đš JUST IN: Mark Carney says Canada is not chasing a China free trade deal, but Washingtonâs tariff warning is already exposing a deeper power struggle âĄ.
The warning from Washington did not sound like routine diplomacy. It sounded like a test.
When asked how Canada would respond to Donald Trumpâs threat of 100% tariffs, Prime Minister Mark Carney did not lunge for a headline. He reached for the rulebook.
Calmly, carefully, and with the precision of a man who understands exactly how markets panic, Carney reminded reporters that Canada respects its commitments under USMCA/CUSMA and has no intention of pursuing a free trade agreement with China.
That answer mattered because the threat was real.
According to recent reporting, Trump warned that if Canada moved toward a deeper free trade deal with Beijing, he would hit Canadian goods with a 100% tariff.
Carneyâs response was to make clear that Ottawaâs recent work with China is not a sweeping FTA, but a narrower effort to ease trade irritants in a handful of sectors, including electric vehicles, agriculture, fish products, and other food items.
That distinction is the entire battleground.
Under Article 32.10 of CUSMA, if one party enters a free trade agreement with a ânon-market country,â the others can terminate the trilateral deal with six monthsâ notice and replace it with a bilateral arrangement between themselves. In other words, this is not a vague diplomatic norm. It is written into the architecture of North American trade. Carneyâs argument is that Canada is staying inside those lines.
But politics is moving faster than legal text.
Beijingâs message has been almost theatrical in its contrast with Washingtonâs. China has framed its growing engagement with Canada as cooperation, not confrontation â âwin-win,â not zero-sum. That phrasing is no accident. It positions China as the calm alternative while painting the United States as the country trying to force loyalty through tariff threats. Even if the actual Canada-China arrangement is limited, the symbolism is enormous: China is offering Canada another lane, and Washington is trying to close it before traffic gets moving.
Carney, for now, is trying to cool the temperature without backing away from the larger strategy.
He has made clear that Canada wants to become less dependent on a single trading partner and more resilient to external shocks. That is not just rhetoric. In the same exchange, he pointed to a broader diversification push, saying Canada has concluded 12 new trade and security agreements across four continents in six months, with more to come. APâs reporting also places this China episode in the wider context of Carneyâs effort to rally middle powers and reduce overreliance on Washington.
That is why this fight feels bigger than tariffs on a few product categories.
The White House is effectively warning Canada that even a limited thaw with China could be treated as strategic disloyalty. Canada, meanwhile, is insisting it is simply protecting its own room to maneuver while honoring existing agreements. And China is standing off to the side, smiling like a rival who knows the pressure itself may do more to push countries away from Washington than any sales pitch ever could.
The economic stakes are not theoretical. Carney has argued Canadaâs economy has added 190,000 jobs since August, and he is selling diversification as part of a plan to build a stronger, more independent economic base. I could not independently confirm that exact âsince Augustâ number from the sources I checked, so that figure should be treated as coming from Carneyâs remarks rather than verified here. What is clear is that Ottawa wants to project confidence: momentum is building, the world is knocking, and Canada is no longer interested in being told that every global relationship must be filtered through U.S. approval.
And that is the deeper reason Trumpâs tariff threat may backfire.
The more Washington frames trade as loyalty and diversification as betrayal, the more it encourages allies to keep searching for alternatives. Canada is not announcing a full pivot to China. It is doing something more subtle and, in some ways, more consequential: proving that it can widen its options while still claiming to stay inside the rules.
That may be exactly what makes Washington so uneasy.
Because once a close ally shows it has alternatives, the threat of total dependence starts to collapse.
Vote To Remove Minnesota Representative Ilhan Omar From Congress Being Considered By Republican Congressman
Minnesota - June 7, 2026
In a closely divided 5-3 vote that fell one short of the required threshold, Minnesota House Republicans failed to secure a subpoena compelling U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar to testify and produce documents tied to the Feeding Our Future fraud scandal.
The outcome on May 5 marked the dramatic conclusion of months of mounting scrutiny over the congresswomanâs legislative actions and community outreach during the pandemic-era program at the center of one of the largest federal fraud investigations in recent Minnesota history. The House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Committee, operating under a bipartisan agreement that demands six votes to authorize a subpoena, saw every Republican member support the measure while all three Democrats opposed it.
Committee Chair Kristin Robbins (R-Maple Grove) argued that the subpoena had become the only remaining tool after Omar repeatedly declined invitations to appear and failed to respond to formal document requests.
âWe have reached out to Representative Ilhan Omar on multiple occasions, inviting her to testify and inviting and requesting documents,â Robbins said ahead of the vote. âThe only tool left for us as a committee if we want to get these documents is to issue a subpoena.â
Republicans on the panel have focused on Omarâs sponsorship of the federal MEALS Act, enacted in March 2020. They contend the legislation loosened critical oversight requirements in federal child nutrition programs and helped create the conditions that enabled large-scale fraud.
