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.
Eric Trump, the newly appointed ALT5 board director of World Liberty Financial, walks outside of the NASDAQ in Times Square as they mark the $1.5- billion partnership between World Liberty Financial and ALT5 Sigma with the ringing of the NASDAQ opening bell, on Aug. 13, 2025, in New York City.
Why does the Trump family always get a pass?
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche joined ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday to defend or explain a lot of controversies for the Trump administration: the Epstein files release, the events in Minneapolis, etc. He was also asked about possible conflicts of interest between President Trump’s family business and his job. Specifically, Blanche was asked about a very sketchy deal Trump’s son Eric signed with the UAE’s national security adviser, Sheikh Tahnoon.
Shortly before Trump was inaugurated in early 2025, Tahnoon invested $500 million in the Trump-owned World Liberty, a then newly launched cryptocurrency outfit. A few months later, UAE was granted permission to purchase sensitive American AI chips. According to the Wall Street Journal, which broke the story, “the deal marks something unprecedented in American politics: a foreign government official taking a major ownership stake in an incoming U.S. president’s company.”
“How do you respond to those who say this is a serious conflict of interest?” ABC host George Stephanopoulos asked.
“I love it when these papers talk about something being unprecedented or never happening before,” Blanche replied, “as if the Biden family and the Biden administration didn’t do exactly the same thing, and they were just in office.”
Blanche went on to boast about how the president is utterly transparent regarding his questionable business practices: “I don’t have a comment on it beyond Trump has been completely transparent when his family travels for business reasons. They don’t do so in secret. We don’t learn about it when we find a laptop a few years later. We learn about it when it’s happening.”
Sadly, Stephanopoulos didn’t offer the obvious response, which may have gone something like this: “OK, but the president and countless leading Republicans insisted that President Biden was the head of what they dubbed ‘the Biden Crime family’ and insisted his business dealings were corrupt, and indeed that his corruption merited impeachment. So how is being ‘transparent’ about similar corruption a defense?”
Now, I should be clear that I do think the Biden family’s business dealings were corrupt, whether or not laws were broken. Others disagree. I also think Trump’s business dealings appear to be worse in many ways than even what Biden was alleged to have done. But none of that is relevant. The standard set by Trump and Republicans is the relevant political standard, and by the deputy attorney general’s own account, the Trump administration is doing “exactly the same thing,” just more openly.
Since when is being more transparent about wrongdoing a defense? Try telling a cop or judge, “Yes, I robbed that bank. I’ve been completely transparent about that. So, what’s the big deal?”
This is just a small example of the broader dysfunction in the way we talk about politics.
Americans have a special hatred for hypocrisy. I think it goes back to the founding era. As Alexis de Tocqueville observed in “Democracy In America,” the old world had a different way of dealing with the moral shortcomings of leaders. Rank had its privileges. Nobles, never mind kings, were entitled to behave in ways that were forbidden to the little people.
In America, titles of nobility were banned in the Constitution and in our democratic culture. In a society built on notions of equality (the obvious exceptions of Black people, women, Native Americans notwithstanding) no one has access to special carve-outs or exemptions as to what is right and wrong. Claiming them, particularly in secret, feels like a betrayal against the whole idea of equality.
The problem in the modern era is that elites — of all ideological stripes — have violated that bargain. The result isn’t that we’ve abandoned any notion of right and wrong. Instead, by elevating hypocrisy to the greatest of sins, we end up weaponizing the principles, using them as a cudgel against the other side but not against our own.
Pick an issue: violent rhetoric by politicians, sexual misconduct, corruption and so on. With every revelation, almost immediately the debate becomes a riot of whataboutism. Team A says that Team B has no right to criticize because they did the same thing. Team B points out that Team A has switched positions. Everyone has a point. And everyone is missing the point.
Sure, hypocrisy is a moral failing, and partisan inconsistency is an intellectual one. But neither changes the objective facts. This is something you’re supposed to learn as a child: It doesn’t matter what everyone else is doing or saying, wrong is wrong. It’s also something lawyers like Mr. Blanche are supposed to know. Telling a judge that the hypocrisy of the prosecutor — or your client’s transparency — means your client did nothing wrong would earn you nothing but a laugh.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.