Alberta separatists get promise of money from us government

1. What actually happened: meetings, claims and the players involved

Multiple outlets report that activists tied to Alberta separatist initiatives, principally the Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) and related organizers, held several meetings with U.S. officials during the Trump administration to press for support for a possible Alberta independence effort, and separatist leaders have said they sought financial backing or recognition from Washington ^{[1] [2] [3]}; the Financial Times first documented the meetings and Al Jazeera and the BBC, among others, corroborated follow-up reporting that three meetings were reported and that APP representatives sought U.S. engagement ^{[1] [2] [5]}.

2. What separatists say was discussed: loans and recognition, but differing figures

Separatist spokespeople have claimed U.S. officials discussed mechanisms to help a newly independent Alberta, including talk of credit facilities or loans; one outlet reported APP sought a $500 billion credit facility while separatist leaders and allied figures have also described discussions of hundreds of millions of dollars in potential lending—reporting varies on the precise sums and attributes those figures to separatist claims rather than to an official U.S. pledge ^{[6] [3]}.

3. What U.S. officials actually said in public and how journalists framed it

Senior U.S. figures made public comments that many interpreted as sympathetic: U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent called Alberta a “natural partner for the US,” and other U.S. officials were reported as meeting separatist representatives, but available reporting records public remarks and meetings rather than an executed policy or signed financial commitment to underwrite secession ^{[5] [7] [1]}. Journalists from the BBC, The Guardian and Le Monde highlighted the gap between private meetings or off-the-record chatter and formal government action, and noted how rhetorical encouragement differs from a treaty, loan agreement or formal recognition ^{[4] [8] [7]}.

4. Canadian reaction: sovereignty alarm and political condemnation

Canadian political leaders framed the contacts as a severe breach of norms: British Columbia’s premier called seeking U.S. assistance for Alberta independence “treason,” and Prime Minister Mark Carney publicly urged respect for Canadian sovereignty after reports of the meetings surfaced, reflecting sharp domestic alarm even as separatist support polls remained minority positions in Alberta ^{[9] [4] [6]}. Provincial premiers and federal leaders have also emphasized that petitions and signature drives are active but do not equate to an imminent or internationally backed secession ^[10].

5. How credible is the “promise of money” narrative?

The strongest, verifiable facts in the record are the meetings and public comments; specific claims that the U.S. government promised funding rest on assertions by separatist participants and on media summaries of what was discussed, not on a confirmed, documented U.S. government commitment to underwrite Alberta’s independence—reporting traces conversations and aspirational asks (including widely different dollar figures in different accounts) but does not produce a signed loan, executed credit facility or formal U.S. pledge as of the sources reviewed ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

6. Why this matters and the likely real-world limits

Even without a binding U.S. pledge, the political effect of meetings and sympathetic comments is tangible: they amplified the separatist movement’s visibility, prompted domestic backlash and raised questions about foreign interference and diplomatic norms, but major obstacles—Canadian constitutional law, provincial and federal politics, public opinion in Alberta, and the logistical and financial hurdles of secession—mean that reported U.S. overtures, whether rhetorical or exploratory, do not equate to an easy path to independence backed by Washington ^{[10] [4] [7]}.