Elon Musk is back to attacking President Trump's agenda, but Trump isn't taking the bait.
Trump shrugged off Musk's latest mood swing after the Tesla CEO started ripping into the Senate version of Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill."
Musk had previously apologized to Trump for hurling bitter insults during a dramatic rift that opened up in early June. The Tesla CEO had called for Republicans to kill Trump's legislation, calling it an "abomination" and later tying Trump to Jeffrey Epstein's crimes without evidence.
The president was magnanimous in an interview Sunday with Fox News, calling his former campaign benefactor a "wonderful" guy despite his latest criticism.
However, Trump kept his distance, noting he hasn't spoken to Musk very much since he went haywire the first time.
"I think he's a wonderful guy. I haven't spoken to him much, but I think Elon is a wonderful guy, and I know he's going to do well always," Trump told Fox News' Maria Bartiromo.
"He's a smart guy. And he actually went and campaigned with me and this and that. But he got a little bit upset, and that wasn't appropriate."
Weeks after his initial meltdown, Musk is once again sounding off at a critical juncture as Republicans scramble to finalize the Big, Beautiful bill before Trump's July 4th deadline.
"The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country! Utterly insane and destructive," Musk wrote.
In another post Monday, Musk called for a new political party in a direct shot at Trump and his sway over the GOP.
"It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!! Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people," Musk wrote.
While Musk insists that his main issue is with federal spending, Trump says Musk is upset that the bill does not advance his electric car agenda.
"Why did he get upset? He just wasn't getting what he wanted?" Bartiromo asked Trump.
"Look, the electric vehicle mandate, the EV mandate, is a tough thing for him. I would, you know, I don't want everybody to have to have an electric car," Trump said.
For now, it seems Trump wants to avoid drawing attention to Musk's latest criticism, but we'll have to see if Trump's approach changes in the coming days.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump's announcement that he was ending trade negotiations with Canada over a new digital services tax imposed by America's northern neighbor has brought results: The suspension of that tax.
According to an announcement from the Department of Finance Canada, those negotiations had been underway.
"To support those negotiations, the minister of Finance and National Revenue, the Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, announced today that Canada would rescind the Digital Services Tax (DST) in anticipation of a mutually beneficial comprehensive trade arrangement with the United States," a government statement confirmed.
"Consistent with this action, Prime Minister Carney and President Trump have agreed that parties will resume negotiations with a view towards agreeing on a deal by July 21, 2025."
Canada's statement said, "The DST was announced in 2020 to address the fact that many large technology companies operating in Canada may not otherwise pay tax on revenues generated from Canadians. Canada's preference has always been a multilateral agreement related to digital services taxation. While Canada was working with international partners, including the United States, on a multilateral agreement that would replace national digital services taxes, the DST was enacted to address the aforementioned taxation gap."
"In our negotiations on a new economic and security relationship between Canada and the United States, Canada's new government will always be guided by the overall contribution of any possible agreement to the best interests of Canadian workers and businesses. Today's announcement will support a resumption of negotiations toward the July 21, 2025, timeline set out at this month's G7 Leaders' Summit in Kananaskis," said Mark Carney, the prime minister.
WND had reported only days ago that Trump had halted those negotiations and said a new tariff for Canada would be imposed because of the DST.
"We have just been informed that Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products, has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country," Trump said at the time on social media. "They are obviously copying the European Union, which has done the same thing, and is currently under discussion with us, also. Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately."
President Donald Trump will resume trade talks with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney after Canada decided late Sunday to rescind its 3% digital services tax on U.S. companies that profit from Canadian customers.
The tax was rescinded "in anticipation of a mutually beneficial comprehensive trade arrangement with the United States," the Canadian government said.
"Consistent with this action, Prime Minister Carney and President Trump have agreed that parties will resume negotiations with a view towards agreeing on a deal by July 21, 2025," Canada’s Department of Finance said in a news release.
The tax was due to be collected on Monday June 30, but that has now been halted.
Legislation in Canada to rescind the tax is expected to be enacted in the near future.
The tax has been in effect for roughly a year. It impacts companies including Amazon, Meta, Google, and Apple.
Trump terminated the trade talks on Friday because of the tax.
"They are obviously copying the European Union, which has done the same thing, and is currently under discussion with us, also. Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately," Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.
Trump also posted that Canada is "a very difficult Country to TRADE with" and has imposed 400% tariffs on some dairy products it exports to the U.S.
Canada is currently the largest trading partner of the U.S., so the lack of a deal would impact markets in both countries.
More U.S. exports go to Canada than any other country, and Canada is a major supplier to the U.S. of crude oil, natural gas, and electricity.
Trump knows he has to make a deal with Canada, but he also wants to fight for fairness in the trade between the two countries.
