Trump says DOGE ‘might have to go back and eat' Elon Musk. Tesla CEO replies
Trump, while departing the White House on Tuesday morning that Musk was 'very upset' because 'he's losing his EV mandate. Not everybody wants an electric car. I don't want an electric car.' Trump bought a Tesla in March.
🚨 President Trump on Elon Musk today:
'He is upset he is losing the EV mandate. He can lose a lot more than that.'
pic.twitter.com/8QqQgpJXVv
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) July 1, 2025
'We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible?,' Trump said, adding, 'I don't think he should be playing that game with me.'
When a reporter asked if Trump is considering deporting Musk, he responded that he didn't know but would 'take a look'.
Earlier on Monday, Trump had made similar comment, saying Musk was attacking the bill because he was annoyed that it had dropped measures to support the electric vehicles (EV) industry.
'Without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa,' Trump wrote on his Truth Social handle.
Trump also signalled that he could take aim at the huge contracts that Musk's SpaceX rocket and Starlink satellite internet businesses receive from the US government.
Musk on Tuesday, once again weighed in on his growing feud with Trump. 'So tempting to escalate this. So, so tempting. But I will refrain for now,' Musk posted on X, responding to a video of Trump making the remarks.
REPORTER: 'Are you going to deport Elon Musk?'
TRUMP: 'We'll have to take a look. We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? The monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible? He gets a lot of subsidies.'
pic.twitter.com/gOZB96nsVh
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) July 1, 2025
Musk, once Trump's biggest political backer in the 2024 election, has dramatically shifted gears. After months as a close ally and head of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk has turned increasingly critical since stepping down from the role in May.
Now, the SpaceX and Tesla CEO is threatening to use his immense wealth to oppose Trump, even floating the idea of launching a new political party aimed at challenging Republican lawmakers who support the president's marquee spending bill.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
21 minutes ago
- United News of India
China warns against trade deals that harm third parties after US-Vietnam pact
World Beijing, July 3 (UNI) China today expressed concerns over the recent trade agreement between the US and Vietnam, warning that trade deals should not target or harm the interests of third parties. This statement comes after US President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with Vietnam, which includes a 20% tariff on Vietnamese exports to the US and a 40 per cent tariff on goods deemed to be transshipped through Vietnam. The trade agreement, announced by Trump, aims to level the playing field for US businesses in Vietnam. As per the deal, "20 pc tariff will be imposed on Vietnamese exports to the US, and 40 pc tariff on goods deemed to be transshipped through Vietnam." The trade agreement will help provide Vietnam the US total access to its markets for trade, allowing US products to enter Vietnam at zero tariff. China is upset as the deal would ensure 40% tariff on transshipping that aims to prevent goods from third countries, particularly China, from being exported to the US through Vietnam. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said the deal would open Vietnamese markets to American goods without any tariffs. As part of the agreement, Vietnam has also pledged to impose a 40% tariff on products that originate in other countries but are routed through Vietnam before being exported to the U.S. Earlier, Trump had imposed a hefty 46% tariff on Vietnam, which would have impacted the supply chain of various products. "China always believes that trade disputes should be resolved through equal consultation, and relevant negotiations and treaties should not target or harm the interests of any third party," Chinese FM spokeswoman Mao Ning said after a new trade deal between the US and Vietnam was reached, which will place a 40 percent tariff on goods deemed to be transshipped through the country The US-Vietnam trade deal has sparked concerns about its potential impact on global trade. UNI AAB RN
Mint
22 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump May Start Telling Nations New Tariff Rates on Friday
US President Donald Trump said that his administration may begin sending out letters to trading partners as soon as Friday setting unilateral tariff rates ahead of a July 9 deadline for negotiations. 'We're probably going to be sending some letters out, starting probably tomorrow, maybe 10 a day to various countries saying what they're going to pay to do business with the US,' Trump told reporters on Thursday as he left Washington for an event in Iowa. Trump has long threatened that if countries fail to reach deals with the US before next week's deadline, he would simply impose rates on them, raising the stakes for trading partners who have rushed to secure agreements with his administration. The US president initially announced his higher so-called 'reciprocal' tariffs on April 2, but paused those for 90 days to allow countries time to negotiate, putting in place a 10% rate during that interval. So far, the Trump administration has announced deals with the UK and Vietnam and agreed to a truce with China that saw the world's two largest economies ease tit-for-tat tariffs. Asked Thursday if more deals were on the way, Trump responded that 'we have a couple of other deals, but you know, my inclination is to send a letter out and say what tariffs they are going to be paying.' 