The relationship between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk has come to a dramatic end. An alliance that took off like one of SpaceX’s rockets has now crashed and burned.
Days of increasing tensions over government contracts and political issues culminated on Thursday.
Without offering any proof, Musk claimed on X that the Trump administration hasn’t released all the records related to sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein because Trump is mentioned in them.
Trump, who uncharacteristically had been quiet, fired back yesterday in the Oval Office, saying he was “very disappointed in Musk.”
Then he turned up the heat on his own social media network, Truth Social, stating, “The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon’s Governmental Subsidies and Contracts."
Hours later, Musk announced that SpaceX would start phasing out the spacecraft it has used to transport astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station for NASA.
The growing rift between Trump and Musk has had a notable financial impact. Following Trump's criticisms, shares of Tesla, Musk's electric vehicle company, fell more than 14%, resulting in a loss of approximately $150 billion in Tesla's market valuation. Consequently, Musk's personal holdings in the company decreased by about $20 billion.
Musk remarked in a post, “Without me, Trump would have lost the election," and followed up with the comment, "Such ingratitude.” Notably, he had invested at least $250 million in support of Trump's re-election campaign reported the Associated Press.
Once Trump was elected, the tech billionaire appeared to enjoy the spoils of his investment by standing prominently behind him as he took the oath of office, was appointed to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), flew on Air Force One for weekend stays at Mar-a-Lago, slept in the Lincoln Bedroom, and joined Cabinet meetings wearing MAGA hats.
However, Musk stepped down last week from his official senior adviser role at the White House.
While Trump praised Musk for his service then, he recently texted that Musk was “wearing thin,” that he had “asked him to leave” his administration, that the tech titan had “gone CRAZY.”
Both figures have made strong statements about each other, highlighting how quickly political and business relationships can change in the public eye.
Here's part of a timeline of the Musk and Trump feud produced by CNN :
June 3: Musk posts that the “massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination.”
June 4: Trump posts an image on Truth of Musk’s post announcing he’s leaving the government.
June 5: Trump confirms the deterioration of his relationship with Musk, saying he was “very disappointed” in the tech billionaire after he repeatedly blasted the president’s sweeping domestic agenda bill.
Musk claims that without him, Trump would have lost the election.
Trump claims he asked Musk to leave the administration and took away his "his EV mandate," after which he alleges Musk "just went CRAZY!"
Trump posts that the US government could save billions of dollars in its budget by terminating the contracts and subsidies awarded to Musk’s companies.
Musk claims Trump is "in" the Jeffrey Epstein files.
Musk agrees with an X user calling for Trump’s impeachment.
Musk claims Trump’s tariffs will cause a recession.
The Trump-Musk flameout reflects broader themes in the complex interplay between technology, politics, and personal relationships in today's society.
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and a board member of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund, the parent organization of The Fulcrum. He is the publisher of the Latino News Network and an accredited Solutions Journalism and Complicating the Narratives trainer with the Solutions Journalism Network.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks with U.S. President Donald Trump during a Cabinet meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House on May 27, 2026 in Washington, D.C. Trump met with his Cabinet days after saying a peace deal with Iran was“ largely negotiated” amid expectations around the re-opening the Strait of Hormuz.
The worst deal in the history of deals
As a former Republican, sometimes it’s fun to look back on the things we — I was part of a “we” at one time — criticized Democrats for, and not all that long ago.
Remember, if you will, when Republicans condemned former President Bill Clinton for pardoning his brother and his corrupt donor friend Marc Rich?
Or, remember when Republicans wagged their fingers at former President Barack Obama’s golf outings? Or his executive orders? Or his Syrian “red line”?
Or all the times Republicans went after former President Joe Biden’s gaffes?
While those criticisms may have been justified at the time, they look patently ridiculous next to our current president’s cartoonish and downright dangerous offenses.
Offenses like pardoning Jan. 6 insurrectionists — nearly 100 of whom have gone on to be arrested for, charged with, or convicted of crimes separate from the events of that day.
Or wreaking havoc on the global economy by instituting reckless tariffs on friends, neighbors, and enemies alike?
Or taking a proverbial sledge hammer to countless government agencies that have put every American in danger, whether on airplanes, in hospitals, at job sites, or in natural disasters.
That’s just a few, but nothing looks worse next to his predecessors than Donald Trump’s supposed Iran deal, at least as it’s outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding, the details of which Trump was loath to share.
And for good reason — they are shockingly bad and humiliating for the U.S.
I remember Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA from 2015 very well. I, along with many Republicans as well as a cadre of foreign policy experts, criticized that deal for its obvious and problematic concessions to a very bad actor who we’ve long known could not be trusted. But trust was what we gave the Iranian regime, as well as sudden access to a boatload of cash — $100 billion, to be exact.
All of Obama’s provisions were temporary, which would allow Iran to restart enriching uranium upon their sunset; the deal didn’t address Iran’s ballistic missiles, or its funding of terrorist proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas; the supposed “anytime, anywhere” inspections came with a 24-day delay, if Iran so chose, giving them ample time to hide any suspect materials; and it didn’t require any congressional authority.
In short, I’d argue it wasn’t a great deal. But as bad as it was, it looks like the Magna Carta next to Trump’s.
Trump’s deal would give Iran immediate sanction relief and access to $300 billion, presumably to use to fund terror proxies; it doesn’t secure any upfront limits on uranium enrichment or missile development; it allows Iran to charge for safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz in the future; and it calls for Israel to stop its attacks on Hezbollah, another win for Iran.
Neither Americans nor the Middle East are safer than we were 100-plus days ago when Trump decided to pursue this folly. And in fact, our economy is weaker for it. But Iran is unquestionably stronger and more emboldened.
They’ve seen Trump’s weakness, unseriousness, and frighteningly limited appreciation for history. They’ve seen him retreat on most of his core threats to the regime, from bombing their cultural sites to ending a civilization overnight. And they’ve taken notice as he’s abandoned the promises that were supposedly central to his justification for war in the first place — regime change, liberating the Iranian people, and removing Iran’s nuclear materials.
What a waste of blood and treasure, not to mention American might and power, only so that our enemies can watch us limp desperately toward a conclusion that’s being described — by the right — as “unthinkable,” “appeasement,” and “the worst foreign policy blunder in decades.”
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.