Elon Musk's row with President Donald Trump turned ugly after Musk resorted to leftist smear tactics to attack Trump using “a guilt by association” smear.
Musk falsely claimed on Thursday that the Department of Justice has not released the Jeffrey Epstein files because President Trump is named in them. While Trump's connection with the late billionaire financier has been established, Musk's claims of Trump being a client are completely unfounded.
Trump, like the entirety of America's rich and powerful, has either met Epstein or conducted some kind of business with him.
Epstein, who was convicted of sex trafficking young girls for the rich and powerful, made it a point to connect with anyone with influence and power. However, Trump has never been named by any of Epstein's victims, and there is nothing indicating that Trump participated in Epstein's sordid business.
This much is obvious, as anything connecting Trump to Epstein's sex trafficking would have come out years ago. This didn't stop Musk from making absurd claims against Trump in a tantrum that has been humiliating for all involved.
Musk's sudden decision to go ballistic on Trump has been humiliating for Musk's supporters in the Republican Party, as Democrats, who have treated Musk like the second coming of Hitler, are eagerly jumping on this bizarre spat.
In a post to X, Musk stated, "Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!"
No citations or new information were provided in this post, and the post felt like a retread of a very tired attack against Trump. Trump's innocence in the Epstein saga has long been established, as Trump was one of the first major figures to distance himself from Epstein.
All the way back in 2004, Trump distanced himself from Epstein months ahead of a criminal investigation into Epstein. At the time, Epstein was a massive power player in New York and Democrat social circles.
Furthermore, the reason the Epstein files are being slowwalked is because of the massive operation that the Department of Justice is taking to protect victims and filter out criminal material.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a statement saying that the DOJ was busy handling "tens of thousands of videos of Epstein with children or child porn." Bondi confirmed there were “hundreds of victims,” and explained that “no one victim will ever get released."
Many suspect that this spat between Trump and Musk will likely not be permanent, as Trump has exercised significant restraint in not attacking Musk. Furthermore, many of Musk's threats have remained just threats.
Many Republicans suspect that Musk will be back in the fold quickly, as the GOP is the only place where his political views will be welcomed. Musk has been demonized by Democrats who have accused him of being a Nazi and an oligarch determined to overthrow the nation.
However, Musk has done permenant damage to his reputation with this tantrum as many Conservatives have watched him go ballistic over a political disagreement and resort to slinging mud at someone who has been a close ally.
Former First Lady, bestselling author and media developer Michelle Obama explained this week that she was okay with her daughter Malia dropping the Obama name from her film credits as a signal that she is making her own way in the industry.
The 23-year-old presented her short film "The Heart" at the Sundance Festival in 2024 under the name Malia Ann, replacing her last name with her middle name in an attempt to be more anonymous.
Obama told Kate and Oliver Hudson on their podcast Sibling Revelry, “Our daughters [Malia and Sasha] are 25 and 23. They are young adult women, but they definitely went through a period in their teen years where it was the push away … [where] you’re trying to distinguish yourself.”
“I mean, it is very important for my kids to feel like they’ve earned what they are getting in the world, and they don’t want people to assume that they don’t work hard, that they’re just naturally, just handed things,” she said. “They’re very sensitive to that — they want to be their own people “Malia, who started in film, I mean, her first project — she took off her last name, and we were like, they’re still going to know it’s you, Malia. But we respected the fact that she’s trying to make her way.”
Of course, the former first lady is right that the attempt at anonymity largely failed. Her film got a lot of attention and the media stories about it clearly said that she was the daughter of a former president (and his also very famous wife).
The reviews of her movie were mixed, with some calling it terrible and others (like the New York Times) praising it.
She was also called a nepo baby by some outlets because of her famous parents.
And let's face it--the odds of an unknown working with Donald Glover while still in college and then getting him to produce an 18-minute film are fractional at best.
She probably would not have had the opportunity to intern with both the CBS sci-fi series Extant and HBO hit Girls, either.
Like one social media commenter featured in Newsweek said, she should just "own" her name and connections, which might have included greats Kate Capshaw and Steven Spielberg, according to the mentions in her movie's credits.
Malia would have to try a lot harder to get enough distance from her famous parents to make the playing field level, but as long as she can claim she's trying to make her own way, she can claim plausible deniability, right?
Like parents, like daughter, in any case.
