right here on cnbc. >>> good morning. welcome to "worldwide exchange." thanks for being with us. i'm frank holland. with me for the hour is marc short, former chief of staff to former vice president mike pence. we will talk executive orders and tariffs and trade. first, a check on u.s. stock futures on this second day of the new trump admi

in particular canada is a bit annoyed _ implement?ular canada is a bit annoyed because - implement? in particular canada is a bit annoyed because they i is a bit annoyed because they are being accused of allowing too much immigration and too much fentanyl, neither one of which seems to be an issue for canada in particular so here you have been a long—standing best friend of the united states and deeply integrated 3—way market and how you will be hit with a 25% tariff. first, actually, in that field, i think, deeply alarming and unsettling for what canada, mexico, for other allies of the united states. some of you are heading adverse areas and allies, what does that mean? the date of february one was one mooted by donald trump himself. it doesn't leave a lot of time for any form of negotiation.— of time for any form of negotiation. no. on the question _ negotiation. no. on the question you _ negotiation. no. on the question you always - negotiation. no. on the l question you always have negotiation. no. on the - question you always hav

the people of canada would like it. but just to start off, they have a massive tax cut and they would have a lot more business and we would let business go to canada routinely and have no tariffs. >> the united kingdom might be in a better spot, then? [indiscernible question] president trump: say it once again. [indiscernible question] frum thrum -- president trump: his father was a big asset to the state. i think franklin and and other people that are doing what franklin have done. but i have known franklin so long. he made a speech, beautiful speech, beautiful prayer. he does a great job. and we made a big donation and it was money well spent. sometimes you make donations that aren't well spent. we are going to the site now and one of the sites and i think for those who haven't seen it, you won't even believe it. and i can speak for the republican congressman, we're going to knock it out, right? we're going to knock it out and we take it personally. north carolina was very unfairly treated, very unfairly treated. it w

with canada lose $200 billion a year with canada. that's because we allow them to make cars. we allow them to take lumber. we don't need their cars or lumber. we don't need their food products because we make the same right on the other side of the border. we just allowed that bad management has allow t-td over the last four years in particular -- has allowed it over the last four years in particular to become very unbalanced. i call them governor trudeau, he's prime minister trudeau when he was prime minister. i asked him why would we do that? he was unable to give me an answer. he said i don't know. i said do you think it's fair that we are paying $200 billion to keep canada going? what would happen, i said, i asked him, what would happen if we didn't do that? if we didn't subsidize canada? he said we would be a failed nation. and i said then you should be a state. because why are we paying all of that money to canada when we could use it ourselves. we take care of their military. we ordered -- we are going to order about 40 coast guard big ice breakers. big ones. all of a

america's two biggest trading partners, canada and| trading partners, canada and mexico.make good spot from their more expensive the idea being to support business within the united states. the flip side of this is prices could go up. consumers in america will be paying more for this stuff as a result, meaning inflation rises, doesn't it? if depends on how companies _ rises, doesn't it? if depends on how companies absorb i rises, doesn't it? if depends. on how companies absorb the tariffs, but that is generally the consensus. when you look at canada, the us, mexico, it is a very interlinked supply chain. parts of congress have concerns about chinese companies who are using mexico's access to basically have a base and an easy access without dealing with tariffs. trump talked about looking at this new renegotiated agreement between the us, canada and mexico that was struck under these last administration to see what flexibility there is to apply those tariffs. we flexibility there is to apply those tariffs.— flexibility there is to apply those tariffs. ~ ~ ., , , those tari

maybe he'd like to get canada to pay more for joint defense. maybe he'd like to get canada do more to stop immigration or stop the flow of fentanyl from china. and maybe he'd like pound him out to give us carriers. cheaper rates. actually is he going to use military force to do any of those things? i would pretty much lay my hand and fire that he will not do that. but it's part of his deal making on one thing we can learn from this. he's not only transactional, it's all about power. these are, these are allies, neighbors of the us that he is putting under heavy pressure just the way he would rivals. so he makes no distinction between the 2 because he doesn't really set much store by treaties and such. he wants power politics and he's taking us back to the 19th century in the monroe doctrine of sphere of influence. this is the us sphere of influence in north and south america, and they are going to decide what happens their tours and tell us a little bit more of the about crumbs interest in greenland, even if he has is as a window size, just thr

not going _ deficit with canada and we are not going to do that any more. is good for them, _ i don't know if that is good forthem, but i don't know if that is good for them, but you can always become _ for them, but you can always become estate, then we won't have _ become estate, then we won't have a — become estate, then we won't have a deficit and we will not have — have a deficit and we will not have to — have a deficit and we will not have to tariff you —— you can always — have to tariff you —— you can always become a state. is have to tariff you -- you can always become a state. is that bein: always become a state. is that being taken — always become a state. is that being taken seriously, - always become a state. is that being taken seriously, the - always become a state. is that| being taken seriously, the idea of canada becoming part of the us? donald trump said he would rather not impose tariffs on china. , , , china. interesting, yes, the reaponse — china. interesting, yes, the reaponse to _ china. interesting, yes, the response to the _ china.