Outside of oil imports, the U.S. has a trade surplus with Canada, but with the oil included, there is a deficit.
Canada also holds over $300 billion of U.S. debt, but also owes the U.S. a significant amount of money.
The Supreme Court has chosen to uphold a fundamental provision of the Affordable Care Act, securing the preventive health care coverage crucial to many Americans, the Associated Press reported.
This decision impacts roughly 150 million people by ensuring continued access to preventive health services.
On Friday, the Supreme Court delivered a 6-3 decision in favor of maintaining a significant component of the health care policy. The law, commonly known as Obamacare, faced a challenge centered on its coverage requirements for preventive care. This component is essential to Americans who rely on it for access to various health services without extra costs.
The controversy focused on the United States Preventive Services Task Force, a volunteer panel of medical professionals. This group determines specific health services and medications that should be covered under the Affordable Care Act. The challenge raised questions about the legitimacy of the Task Force, which operates without Senate approval.
The court concluded that Senate approval was not necessary. This ruling came because the Task Force operates under the supervision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The Secretary maintains significant influence over the Task Force, including control over its membership and recommendations.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh emphasized this point, stating the Secretary has the authority to influence recommendations by changing Task Force members. This control was crucial in the decision to reject the challenge from Christian employers.
The decision holds implications for numerous medications and health services, such as those for HIV prevention, lung cancer screenings, and breast cancer medications. By dismissing the challenge, the court ensures these services remain accessible at no cost.
The legal challenge originated after an appeals court in the U.S. 5th Circuit struck down some Affordable Care Act coverage mandates. The Supreme Court's decision effectively overturns the appeals court ruling, reinforcing the health care coverage system established under Obamacare.
Alan Balch, CEO of the Patient Advocate Foundation, expressed relief, noting that the decision spares patients from losing access to vital health resources. The preservation of this coverage maintains the public's ability to receive preventive care without additional financial burden.
The case was brought forward by Christian employers, represented by conservative attorney Jonathan Mitchell. Mitchell, famously known for his involvement in past legal representation for Donald Trump, argued against the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act's preventive coverage requirements. His arguments ultimately did not sway the court's decision.
Justice Clarence Thomas acknowledged the court's duty to uphold laws, regardless of personal agreement. His voice was one of six in the decision that maintained the integrity of Obamacare's health care mandates.
The ramifications of this decision highlight the nation's ongoing political discourse surrounding health care legislation. While the ruling secures preventive coverage, organizations such as GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders caution about the potential future politicization of the Task Force.
The Supreme Court's decision fuels the broader conversation about health care access in America. Ensuring that millions of citizens continue to receive preventive care at no charge is a victory for many advocates of Obamacare.
However, the ruling also underscores the persistent debate over the role of the federal government in health care. Some view it as a necessary guarantee of public health, while others perceive it as overreach.
As the Affordable Care Act endures, the public remains attentive to how such legal challenges might evolve. The successful defense of the preventive care provision underscores its importance within the broader context of national health policy.
The feud between Elon Musk, the former head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and President Donald Trump was rough for the MAGA world, as Musk was well-liked by many until that.
While the dust-up had died down for the most part, it could soon be reignited after Musk leveled a new round of criticism against Trump's "big, beautiful" spending bill, which is what sparked a fight between the two previously.
Musk, in an X post over the weekend, held nothing back as he launched a fresh round of attacks on the bill that he claims will have the opposite effect that the GOP is hoping for.
The Tesla and SpaceX billionaire went as far as to claim that the bill would amount to "political suicide" for the Republican Party.
Not unlike President Trump, Musk held nothing back in his criticism, making sure his tens of millions of followers understand the impact he believes the spending bill will ultimately have on America.
"The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country! Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future," Musk wrote on his X account.
The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!
Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future. https://t.co/TZ9w1g7zHF
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 28, 2025
In a later post citing a poll, Musk wrote, "Polls show that this bill is political suicide for the Republican Party."
CBS News noted:
The criticisms reopen a recent fiery conflict between the former head of the Department of Government Efficiency and the administration he recently left. They also represent yet another headache for Republican Senate leaders who have spent the weekend working overtime to get the legislation through their chamber so it can pass by Mr. Trump's Fourth of July deadline.
Musk previously spent weeks attacking the bill before it went to the Senate, which sparked a battle with President Trump.
Users across social media weighed in on Musk's most recent criticisms.
"I’m pretty sure President Trump knows a little more than running the country and creating jobs than you do. Actually a whole lot more," one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "DISAGREE. Happy that wind & solar are being taxed higher. I’m tired of seeing farmland all around me turn into solar panels. You are being selfish."
It'll be fascinating to see if Musk's latest words spark another argument with the president.
The MAGA world would love nothing more than for another Trump family member to pick up where President Donald Trump leaves off at the end of his second term in 2028.