The streaming outlets were falling all over themselves to give the Obamas millions and millions of dollars to produce content for them, even though neither one of them had ever done it before.
The world is at Sasha and Malia's feet, and there's really nothing they can do about it other than refuse the spoils or accept them. To pretend things are any different is just ridiculous.
U.S. policy toward Syria will change "because none of them worked" over the past century, and the country's military footprint will shrink from eight bases to one, according to the newly appointed U.S. special envoy.
The comments were made during an interview with the Turkish channel NTV late on Monday by Thomas Barrack, who was appointed special envoy by President Trump last month, just after the unexpected lifting of U.S. sanctions on Syria, as Breitbart News reported.
On the ground in Syria, the majority of the approximately 2,000 American troops are stationed in the northeast. Islamic State was driven back from huge parts of Iraq and Syria in 2014, and they are collaborating with local forces to stop them from regaining control.
Following the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad in December by rebels, the US and other nations are reestablishing ties with Damascus, now led by Ahmed al-Sharaa.
For the first time since 2012, Barrack—who is also the United States ambassador to Turkey—raised the American flag over the ambassador's residence in Damascus last week.
When asked about the future of U.S. troops in Syria and how the Trump administration plans to handle the situation, Barrack said:
"What I can assure you is that our current Syria policy will not be close to the Syria policy of the last 100 years, because none of these have worked."
An interview transcript of the recent comments shows that he mentioned cutting the number of bases from eight to one as one of the more significant aspects of that change.
In April, reporters were told by two security sources at U.S. military facilities that military equipment and trucks were already leaving eastern Deir el-Zor and were being concentrated in Hasakah province.
The withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Deir el-Zor province was supposedly part of the consolidation plan, according to one of the sources.
The military presence will be lowered "if and when appropriate," depending on conditions, according to a U.S. State Department official.
According to Barrack, the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are an ally of the United States and a "very important factor" for Congress, who helps guide the policy.
He also emphasized the importance of directing them to become a part of a new Syrian government: "Everyone needs to be reasonable in their expectations," he said.
The SDF is the primary ally for the United States-led coalition against Islamic State militants in Syria.
According to an arrest report that was acquired by NBC News, a man from Texas was taken into custody on Tuesday and charged with trespassing on the premises of President Donald Trump's club in Palm Beach, Florida.
After arriving at the Mar-a-Lago resort shortly after midnight, the Palm Beach police department said that they were greeted by Secret Service personnel who had detained Anthony Reyes, who was 23 years old, as The Daily Caller reported.
An apparent allusion to the president's granddaughter Kai, who is 18 years old and the eldest daughter of Donald Trump Jr., was made by Reyes when he allegedly informed police that he had climbed a wall that surrounded the property in order to "spread the gospel" to Trump and "marry Kai at the same time."
According to the arrest report, officials from the Secret Service stated that they discovered Reyes on the property and that he informed them that "he had jumped over the wall to get into property."
According to the authorities, Reyes was not authorized to access the protected area. The police report stated that he had an arrest record for trespassing on the premises on New Year's Eve.
A representative from the Secret Service confirmed in a statement that Reyes was apprehended by agents following his actions of "scaled a perimeter fence and triggered alarms."
"No Secret Service protectees were present at the time of this incident," the spokesperson added.
An official from the White House informed NBC News that Trump had received a briefing about the incident but had asked the Secret Service for more details.
Court documents indicate that Reyes was detained at the Palm Beach County Jail and given a bond of $50,000. Among the conditions of the release was a prohibition on any communication with Trump or his family members, including Kai Trump. He pleaded not guilty, according to the report.
Following an attempted assassination at a Trump campaign rally in July, the Secret Service designated Mar-a-Lago as a nationally protected location.
The targeting of Trump's Florida property took place before Tuesday's arrest.
Last October, a man from Florida was charged with plotting Trump's assassination at his West Palm Beach golf course.
The alleged scheme has resulted in charges being brought against Ryan Routh at both the state and federal levels.
Additionally, Idaho's Warren Jones Crazybull was indicted for threatening to murder Trump via phone calls to his Mar-a-Lago home.
Sen Rand Paul (R-KY) said Monday that even after discussions with President Donald Trump over the weekend about his "big beautiful bill," he plans to vote no because of the $5 trillion debt ceiling increase, which he believes will increase deficit spending too much.