by translators, comments about annex in greenland and canada. i've cast down on the united states reliability as an allied. what's behind the trunk of parents, expansionist ambitions? today we'll look at whether foreign policy under trump quotes mean a new era of land grabs by the most powerful, the hello and welcome to to the points. i'm clear. richardson in berlin, and i'm thrilled to introduce our panels today. we have thorsten banner, the co founder and director of the global public policy institute in berlin, moore. it's got me on a foreign correspondent for the german weekly magazine sch down. and american journalist melinda crane. you probably know her as a regular face. you're onto the warm welcome at tea. well 1st and let's get started with you is a trump presidency, potentially a turning point in the way we see the united states on the world stage? i think it is. and i think now we can be sure that this vision as the us as the self appointed guardian of the global liberal international order that's over the market. rubio said as much a

big trunk force himself on canada. but i do believe he's going to create this chord by refusing to it. you are artificially support canada is jeannie p anymore. the united states is a new investor with you in a few $100000000.00 a year. but we put an enormous amount of money and support canada's infrastructure and economy. if trump discounts off that money, i think that he has a real case for being able to convince canada to at least brokers some kind of deal . i doubt it will become the 50 for a specific 2nd state. i doubt that the different provinces will all become states in the united states for the fact that he was even talking. that way. it's such a different way of talking as compared to what we've been hearing for the last 40 years in this country, which is united states and never needs to be bigger. but what we do need to do is invest in blowing up countries around the world and then leave it like that makes no sense to people. i think at least the greenland the argument, even though it who knows what will hap

and when we saw negotiations between the us and canada in the first trump administration.o i think it is quite likely that he's going for something similar this time around. and it's a tool. right. so it's and these are very large trading partners for the us. these are the largest trading partners for the us. so it would of course be costly to impose those tariffs. but the relative size of the trade arrangement is even larger for those partners. so for canada, for mexico, us as a trade partner is an even more important partner than they are for the us. so i think he may be counting on basically this asymmetry that even though it would be costly for both sides and maybe even more costly for the other side. and so he can extract agreements to things that he would like, such as, for example, keeping the migrants on the other side of the border and so on. >> it's a game of chicken in a way. right. but if they were enacted, what would be the consequences? let's start with the consequences on consumers. right. already we've been worried about inflation and the prices of things t

global leaders react to donald trump's threat of new tariffs on mexico and canada as soon as februarymixed picture on global stock markets, as investors remain cautious over the details of those new tariffs. and airport expansion — britain considers building new capacity at heathrow and gatwick airports. but how long will it take? welcome to business today. i'm ben thompson. leaders around the world have been reacting to donald trump's new tariff threats. last night the president suggested 25% levies on the united states�* neighbours canada and mexico could come by february the 1st. canadian prime minister justin trudeau reiterated that his government is ready to respond to all scenarios, whilst mexico's president, claudia sheinbaum, called for cool heads. meanwhile at the world economic forum in davos, the european commission president, ursula von der leyen, said europe has entered a new era of harsh geostrategic competition, with president trump playing a protectionist game. the director general of the world trade organization, ngozi okonjo—iweala, also speaking in davos, says she f

big trunk, forcing himself on canada. but i do believe he's going to create discord by refusing to it. you are artificially support canada is jeannie p anymore. the united states is a new investor with you and a few $100000000.00 a year. but we put an enormous amount of money and support canada's infrastructure and economy. if trump discounts off that money, i think that he has a real case for being able to convince canada to at least brokers some kind of deal . i doubt it will become the 50 for a specific 2nd state. i doubt that the different provinces will become states in the united states for the fact that these even talking that way is such a different way of talking as compared to what we've been hearing for the last 40 years in this country, which is united states and never needs to be bigger, but what we do need to do is invest in blowing up countries around the world and then leave it like that makes no sense to people. i think at least the greenland, the argument, even though it who knows what will happen. the g