According to The Guardian, Eric Trump, 41, could possibly be that person. The outlet reported that Eric Trump recently suggested that running in the next presidential election could be an "easy" road should he choose to pursue it.
The president's son has been a vocal advocate for his father and the Trump family and is currently co-executive vice-president of the Trump Organization. He holds a great deal of influence over his father's empire and has the same connections.
Many have suggested that Donald Trump Jr. would be the next Trump to try to hold the White House, though he's not been as forthcoming with his thoughts on actually running.
Eric Trump revealed his thoughts on the matter during a recent interview with the Finacial Times, noting that there would be many deep considerations before he would choose to campaign and essentially upend his family's life.
"The real question is: ‘Do you want to drag other members of your family into it?… Would I want my kids to live the same experience over the last decade that I’ve lived?'" Trump told the outlet.
Eric Trump made it clear that he believes his father's last name could carry him to the White House but noted that he believes other Trump family members could have the same pathway if they wanted it.
"You know, if the answer was yes, I think the political path would be an easy one, meaning, I think I could do it," the middle Trump son added. "And by the way, I think other members of our family could do it too."
The Guardian noted:
Unlike his other siblings, Donald Jr and Ivanka Trump, the 41-year-old has mostly stayed away from politics, focusing instead on running the family business since his father entered the Oval Office in 2017.
However, he seems to have kept one eye on politics this whole time, saying he found himself “wholly unimpressed by half the politicians” he sees and that he could do the job “very effectively”.
The next presidential election will be stocked full of frontrunners, including Vice President J.D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, among others.
When asked if the 2024 election would go down as the last one with a Trump on the ballot, Trump dropped a major hint in the eyes of some .
"I don’t know … Time will tell. But there’s more people than just me," he said.
He added, "The question is, do you want to do it? And do you want to subject the people that you love to the brutality of this system? And I’m not sure if I can answer that question yet."
Only time will tell if Eric Trump -- or another Trump family member -- goes down that path.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump on Sunday pushed a "temporary pass" for immigrant farmworkers in America, while he blasted "lunatics" in Biden administration for bringing prisoners from other countries into America, calling it "a sin that we can never forget."
"This to me was the worst part of Biden," Trump said in an exclusive interview on "Sunday Morning Futures" with Maria Bartiromo on the Fox News Channel. "The worst thing he did was the whole thing on immigration."
"They would empty their prisons into the United States," Trump said. "Not just South America, Africa, Asia, Europe, parts of Europe, rough parts of Europe.
"Their prisons were emptied into the United States and the people, you saw the people.
They run into the country. To me, that's a sin that we can never forget. We can never forget what Biden and that group of lunatics that work for him have done to our country."
"If I didn't get elected, I'm telling you, we wouldn't have had a country left."
Trump also says he's working on a temporary pass for immigrants working on American farms.
"We're gonna work it so that some kind of a temporary pass where people pay taxes, where the farmer can have a little control, as opposed to you walk in and take everybody away. But no, I want, the criminals are going out of this country."
"I cherish our farmers, and when we go into a farm and when we take away people that have been working there for 15 and 20 years, who are good, who possibly came in incorrectly, and what we're gonna do is we're gonna do something for farmers where we can let the farmers sort of be in charge.
"The farmer knows. He's not gonna hire a murderer. But when you go into a farm and he's had somebody working for him for nine years doing this kind of work, which is hard work to do, and a lot of people aren't gonna do it, and you end up destroying a farmer because you took all the people away."
"It's a problem. You know, I'm on both sides of the thing. I'm the strongest immigration guy that there's ever been, but I'm also the strongest farmer guy that there's ever been. And that also includes also hotels and places where people work, a certain group of people work."
Regarding this week's victory of socialist Zohran Mamdani in New York City's Democratic primary in the race for mayor, Trump called him a "radical left lunatic."
"He's a communist. I think it's very bad for New York. I don't know that he's gonna get in. It's inconceivable. But he's a communist and he's a pure communist. I think he admits it," Trump explained.
"I can't imagine it, but let's say this. If he does get in, I'm gonna be president, and he's gonna have to do the right thing or they're not getting any money. He's got to do the right thing."
Trump avoided saying whom he'd like to see as NYC mayor, but added: "I can tell you this. Who's ever mayor of New York is gonna have to behave themselves or the federal government is coming down very tough on them financially."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
With Republican U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina announcing Sunday he won't seek reelection in 2026, Lara Trump, the daughter-in-law of President Donald Trump, is said to be strongly thinking about a run for that seat in Congress.
The report from NOTUS says Lara Trump, the former co-chair of the Republican National Committee during the 2024 presidential race and current Fox News host on Saturday night, is "seriously considering" a Senate run.