"We have never raised the debt ceiling without actually meeting that target," he told reporters. "So you can say it doesn't directly add to the debt, but if you increase the ceiling $5 trillion, you'll meet that. And what it does is it puts it off the back-burner. And then we won't discuss it for a year or two."
The increase is the largest in the country's history.
"So I think it's a terrible idea to do this," he added.
Paul said he would likely support the rest of the bill if the debt ceiling increase was removed and considered separately.
Paul said that the country is still spending at Biden-GOP spending levels because of an agreement in March to avert a government shutdown, which will result in $2.2 trillion in deficit spending when the fiscal year ends in September.
That's just not conservative," he added. "They're borrowing 5 trillion. That means they're anticipating the following year being over 2 trillion as well. So it's just not a conservative thing to do."
Trump said that if Paul and other Republicans vote against the bill and block it, they will damage the economy and raise taxes.
"If Senator Rand Paul votes against our Great, Big, Beautiful Bill, he is voting for, along with the Radical Left Democrats, a 68% Tax Increase and, perhaps even more importantly, a first time ever default on U.S. Debt," he wrote on his Truth Social platform.
"Rand will be playing right into the hands of the Democrats, and the GREAT people of Kentucky will never forgive him! The GROWTH we are experiencing, plus some cost-cutting later on, will solve ALL problems. America will be greater than ever before!" he added.
Paul is correct in that continued deficit spending will not be good for the economy in the long run.
It's a long shot that we could grow our way out of a $2-plus trillion a year deficit plus $34 trillion in existing debt.
Furthermore, kicking the spending cut can down the road again is exactly what all presidents, Democrat or Republican, have been doing for decades now.
Paul said he thinks he has the votes to prevent the bill from passing. "I think there are four of us at this point, and I would be very surprised if the bill at least is not modified in a good direction," he said.
An energy watchdog group reported to Breitbart News after an investigation that it found evidence of "criminal" impersonation of the president in how the autopen was used to approve legislation and executive actions.
Energy expert Daniel Turner, founder of Power the Future released a report last week alleging that at least eight major actions by Biden were signed with the autopen, including several bans on offshore drilling.
“You know, I get so angry when I have these conversations about this because I deal with the people whose livelihoods were destroyed. It takes a lot of effort to not curse and be profane because what they did to the American people is not just criminal, it’s evil,” Turner told radio show host Matt Boyle. “It’s genuinely morally reprehensible. The damage that we did, that we continue to do, to the American people, all because we’re ‘worried about Donald Trump.'”
Turner wondered whether the staffers who used the autopen in this way had presidential immunity against prosecution but argued that "people died" from the actions of those who used Biden's autopen.
"People died as a result of this, quite literally," he said, connecting some of the actions to the war in Ukraine. "So there is no hiding behind presidential privilege. There is no saying, ‘Well, I was working for the president, and you can’t subpoena me.’"
"These are really criminal, criminal, allegedly criminal acts that are worthy of investigation," he argued. "You can’t act in Persona Presidente, right? You can’t commandeer the president’s autopen and put forward policies."
He used some of what was presented in the new book "Original Sin" about Biden's cognitive decline and how staffers dealt with it to explain what happened.
“As they said in the book, when they’re willing to do undemocratic things to protect democracy, those people are admitting they’re willing to do undemocratic things to stay in power. And that’s what they did the last four years with the auto pen," he said.
The group noted that Biden never spoke of or acknowledged the actions they allege were autopenned without his knowledge.
Group leadership said this proves he didn't know about them.
Last week, Power the Future wrote letters to the Department of Justice (DOJ), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Department of Energy (DOE) asking the agencies to investigate the autopen usage.
Turner said on Fox News that letters were also sent to the House and Senate Oversight committees.
"When you have an executive order to ban offshore oil and gas drilling … That’s a pretty damn big ban,
Turner said to Boyle. "When you have that and you sign it by autopen, there are process crimes.”
"The chief of staff had to know what was going on," he accused. "The staff secretary — every time Donald Trump signs an executive order, we see the staff secretary hand him that order, explain it, the president signs it. There are personnel involved in processes.”
The Trump administration has withdrawn the nomination of Jared Isaacman as NASA Administrator in a move that surprised many.
