Maybe so. At last check, the existing agreements pointedly try to guard against abuses, either way, which comprises of a major potential hurdle. Driving local producers out of business by flooding the markets with excess production can create security concerns, regardless.
I strongly hesitate to attribute Trump's words and claims to ignorance. He is friggin' stupid, going by the evidence, but the whole Canada thing screams out intentional malice, with stupidity only even potentially in a supporting role there.
Imagine is a fine song and invokes a fine ideal. What Trump is acting towards is a horrible caricature of that, at very best.
As with Trump, I hesitate to attribute Musk's BS to ignorance, especially when he keeps pushing it despite it certainly having been made clear, repeatedly, that it's BS. Intentional malice fits far better than ignorance. That leads to the assessment that rather than simply passively not trusting, he should be active distrusted and his words dismissed with prejudice. It's possible that he can tell truths, of course, but his words should be actively removed from any determination of truth.
Sometimes, they're even correct, of course. In this case, though, we have a very deservedly convicted felon who only avoided a lot more really deserved convictions by being elected and those stumping for him tossing about claims like that, which makes it much harder to categorize as simply a more normal losing party thing.