Listen to the article
Trump Halts Canada Trade Talks Over Reagan Ad Controversy
President Donald Trump abruptly withdrew from trade discussions with Canada on Thursday evening, citing his anger over what he called a “phony” television commercial produced by Ontario’s provincial government. The advertisement featured audio clips from a 1987 radio address by former President Ronald Reagan criticizing tariff policies.
The commercial included Reagan’s statement that “over the long run such trade barriers hurt every American worker and consumer.” Trump immediately took to Truth Social to denounce the ad, later telling reporters on the South Lawn before departing for Asia that the commercial was manipulated.
“They cheated on a commercial. Ronald Reagan loved tariffs and they said he didn’t. It was AI or something,” Trump claimed. “They cheated badly. Canada got caught cheating on a commercial.”
However, fact-checkers quickly determined the advertisement used authentic audio from Reagan’s April 25, 1987 presidential radio address. Context, a fact-checking tool on X (formerly Twitter), confirmed: “Ronald Reagan’s statements praising free trade, as reported in a commercial broadcast in Ontario, are not generated by artificial intelligence, as can be easily verified from the audio transcript provided by a reliable source.”
The fact-checking organization provided a link to the complete transcript from the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, along with the full audio recording of Reagan’s address.
While the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute criticized the advertisement for misrepresenting Reagan’s speech, they did not dispute the authenticity of the audio itself. Instead, they argued the commercial lacked proper context for Reagan’s remarks.
Reagan delivered the 1987 address during a period of rising economic tensions with Japan. In the complete speech, Reagan did extensively criticize protectionist trade policies, stating: “High tariffs inevitably lead to retaliation by foreign countries and the triggering of fierce trade wars. The result is more and more tariffs, higher and higher trade barriers, and less and less competition.”
The former president went on to describe the devastating economic consequences of such policies: “Soon, because of the prices made artificially high by tariffs that subsidize inefficiency and poor management, people stop buying. Then the worst happens: Markets shrink and collapse; businesses and industries shut down; and millions of people lose their jobs.”
Reagan’s actual trade record was more nuanced than his rhetoric suggested. While he frequently championed free trade principles, his administration did implement several protectionist measures. He imposed duties on Japanese semiconductors and heavy motorcycles, the latter designed to protect American manufacturer Harley-Davidson. Reagan also pressured Japanese automakers to accept “voluntary” export restrictions to the United States, which eventually led them to establish manufacturing plants across the American Midwest and South.
Robert Lighthizer, a Reagan trade official who later served as Trump’s top trade negotiator from 2017 to 2021, acknowledged this complexity in his 2023 memoir, writing that “President Reagan distinguished between free trade in theory and free trade in practice.”
Trump’s approach to tariffs stands in stark contrast to Reagan’s expressed reluctance to implement trade barriers. Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has imposed double-digit tariffs on products from nearly every nation globally, targeting sectors including automobiles, steel, and pharmaceuticals.
According to Yale University’s Budget Lab, the average effective U.S. tariff rate has surged from approximately 2.5% at the beginning of 2025 to 18% currently—the highest level since 1934. Trump has embraced this aggressive tariff strategy, proudly referring to himself as “Tariff Man.”
The president’s enthusiastic use of import taxes has prompted legal challenges from businesses and states arguing he has exceeded his constitutional authority. While the Constitution grants Congress the power to levy taxes, including tariffs, lawmakers have gradually delegated significant trade policy authority to the executive branch. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments on this matter in early December.
In his statements Thursday, Trump claimed the Canadian advertisement was designed “to interfere with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, and other courts” regarding his tariff authority.
Verify This Yourself
Use these professional tools to fact-check and investigate claims independently
Reverse Image Search
Check if this image has been used elsewhere or in different contexts
Ask Our AI About This Claim
Get instant answers with web-powered AI analysis
Related Fact-Checks
See what other fact-checkers have said about similar claims
Want More Verification Tools?
Access our full suite of professional disinformation monitoring and investigation tools


17 Comments
While I understand the desire to use powerful figures from the past to bolster one’s case, it’s crucial that we maintain integrity and honesty in our political discourse. Fact-checking is essential.
Absolutely. Manipulating historical quotes is a slippery slope that erodes public trust. I hope both sides can have a substantive, good-faith discussion based on the actual facts.
It’s disappointing to see accusations of dishonesty being thrown around, but I suppose that’s par for the course in the current political climate. Hopefully the underlying trade issues can be resolved constructively.
You make a fair point. Both sides often seem more interested in scoring political points than finding mutually beneficial solutions. Maintaining perspective and good-faith dialogue is crucial.
This trade dispute highlights the ongoing tensions between Canada and the US, but resorting to misleading tactics is unlikely to resolve anything. I hope the leaders can find a pragmatic way forward that benefits both countries.
Interesting how the political spin on Reagan’s trade views can vary. It’s important to fact-check claims and get the full historical context rather than cherry-picking quotes.
Agreed. Both sides often try to selectively use past leaders’ statements to support their current positions. Staying objective and looking at the primary sources is key.
While it’s concerning to see allegations of dishonesty, I think it’s important to avoid knee-jerk reactions and instead focus on the substantive trade issues at hand. Cooler heads should prevail on both sides.
Well said. Getting bogged down in partisan posturing rarely leads to productive outcomes. The leaders need to take a step back and concentrate on finding mutually agreeable solutions, not scoring political points.
It’s concerning to see trade discussions derailed by accusations of misleading advertising. While I can understand the desire to use historical figures to bolster one’s position, it’s crucial that we stick to the facts and have an honest, good-faith dialogue.
I agree. Both sides should focus on the substantive issues at hand rather than getting caught up in partisan point-scoring. Maintaining transparency and accountability is key to finding a mutually beneficial solution.
This dispute over the Reagan ad is a disappointing distraction from the real trade issues at stake. While I can understand the temptation to selectively use historical figures, it’s crucial that we have an open and honest dialogue based on facts, not partisan spin.
This dispute over the Reagan ad highlights the polarized political environment we live in, where both sides seem more interested in winning the messaging war than solving real-world problems. A more measured, fact-based approach is needed.
You’re absolutely right. Resorting to accusations of dishonesty or manipulation is unlikely to foster the kind of constructive dialogue that’s needed to resolve complex trade issues. Maintaining objectivity and good faith should be the priority.
This kind of misleading advertising is disappointing, but not surprising in the highly partisan world of politics and trade policy. I hope both sides can find a constructive way forward.
You’re right, it’s all too common for political ads to distort the past to score points in the present. Hopefully cooler heads can prevail and they can focus on the real issues at hand.
It’s concerning to see trade talks undermined by accusations of dishonesty and manipulation. While I can appreciate the desire to invoke the authority of past leaders, it’s vital that we maintain integrity and stick to the facts. Constructive dialogue should be the priority.