Liz Huston, a spokesperson for the White House, issued a statement explaining that it was "essential that the next leader of NASA” be completely onboard with President Donald Trump's America First agenda.
This explanation suggests that there was some sort of disagreement between Isaacman and the Trump administration on how NASA was going to participate in the MAGA agenda.
Huston's statement explained, "The Administrator of NASA will help lead humanity into space and execute President Trump’s bold mission of planting the American flag on the planet Mars. It’s essential that the next leader of NASA is in complete alignment with President Trump’s American First agenda and a replacement will be announced directly by President Trump soon.”
There is little to no information in this statement that hints at the real reason behind Isaacman's nomination, and many Congressional Republicans are not happy.
Isaacman was on pace to be confirmed by Congress without trouble, as he had previously testified before the Senate Commerce Committee in April, which ended in him being “advanced out of committee in a 19-9 vote."
Furthermore, Isaacman was a good candidate to help NASA work with the private sector as he has previously worked alongside SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who is seen as a trailblazer of the aerospace industry.
So it is no surprise to see the dismissal of Isaacman be greeted with both confusion and anger from some Republicans who were sold on confirming him as NASA's next administrator.
Senator Tim Sheehy (R-MT) took to X to say, "Astronaut and successful businessman @RookIsaacman was a strong choice by President Trump to lead NASA. I was proud to introduce Jared at his hearing and strongly oppose efforts to derail his nomination."
Conservative activist Robby Starbuck also weighed in on the decision by saying, "The White House just pulled Jared Isaacman’s nomination to lead NASA. A big mistake to keep the acting Administrator (Janet Petro) in charge of NASA. She’s a true believer in DEI. Keeping her in charge is inexcusable and @rookisaacman was a tremendous pick lead our space agency."
Starbucks' tweet only further clouds the waters on what is happening with NASA as Petro ended NASA's DEI programs in January following Trump's inauguration. By all accounts, Petro has been vigilant in stamping out leftist DEI programs.
NASA has an important role to play in the future, as space travel is a growing priority that has seen immense leaps thanks to Elon Musk and SpaceX.
While it is important that NASA's next administrator is in line with the Trump administration's agenda, it is also important that this situation gets sorted in an efficient and timely manner.
The opposite seems to be happening right now, as this revocation of the nomination comes just ahead of an expected easy confirmation.
Hopefully, more information will be released in the coming days if the Trump administration wants to avoid spreading confusion.
The FBI is investigating a mysterious series of text messages from an unknown individual that appears to be impersonating White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.
According to the Wall Street Journal, this unidentified person has been posing as Wiles, sending text messages and making phone calls to Republican lawmakers, governors, and business executives for the past few weeks.
This individual is using Artificial Intelligence to impersonate Wiles in phone calls, but what has investigators flummoxed is the lack of a cohesive motive outside of a one-time request for a cash transfer.
Investigators were first tipped off about the possibility of an impersonator because of texts from a different number claiming to be Wiles going to lawmakers and White House staffers.
A combination of broken English and bizarre questions that Wiles should have known further cemented the reality that someone was impersonating an extremely important figure in the Trump administration.
In response to a request for comment from the WSJ, the White House issued a statement saying, "The White House takes the cybersecurity of all staff very seriously, and this matter continues to be investigated."
This impersonation episode comes after the FBI issued a warning on “an ongoing malicious text and voice messaging campaign” targeting current or former senior US federal or state government officials and their contacts.
A statement from the FBI explained, "The malicious actors have sent text messages and AI-generated voice messages — techniques known as smishing and vishing, respectively — that claim to come from a senior US official in an effort to establish rapport before gaining access to personal accounts."
FBI Director Kash Patel commented on the Wiles case, saying that the FBI "takes all threats against the president, his staff, and our cybersecurity with the utmost seriousness. Safeguarding our administration officials’ ability to securely communicate to accomplish the president’s mission is a top priority.'
With all of that in mind, the FBI has supposedly determined that whoever is impersonating Wiles is not acting on behalf of a foreign nation.
To add more intrigue to this situation, one text to an unnamed lawmaker asked for a list of people who could be pardoned by President Trump. This points to the possibility that the impersonator is searching for politically damaging information in relation to Trump's use of the pardon power.
Information security has been a top priority for the Trump administration, and Susie Wiles has been one of Trump's chief enforcers in preventing politically damaging leaks and controlling staffers to minimize information getting out of the White House.