âRepresentative Omar had some role, whether inadvertent or not,â Robbins said. âShe passed the MEALS Act in March of 2020, and that took the guardrails off the federal school nutrition program which created the conditions for Feeding Our Future.â
The Feeding Our Future scandal stands as one of Minnesotaâs most significant public corruption cases in recent decades. Federal prosecutors allege that organizers and associates diverted hundreds of millions of dollars intended to feed low-income children through fabricated meal claims, shell nonprofit organizations, and fraudulent reimbursement requests. Dozens of individuals have been charged, including nonprofit founder Aimee Bock and multiple business operators connected to Minnesotaâs Somali community.
Committee Republicans specifically sought communications between Omarâs office and several individuals named in the federal investigation, along with records related to her public promotion of Safari Restaurant in Minneapolis, a business later linked to the scandal. Robbins also referenced a Somali-language television appearance in which Omar highlighted the restaurant as a meal distribution site during the pandemic.
âWe thought itâd be very helpful to understand from Rep. Omarâs perspective how she thought the MEALS Act impacted the community, why she brought it, what communication she had with the fraudsters,â Robbins said during the hearing.
Democrats on the committee strongly opposed the effort, accusing Republicans of politicizing the investigation and targeting Omar for partisan advantage. Dave Pinto, the committeeâs lead Democrat, questioned both the timing and practical purpose of pursuing a subpoena with only days remaining in the legislative session.
âEven if Omar were to testify or information is received, I do not see the committee doing anything with that information,â Pinto argued.
Pinto further referenced broader concerns about investigations involving political opponents under the current federal administration.
âWe know the president and federal administration have got no hesitation going after political enemies and investigating them in all sorts of ways,â he said during the hearing.
The failed vote effectively prevents the Minnesota House committee from compelling Omarâs testimony or documents before the legislative session ends later this month. Nevertheless, Robbins signaled that Republicans are exploring alternative avenues to continue the pursuit.
âTheyâre fading,â Robbins said. âBut Iâll certainly talk to our friends in Congress to see if they would be willing to issue a subpoena.â
Robbins noted that federal authorities retain âa whole menu of legal optionsâ because Omar is a sitting member of Congress. The controversy unfolds amid broader Republican efforts at both state and national levels to highlight waste, fraud, and inadequate oversight in federal spending programs enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic.
New California Leader Announced After Overnight Count as Kash Patel Demands Recount Over Democrat Fraud
Primary voters in Folsom, Rancho Cordova, and Citrus Heights went to the polls on Tuesday night to decide who would represent Californiaâs 7th Assembly District.
According to early results from the California Secretary of Stateâs Office, Josh Hoover, the Republican incumbent, has surged to first place with about 54 percent of the vote as of 1 p.m. Wednesday. Democratic candidate Amy Slavensky got about 44 percent of the vote.
Based on reports from the Associated Press, the two candidates will face off in November. The seat went from being Democratic to Republican under Hoover in 2022.
Hoover, who lives in Folsom, was Kevin Kileyâs chief of staff when he was an assemblyman. He hosts the political podcast âPoint of Orderâ and belongs to the bipartisan California Problem Solvers Caucus.
Slavensky came out of retirement to become the interim deputy superintendent for the San Juan Unified School District. She retired in 2021 as superintendent of the Amador County Unified School District.
California faced fresh criticism this week over Tuesdayâs primary elections, with Democratic leaders warning that full ballot counting could take weeks.
In Los Angeles, incumbent Democrat Karen Bass fell short of 51 percent, forcing a November runoff. Republican Spencer Pratt, a former reality TV personality, leads Democrat and City Council member Nithya Raman.
With 62 percent of votes counted as of Wednesday night, New York Times figures as of Thursday morning show:
Karen Bass â 183,701 (35 percent)
Spencer Pratt â 157,116 (29.9 percent)
Nithya Raman â 119,809 (22.8 percent)
No Republican has won Los Angeles mayor in over three decades. Prattâs performance signals voter frustration with the city after years of Democratic rule.
Spencer Pratt filed a complaint Tuesday on X against Karen Bass.
âKaren Bass just violated election law here,â Pratt wrote.
âShe is so accustomed to breaking the law with no accountability, she even filmed herself doing it. Well, those days are over. We just filed a formal complaint for illegally gaming the election. We must protect our democracy.â
âElectioneering within 100 feet of a ballot box is AGAINST THE LAW. Soliciting votes at a ballot box is AGAINST THE LAW,â he wrote.
âThese clear violations show a reckless disregard for the rule of law and our democratic process.â
âA person in a position of power such as Bass should be especially respectful of our democratic laws, but this is just emblematic of Karenâs mafia-like regime. Itâs ârules for thee, but not for me,ââ Pratt said.
Pratt posted a photo of the complaint. California law bans electioneering within 100 feet of ballot drop boxes. The complaint targets a Bass video showing her urging votes near a ballot box. A Bass spokesperson dismissed the complaint and questioned Prattâs campaign.