no, shall canada greenland. because son that he might also come through with his vile to take them onto the us flag as well. should they be concerned with? should they be excited? i'm not sure. what is what it is like in terms of, of greenland looks like i'm a freelance because i i think would breeland it's, it's extremely likely that trouble make a move to purchase we window make a deal with greenland in order to have them come on to the united states extremely likely. the reason for, for greenland really has nothing to do with the arctic circle which some people claim it does. it does. it's really not about that. the wearers minerals that are in greenland exceeds the number of areas, minerals even controlled by china. and so it will be an incredibly valuable thing. do you take it by force? probably not. can you purchase it? probably, and for a fraction of what you spend on ukraine for which there is no return, you could have purchased reading. so i think that will probably see that in terms of canada, what i d

i'm glad you brought up the canada there. what are we to make of, of that nonsense of also his threats to, to take greenland by force and, and take breakfast, but the cat, the panama canal, black. well okay. so what, what is terrorists in one's one's more than a national security strategy that he seems to have going with regard sit canada and mexico. in particular, this is where donald trump is, says it's better not to work in the existing rules based system that the w t, our or work try lateral or flurry lateral trade agreements. but it's better for us to engage one on one by laterally with countries. because any time the us negotiates with someone in the us has in a superior position because it has a larger economy, it has the stronger military. if it has a bigger market, it's just got advantages for any one of them. when they go, she ation. and what truck does is he uses he weaponized as the economy. he weaponized his terrorist. and so he says to canada, research to mexico for, i don't like what's happening at the border.

the us president has threatend to impose a 10% levy on china at the start of february with canada andg the threat of tariffs. and trump didn't stop there. he's also promised to go after the european union as well, for what he calls unfair trading practices. deborah elms is the head of trade policy at the hinrich foundation — she gave her view on whether or not trump will follow through on his threats of tariffs. still unclear. i don't think we should assume this is a negotiating ploy, he is serious about his love of tariffs. how will china respond? ithink about his love of tariffs. how will china respond? i think the chinese might be muted especially if the tariffs applied against china are applied against china are applied against china are applied a 10% but if higher, i think china will say there is no point posing on retaliation, let's do something now.- let's do something now. china is seen by _ let's do something now. china is seen by the _ let's do something now. china is seen by the us _ let's do something now. china is seen by the us as _ let's do something now. china is seen

let's regard sick canada and mexico. in particular, this is where donald trump is, says it's better not to work in the existing rules based system that the w t, our or work try lateral or blurry lateral trade agreements. but it's better for us to engage one on one by laterally with countries. because any time the us negotiates with someone in the us is in a superior position because it has a larger economy. it has the stronger military. it has a bigger market, it's just got advantages for any one on one to go. she ation. and what truck does is he uses he weaponized as the economy. the weaponized is terrace. and so he says to canada, research to mexico for, i don't like what's happening at the border. i don't know what's happening. you the immigration piece that piece is more of a bargaining chip and, and we will see of countries are able to come to some bargain like canada and mexico one which i think. so one could say it's, it's to the us is short term benefits, but it, it probably harms the us in the long term. and fin

neither is canada. more or less communicating that donald trump is buffing, they don't think -- bluffing so, therefore, they don't have to change their own policies. he's not even asking for that much. he's really asking for a return to the us quo -- status quo, the what existed the last time he was president. they should give that. if they want the test donald trump on it, i think they're going to find out that donald trump is not bluffing, that the tariffs will come. larry: indeed. dan clifton, how to do you read this story? >> well, i have a little bit of a different variation on it. as you remember, in november the president said he would put the tariffs on mexico on day one. that did not happen, and i think the president's keeping his foot on their throat to make sure that they are enforcing the remain in mexico policy when it comes into effect. if you read these immigration executive orders, tease are sweeping immigration -- these are sweeping immigration changes that the president is putting forw

he is also discussed potential new tariffs on china, canada and mexico as well.ming out of washington, dc as donald trump makes his way into the first week of his second term as president of the united states, a lot of pages up and running, a lot of information and background as to all the different executive orders that he has been putting into place. we will be covering a lot of them as well but here on newsday at the top of the hour, see you again soon. bye for now. hey with the catch up. tonight, trump is back in the white house, elon musk faces backlash and a deadly fire in turkiye. it's donald trump's first full day as president for the second time, so let's talk about what is done so far. his party and many other supporters who were arrested in the capitol riot in 2021, his asked for the cost of living to be addressed, his declared the es will only recognise two sexes, mail and female, his halter diversity equity and inclusion programmes, he signed off on withdrawing from the paris climate agreement and on the top of the climate and fossil fuels, he was wh