Wiles has been the target of cyberattacks previously, as Iranian hackers broke into her devices last year in an effort to damage Trump's presidential campaign.
As the Trump agenda continues to roll out, information security is paramount, and the Trump administration cannot afford more damaging leaks that create unnecessary political drama.
Hopefully, the FBI can find out who is behind this impersonation campaign quickly. However, it will likely take time for Kash Patel and his agents to get to the bottom of this situation.
President Donald Trump isn't satisfied with a $15 million settlement offer from CBS over the network's alleged bias against him and in favor of his rival, then-Vice President Kamala Harris, on a "60 Minutes" broadcast before the election.
Trump rejected the settlement offer from CBS parent Paramount Global during arbitration of his $20 million lawsuit, saying he wanted $25 million and an apology for the bias.
The original lawsuit was for $10 billion, but after a judge said the suit had merit and didn't dismiss it, it went to $20 billion.
Trump's ire was raised after it came out that CBS selectively edited an interview answer by Harris, replacing it with another answer that sounded less like the original "word salad" answer.
Trump and others in the GOP called the action "interfering" in the 2024 election, and the outrage was on full blast.
CBS News still says it didn't do anything wrong, and wants Trump to take the settlement without admitting wrongdoing.
The "60 Minutes" executive editor and the president of CBS News resigned after the widespread backlash over the edits, which certainly belies the assertion that the show and network didn't do anything wrong.
Sure, executive producer Bill Owens is claiming he resigned because he was being denied editorial independence, but that is face-saving at best.
Trump is also threatening to file another suit against CBS over the most recent "60 Minutes" episode, in which Trump was compared to a mob boss.
Complicating matters even more is the ongoing attempt by Paramount Global to merge with Skydance Media.
The price tag of that merger is $8 billion, but Skydance understandably wants nothing to do with a merger until the lawsuit is resolved.
Trump has CBS over a barrel, and he's exactly as much of his pound of flesh as he possibly can while the getting is good.
According to the Daily Beast, Trump's lawyers said "mental anguish" was the reason $15 million wasn't enough, but it's really the apology that he wants even more than the money, it seems.
After so many legal situations where he seemed to be at the mercy of an unfriendly judge and prosecutor, Trump is taking full advantage of this one.
It appears that some cabinet officials are forced to step in to make sure that President Donald Trump's orders are carried out, particularly in the area of international trade.
On Wednesday, a federal trade court prevented President Trump from using emergency powers legislation to impose massive tariffs on imports, as Breitbart News reported.
A three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade in New York issued the verdict following many complaints that claimed Trump had overstepped his bounds, made U.S. trade policy subject to his caprices, and caused economic anarchy.
“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the court wrote, referring to the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
While the White House didn't immediately offer word to journalists about the next steps, it's expected that the Trump administration will appeal
The taxes, which are central to Trump's trade policies, are the subject of at least seven lawsuits that contest them.
There is some involvement by Congress for tariffs, but Trump claims he can take action due to a national emergency with the nation's trade deficits. The markets were sent into a tailspin when he levied tariffs on the majority of nations with which the United States trades.
The plaintiffs contended that tariffs cannot be authorized by the emergency powers law and that, even if they could, the trade deficit does not constitute a "unusual and extraordinary threat" that would trigger the emergency.
For the past half-century, the United States has maintained a trade deficit relative to its global trading partners.
In an attempt to address the United States' large and persistent trade deficits, Trump levied tariffs on the majority of the world's countries.
To counter the influx of illegal immigration and synthetic narcotics into the United States, he had previously imposed tariffs on goods from Mexico, Canada, and China.
His government maintains that the courts upheld Nixon's emergency tariff usage in 1971 and that Congress, and not the courts, has the authority to decide on the "political" matter of whether or not the president's justification for announcing an emergency is lawful.
Trump imposed tariffs that rattled international financial markets and caused analysts to make dire predictions for economic growth in the United States. But thus far, it seems the biggest economy in the world seems unaffected by the tariffs thus far.
V.O.S. Selections, a wine importer whose owner has was vocal about concern that his company might not make it through the tariffs, is one of several small businesses that have joined forces to launch the complaint.
Oregon was the leading state among the twelve that brought suit. "This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can't be made on the president's whim," Assistant Attorney General Dan Rayfield said.