She previously had considered replacing Florida U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio when the president selected the Rubio to be secretary of state.
"Certainly, the fact that my name has been mentioned among many other very qualified, highly regarded people as a potential fit for this," Lara Trump said of possible replacing Rubio in the Senate at the time.
"Yes, it's very intriguing, and I'm seriously considering it."
"She is so highly respected by women!" President Trump said of Lara in December. "I mean, even her workout routines are through the roof."
A poll taken in December showed seven of 10 Republicans in the Tar Heel State want Lara Trump in the Senate.
"The Victory Insights poll of North Carolina Republicans finds that 69% of them want the Republican National Committee Co-Chair to be their next senator, with just 11% preferring incumbent Thom Tillis," reported Florida Politics.
"Other Republicans weighing bids include current RNC chair Michael Whatley, freshman U.S. Representative and former Green Beret Pat Harrigan, as well as Representatives Dan Bishop and Richard Hudson, according to party operatives," reported DeepNewz.
NOTUS reported: "One RNC official pushed back on this, saying that Whatley is 'not actively considering a bid for the North Carolina Senate seat.'"
South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, who chairs the National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman, says he's confident Republicans will hold the seat being vacated by Tillis.
"President Trump has won North Carolina three times, and the state's been represented by two Republican Senators for over a decade," Scott said, according to HuffPost.
"That streak will continue in 2026 when North Carolinians elect a conservative leader committed to advancing an agenda of opportunity, prosperity, and security."
As WorldNetDaily reported, just hours after voting no on advancing President Trump's "big, beautiful" bill and the president's vow to have him primaried, U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., announced Sunday he will not seek reelection.
"In Washington over the last few years, it's become increasingly evident that leaders who are willing to embrace bipartisanship, compromise, and demonstrate independent thinking are becoming an endangered species," Tillis said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The U.S. Senate passed a procedural step Saturday night by a 51-49 vote to move forward with President Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Act, as Vice President JD Vance stood by in case he was needed to break a tie.
Trump has called on Congress to approve the package of tax cuts and spending by July 4th.
As reported by the Associated Press, the vote came after tense scenes played out in the chamber as voting came to a standstill, dragging for hours as holdout senators huddled for negotiations. In the end, two Republicans, Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, opposed the motion to proceed to debate, joining all Democrats.
Ahead of the expected roll call, the White House released a statement saying it "strongly supports passage" of the bill that "implements critical aspects" of the president's agenda.
"It's time to get this legislation across the finish line," said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D.
The 940-page bill was released shortly before midnight Friday, and senators are expected to grind through the hours of all-night debate and amendments in the days ahead, AP reports. If the Senate is able to pass a version of the legislation, the bill would go back to the House for a final round of votes before reaching Trump's desk.
As WND reported, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York is expected to call for a full reading of the text in the Senate, which would take hours.
The U.S. Supreme Court has proven to be a new source of drama given how the conservative majority decides on certain issues, and especially when conservative justices break away from the pack and side with the liberal justices.
According to Newsweek, Justice Neil Gorsuch shocked his colleagues and Republicans across Washington D.C. this week after he joined liberal justices in a dissent regarding an opinion on one of the latest immigration cases.
President Donald Trump's immigration policies have been wrapped up in the judicial system since Day One of his second term in office. Many of those cases are filtering up to the Supreme Court, and those decisions have been coming down mostly in Trump's favor as of late.
It was on Thursday, when the high court made a ruling on Riley v. Bondi that Justice Gorsuch broke away from his conservative colleagues on a ruling that favored the Trump administration.
Newsweek recapped what the case involved and how the Trump administration had to fight to make it happen.
The outlet noted:
The case centers around Pierre Riley, a man from Jamaica facing deportation from the United States who had been convicted on drug charges in 2008. After his release in 2021, immigration authorities took him into custody and sought his removal under a final administrative removal order (FARO).
Notably, Riley didn't contest his deportation from the United States, except he argued that he should not be returned to Jamaica, invoking the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).
He claimed that he could be killed by a drug kingpin should he be returned to his home country.
Newsweek added:
An immigration judge sent his case to a "withholding-only proceeding," which decided whether he could be removed to his home country. During that proceeding, a judge granted deferral of his removal to Jamaica over those concerns.
Kristi Noem's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), "which opted to enforce the earlier removal order," the outlet noted.
Gorsuch, who was appointed by President Trump, joined three liberal justices in dissenting from the case.
"The question is when Riley should have petitioned for judicial review of the Board's order," the dissent reads.
"Was his petition due 30 days after the Government first notified him he would be deported, well over a year before the Board issued the order Riley sought to challenge? Or was it instead due 30 days after the order denying his claim for deferral of removal? The answer is clear: One should not be required to appeal an order before it exists."
It'll be interesting to see what the final decision the case will be.