trump said the move would be in response to fentanyl being sent from china to mexico and canada.dent has yet to announce any new tariffs but he hinted at imposing a 25 percent duty on canada and mexico as early as february 1st. with the threat of new tarriffs — many countries are now working out how they will approach economic relations with the new administration. tomas philipson, is the former acting chair of the council of economic advisers under trump — he explains how he would advise trade partners on how to deal with the new president. the real issue is actually, they're willing to forgo trade with the us and that is very unlikely, particularly on neighbouring countries way this thread has now being imposed in canada and mexico, canada has about 80% of the exports going to us, mexico is about 65% so they cannot afford a trade war which is, pretty clearly understood essentially. so the question is, how did they deal with the possibility of not that they such an economic kid, most likely what will happen, they will fall in line, the threat is out there now is because they are

so 25% tariff coming in, you know, on all goods from mexico and canada.he math on that. that's about $19 billion per month in tariffs paid. some of that will be paid by us consumers, us businesses. some will be paid by the exporter. it's usually a bit of a mix. but remember, this is on top, some of this is on top of existing tariffs. and it's not always linear. so, you know, as tariffs increase, sometimes the pass through to consumers gets bigger and bigger and bigger. and people forget this. so it's, you know, we can't just take what's happened in the past and say, well, that'sjust going to happen again. this could be even more inflationary. we're already hearing from some industries that they were able to absorb some of the tariffs from the first round. they won't be able to do that moving forward. so it might be pretty hard to save us consumers from further tariffs in key consumer goods industries. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. us markets were closed for the martin luther king day public holiday on monday, so the first reactions

trump is musing about making canada america's 51st state, referring to canada's outgoing prime ministertin trudeau, as governor trudeau on social media. this call comes amid political upheaval in canada, where trudeau has announced that he will step down from his post as prime minister. and as trump continues to promise sweeping tariffs on canadian exports. notably, the united states and canada are each other's largest trading partners. now, trump is vowing vowing to use, quote, economic force to merge the neighboring nations, describing the canada-u.s. border as, quote, an artificially drawn line, end quote. seems, strangely that in this particular case, trump is not that into borders. trump's also talking about acquiring greenland, a self-governing territory which was first settled in the late 10th century by the norse explorer erik the red, and which denmark has controlled since the 14th century. it's not the first time the u.s. has been interested in greenland. the u.s. briefly occupied it during world war two, and reportedly offered denmark $100 million in gold bars for it in 1946.

, in a nice country by the way, comes in from canada and it comes all the way through california. and they're restricted. they even have the half pipes, you know, they have pipes, the cup pipes, big ones, bigger than this room. and they going to all the way down and the bone dry. and they could be loaded up with water. no, but isn't it incredible that they don't do it? and it's to protect the delta smelted sufficient? that's. that's doing poorly anyway. but as a how are you protecting the delta smells by not giving it water to fish these water? nobody can answer that question. let me do this for you and you are i wouldn't be if you wanted to buy it. i, i'd like to buy or to buy 2. i have the right to make a deal. so the deal, i'm thinking about wireless negotiate and part of the media. deal i think is this uh and i bet was owners of tech to the big owners. it's worthless if it does, it got a problem and it's not like, oh, you can take the us, the whole thing is worthless with a problem. it is worth like a trillion dollars. so what i'm thinking about saying to somebody is buy it an

and look, canada. we imported $400 billion of goods from canada alone last year.verything from wood and cement that goes into building homes to foreign oil. it's the biggest source of foreign oil. analysts have said that this could cause gas prices, especially in the great lakes region, to go higher. mexico to we get cars, car parts, agriculture from mexico, 90% of the imported avocados and tomatoes into the u.s. come from mexico. but there's so many questions here, right? when does trump actually impose these tariffs? does he really go to 25%? does it start more gradual? and one of the biggest questions is how do other countries respond. right. canada has already signaled that they're not going to take this laying down. they're going to retaliate against u.s. goods. so this is just another one of those major question marks looming over the economy right now. i mean, trump is not proposing subtle changes here. these are sweeping changes. and the truth is, we don't really know how all of this is going to play out. i don't even think he does. >> yeah. and and what t