'It's much easier,' he said. Trump announced the Vietnam deal on Wednesday, saying that the US would place a 20% tariff on Vietnamese exports to the US and a 40% rate on goods deemed transshipped through the nation — a reference to the practice whereby components from China and possibly other nations are routed through third countries on their way to the US. While the rates are lower than the 46% duty Trump imposed on Vietnam initially, they are higher than the universal 10% level. And many of the particulars of the deal are still unclear, with the White House yet to release a term sheet or publish any proclamation codifying the agreement. Still, investors who have eagerly anticipated any deals between the US and trading partners were buoyed Wednesday by the Vietnam announcement, which saw share prices of American manufacturers with facilities in the country rise. Many major trading partners, however, such as Japan, South Korea and the European Union, are still working to finalize deals. The president has expressed optimism about reaching an agreement with India but has spoken harshly about the prospects of an accord with Japan, casting Tokyo as a difficult negotiating partner. He intensified his criticism this week, saying that Japan should be forced to 'pay 30%, 35% or whatever the number is that we determine.' The president on Tuesday also said he was not considering delaying next week's deadline. Asked about any potential extension of talks, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier Thursday that Trump would make the final call. 'We're going to do what the president wants, and he'll be the one to determine whether they're negotiating in good faith,' Bessent said on CNBC when asked whether the deadline might be lengthened. With assistance from Catherine Lucey. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Mint
23 minutes ago
- Mint
Will state bans on transgender athletes in women's sports be upheld? US Supreme Court to weigh in
The US Supreme Court agreed on Thursday (July 3) to hear challenges to state laws banning transgender athletes from girls' and women's sports. The high court said it will take up appeals involving laws enacted in Idaho and West Virginia that prohibit athletes who were assigned male at birth from competing on female teams in public schools and universities. The cases will be heard during the term that begins in October, with a ruling expected next year. The court's decision to hear the cases comes amid a wave of legislation across the country and intensifying political debate on the issue. Idaho's 2020 law, called the Fairness in Women's Sports Act, was blocked by lower courts after a lawsuit by a transgender university athlete who argued the ban violated constitutional rights to equal protection. Similarly, West Virginia's 2021 law was struck down after a middle school student challenged her exclusion from the girls' track team, with an appeals court ruling it violated Title IX, the federal law barring sex-based discrimination in education. More than two dozen Republican-led states have enacted similar restrictions in recent years. Supporters say the bans are needed to protect fairness in women's sports. Critics argue they are discriminatory and deny transgender youth equal opportunities. Joshua Block, senior counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the challengers, said the laws target already vulnerable children. 'We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play,' Block said. 'Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status.' The court's move follows a series of recent legal and political actions on transgender rights. Last month, the Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming medical care for minors. The Supreme Court's decision comes amid broader efforts by President Donald Trump to restrict transgender rights. President Donald Trump, who made the issue a centerpiece of his campaign, signed an executive order in February banning transgender athletes from girls' and women's sports at schools receiving federal funding. 'From now on women's sports will be only for women,' Trump declared. 'With this executive order the war on women's sports is over.' The order also allows federal agencies to cut funding to schools that violate the policy. The Department of Education has since enforced the order by investigating schools, including the University of Pennsylvania, which recently agreed to ban transgender athletes from women's teams as part of a Title IX settlement related to swimmer Lia Thomas. The Supreme Court will hear arguments during its next term starting in October. The eventual ruling could set nationwide precedent on whether schools must allow transgender girls to participate in female sports under the Constitution and Title IX.