look at canada and you talk about gas. you're talking about a potential hike of 25 to $0.75 per gallon. because if you tariff the gas, it gets put onto the price that you and i will pay. and finally, i think the last one we've got is beer or some baby is some sort of food. and drink. again. overall it's going to be put on. it's going to be paid by the importer and it will be passed on to the consumer for all sorts of goods. estimating at 4.5%. >> all right richard quest in davos. thanks so much. we continue to monitor the new wildfire that has just erupted in los angeles county, burning an area the size of a football field every few seconds. the latest on efforts to contain the hughes fire that's ahead. plus, we're also going to go to capitol hill, where january 6th rioters could soon be welcomed to meet with some gallery during the attack of january 6th, 2021. >> i'm jeremy. >> diamond along the israel-gaza. >> border. >> and this is. >> cnn. here you go. >> is there any way to get a better price on this? >> have you chec

like with canada we lose $200 billion a year with canada. that's because we allow them to make cars. we allow them to take lumber. we don't need their cars. we don't need their lumber. we don't need their food products because we make the same products right on the other side of the border. it's sort of crazy. so we've just allowed that, you know, bad management has allowed it over the last four years in particular to become very imbalanced. and i said to i call him governor trudeau, but he's prime minister trudeau when he was prime minister, i asked him, why would we do that? why? and he was unable to give me an answer. he said, i don't know. and i said, do you think it's fair that we're paying $200 billion to keep canada going? and what would happen? i said, i asked him what would happen if we didn't do that, if we didn't subsidize canada? he said we'd be a failed nation. and i said, then you should be a state, because why are we paying all of that money to canada when, you know, we could use it ourselves, right? so we take care of their m

like with canada we lose 200 billion a year with canada. that's because we allow them to make cars. we allow them to take lumber. we don't need their cars, lumber or food products. we make the same products right on the other side of the border. sort of crazy. we have just allowed that bad management has allowed it over the last four years in particular to become very unbalanced. i said to -- i call him governor trudeau. he have is prime minister trudeau when he was prime minister, i asked him why would we do that? he was unaible to give me an answer. he said i don't know. i said do you think it's fair we're paying $2 hundred billion to keep canada going? what would happen -- i asked him what would happen if we didn't subsidize candidate? he said we would be a failed nation. i said then you should be a state. because why are we paying all of that money to canada when, you know, we could use it ourselves, right? so we take care of their military. we are going to order 40 coast guard big ice breakers, big ones, and all of a sudden canada wants a piece of the deal. i said why are we do

neither is canada. there's a donald trump is bluffing. don't think he will come down with the tariffs. they don't have to change their own policies. he is not asking for that much. he is asking for return of the status quo ante. what existed last time he was president. they should give that. if they want to test donald trump on it i think they're going to find out that donald trump is not bluffing. the tariffs will come. >> dan clifton, how do you read the story. >> as you remember november the president said he would put the tariffs on mexico on day one. i think what the president is doing is keeping his foot on their throat to make sure that they are reinforcing the remaining mexico policy when it comes into effect. when you read these immigration executive orders, these are sweeping immigration changes that the president is putting forward that will finally get our borders secured. but there has to be cooperation for mexico on the other side to do that and he just does not want to make sure their caravans coming through. i will tell yo

no, shall canada greenland. because son that he might also come through with his vile to take them onto the us flag as well, to little should they be concerned or they'd be excited. i'm not sure. what is, what is it like in terms of agreement looks like a treatment because i think with greenland it's, it's extremely likely that trouble make a move to purchase greenland or make a deal with greenland in order to have them come into the united states. extremely likely, but the reason for, for greenland really has nothing to do with the arctic circle, which some people claim it does a mean it doesn't. it's really not about that. it's about rivers, minerals, and the fact that he's surrounded, not only by, by, you know, kind of texas tech revolutionaries. but really, people who are texas tech advances in his administration. people like eli moscow, people like peter deal, who really want to see the advancement of a i. you saw all the different people from big tech, the leaders a big techs who were surrounding him at th

canada, we have a tremendous deficit with canada, we will not have that anymore, we cannot do it.on't know if it's good for them. as you probably know, i say you can always become a saint. and we won't have a deficit, we want have to tear a few et cetera, et cetera. but canada has been very tough to deal with over the years and it is not fair that we should have a 200 billion or $250 billion deficit. we don't need them to make our cars and they make a lot of them. we don't need their lumber because we have our own forest, et cetera. we don't need their oil and gas, we have more than anybody. >> jesse: america is beginning to reassert its economic advantage. we have the biggest consumer market, more liquid capital than any country and the largest energy reserves. not to mention a bigger navy than every nation on earth. and the dollar is the world currency. so this country has an absolute right. an obligation to our own people to set trade terms and not be taken advantage of. nato spending is a perfect example. >> i will also ask all nato nations to increase defense spending to 5% o

why is he starting with canada and mexico? every area where canada and mexico were mentioned. he just didn't mention it. most of the deadlines in the trade executive order are april 1. i expect that to be the deadline. i think that a classic donald trump. he gets asked a question, he will move the goalpost. he will tell you it is happening sooner so we all wait to find out what is next. i probably do not anticipate tariffs coming on for very one. but do i anticipate tariffs on china, mexico, canada, absolutely. how long they stay on, do they cut a deal, those of the market questions. annmarie: it felt like tariffs were not front and center even though we talked about tariffs being his most beautiful word in the dictionary and the fact that he said day one the walls will be going up. does that tell you he wants to negotiate when it comes to trade realignment? ed: just because it didn't happen on day one doesn't mean it is not a really important priority. i think what is happening is there is a debate that's going on between the

comes from canada.t a significant profit. upgraded, make $10 billion, $20 billion of profit. a very strong alliance. there is a lot of signaling going on in the queue medication signaling the importance of energy and defend in the borders. the importance. of the arctic that's a strong communication there's more we can do together. there is more energy we can produce. particularly lng. asia needs lng. we have multiple pipelines we can export to asia. we have been able to build the pipelines and export lng. we can leverage resources but also rare earth minimal's -- minerals. when you think about the production of germanium necessary for fighter jets and military equipment, china was a supplier before. there are opportunities to build supply chain integration on rare earth minerals. 70% of ours goes to american farmers -- pot ash goes to american farmers. you look at uranium needed for nuclear power to drive all that power needs from an ai strategy. 30% of uranium into the u.s. comes from canada. when you

i think most countries, the first in the list, canada, mexico and china, canada and mexico are america'strade partners so it's tariffs against friends and partners not just against adversaries which is a really tricky part of his economic agenda. the response that we are likely to see certainly from canada is one of targeted retaliation. canada hits back hard with its own tariffs. and they are looking to target parts of america for republicans are in charge so friends of donald trump across the united states suffer and the theory is that will put pressure on the president to roll back some of the tariffs but what we know and what people are debating is what are the conditions that come with the tariffs, are they just there to change the trade balance between the united states and the recipient or are they there to get more? if it's about changing the trade balance i think many in europe are thinking about what they can buy from america, more gas, more arms or is there a broader demand? we have seen it said and i think it's likely to be true that the us president is also going to use thos

narrator: ontario, canada. stable and secure when the world around us isn't. can rely on us for energy to power your growing economy and for critical minerals crucial to new technologies. we're here, right by your side. [title: ontario, canada] [title: ontario.ca/partner] [title: paid for by the government of ontario] i'm not a doctor. i'm not even in a doctor's office. i'm standing on the streets talking to real people about their heart. how's your heart? my heart's pretty good. —you sure? —i think so. how do you know? you're driving a car, you have the check engine light. but the heart doesn't have a hey, check heart sign. i want to show you something. put both fingers right on those pads. there you go. in 30 seconds we're going to have a medical-grade ekg reading. —there it is! —that is you. look at that. with kardiamobile, you can take a medical-grade ekg in just 30 seconds from anywhere. kardiamobile is proven to detect atrial fibrillation, one of the leading causes of stroke. and it's the only personal ekg that's fda-cleared to detect normal heart rhythm

in the 2018 e ra he did threaten canada and mexico with high tariffs.me concessions from them in the revised trade agreement with canada and mexico, called the usmca, and so he backed down on that that's a fire tariffs there. with china he put the tariffs on, the chinese retaliated. we have been basically in that same position since 2018, we still have a very high tariffs i china from the u.s. but there is room to put more on because some goods come to the u.s. from china still at very low tariffs. christian: it was an interesting line on energy. he said "absolutely we will make an energy with the rep and see it through," talking specifically about lng gas. the european union said in davos this week it is open to this idea of buying more gas from the united states. you think this might be one of the ways that they can see off tariffs as a tit-for-tat? meredith: actually, this is one were probably the european union and the united states would like more liquefied natural gas stations in europe. one of the issues was in the united states historically beca