Donald Trump Says Elon Musk Has "Trump Derangement Syndrome". What It Means
In the middle of what's been a never-seen-before public fallout between arguably two of the most powerful men in the world, US President Donald Trump said that billionaire Elon Musk was suffering from "Trump derangement syndrome."
On Thursday, the two trained guns on each other, with Trump saying he was "very disappointed in Elon" after his criticism of the "Big Beautiful Bill" on tax cuts and spending plans. Musk, among other things, suggested Trump should be impeached.
Musk spearheaded the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a cost-cutting initiative, until May 31 before leaving his role in the Trump administration to focus on his business commitments.
"He (Elon Musk) hasn't said bad things about me personally, but I'm sure that will be next," Trump said at the Oval Office on Thursday.
Noting he helped Musk "a lot," Trump said the two of them "had a great relationship," but does not know if that will happen anymore.
Brushing aside Musk's financial support to get him elected during the 2024 US presidential election, Trump asserted he could have claimed the closely contested Pennsylvania even without the tech billionaire's help.
This came after Musk attacked Trump's signature bill, warning the legislature would only increase the federal deficit. He termed it a "disgusting abomination."
What Is Trump Derangement Syndrome?
In Urban Dictionary, it has been defined as a "mental condition" wherein a person has been driven effectively insane due to their dislike of the US President "to the point at which they will abandon all logic and reason.'
According to a July 2018 report by CNN, Trump Derangement Syndrome goes back to the early 2000s when the idea of having Trump as US President was a "punch line for late-night comics".
Some reports have even traced its roots to the 'Bush Derangement Syndrome,' coined by late conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer in 2003.
Mr Krauthammer defined it as an "acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency – nay – the very existence of George W. Bush."
The CNN report states that the "truth" here is that this is just the "preferred nomenclature" for Trump defenders, who see people who oppose the US President as "nothing more than the blind hatred of those who preach tolerance and free speech."
'Mental illness' bill in Minnesota
Earlier this year, a bill was introduced in Minnesota that sought to revise the state law and name Trump derangement syndrome as a form of mental illness, according to The Hill.
The legislation was introduced by five Republican state senators.
It defined it as the "acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal persons that is in reaction to the policies and presidencies of President Donald J. Trump."
'Symptoms may include Trump-induced general hysteria, which produces an inability to distinguish between legitimate policy differences and signs of psychic pathology in President Donald J. Trump's behaviour,' read the bill.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
25 minutes ago
- Hans India
Trump signs 'One Big Beautiful Bill' into law
Washington: US President Donald Trump signed the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' into law during the Independence Day ceremony at the White House. This came a day after the House of Representatives passed the bill, giving final approval to President Trump's landmark legislation. 'I've never seen people so happy in our country because of that, because so many different groups of people are being taken care of: the military, civilians of all types, jobs of all types. So you have the biggest tax cut, the biggest spending cut, the largest border security investment in American history,' Trump said at the ceremony. President Trump appreciated Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, and House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, for securing the bill's passage through both chambers of Congress. "Those two are a team that is not going to be beaten," he said. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt described the legislation as "an encapsulation of all of the policies that the president campaigned on and the people voted on," adding that it's a "victorious day for the American people." House Republicans voted on Thursday afternoon to approve Trump's massive package of tax and federal spending cuts and funding boosts for the Pentagon and border security, clearing the Bill, while the Senate passed the bill earlier this week. Trump hailed the passage of the "One Big Beautiful Bill", describing it as the beginning of America's 'new Golden Age.' 'The Republicans in the House of Representatives have just passed the 'ONE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL ACT.' Our Party is UNITED like never before, and our Country is 'hot.' We are going to have a Signing Celebration at the White House tomorrow, at 4 P.M. EST. All Congressmen/women and Senators are invited. Together, we will celebrate our Nation's Independence and the beginning of our new Golden Age,' Trump wrote on Truth Social on Friday. 'The people of the United States of America will be Richer, Safer, and Prouder than ever before. Thank you to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, and all of the wonderful Republican Members of Congress who helped us deliver on our Promises, and so much more. Together, we can do things that were not even imagined possible less than one year ago. We will keep working, and winning — congratulations America!' he added.
News18
28 minutes ago
- News18
B-2 Bombers Roar Overhead As Donald Trump Celebrates US Independence Day
Last Updated: On July 4, President Trump and First Lady Melania watched a B-2 bomber fly over the White House. Trump also signed his major tax and spending bill into law. As the White House celebrated America's Independence Day on July 4, B-2 bombers roared in the sky, showcasing its military strength. President Donald Trump, accompanied by First Lady Melania Trump, witnessed the dramatic flyover from the balcony of the White House. These are the same fighter jets which carried out the precision strikes on Iran's uranium enrichment sites at Fordo and Natanz, along with F-35 and F-22 aircrafts during the 12-day-long Israel-Iran conflict. POTUS. FLOTUS. B-2 BOMBER. 🇺🇸🦅MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! — The White House (@WhiteHouse) July 4, 2025 The video of US President Trump watching the stealth bombers was shared by the official account of the White House on X. The video was captioned, 'POTUS. FLOTUS. B-2 BOMBER. 🇺🇸🦅MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!." Earlier on Monday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt had announced the US pilots who flew the daring B-2 Spirit bombers, targeting Iran's nuclear facilities would be honored guests at President Donald Trump's White House July 4th celebration. Further, Trump also signed his mega 'Big Beautiful Bill' into law during a Fourth of July picnic, a day after Congress narrowly passed his primary tax and spending bill. He signed the bill on the White House South Lawn, turning the traditional July 4 picnic into a celebration of both America's independence and his personal victory in Congress. He had pushed really hard to rally support, and nearly all Republicans in Congress backed his legislation as the Bill was passed in the House on Thursday. He seized the opportunity to underline the biggest legislative success of his second term. A fireworks show on the National Mall was also planned later in the day. As he signed the bill, he called it the 'biggest bill of its type in history". First Published: July 05, 2025, 08:57 IST
The Hindu
39 minutes ago
- The Hindu
What is President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill all about?
The story so far: As envisaged previously, U.S. President Donald Trump is expected to sign into law the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' on U.S.' Independence Day on July 4. This happened a day after the House of Representatives cleared the passage of the legislation proposing sweeping tax cuts, altering access to social security programmes and doing away with provisioning incentives for clean energy production, among other things. While the Opposing Democrats argue the bill effectively introduces tax breaks for the wealthiest populace offset by cuts in healthcare and food security, the Republicans contend it would unleash 'massive economic growth' and avert 'waste, fraud and abuse' of federal spending. The proposed legislation albeit with some alterations from Senate now returns to the House of Representatives for the final passage. VICTORY: The One Big Beautiful Bill Passes U.S. Congress, Heads to President Trump's Desk 🇺🇸🎉 — The White House (@WhiteHouse) July 3, 2025 Why are tax cuts being opposed? At the centre of the contention is the bill proposing to make permanent President Trump's 2017 cuts across several income brackets. This also includes rates for the highest income bracket from the present 39.6% to 37% as per the version of the bill presented to the House of Representatives. Thus, when assessing tax liability for incremental income across successive brackets (say, up to $11,600 and then from $11,601-$47,500, and so forth), reducing rates across the board would translate to lowered tax liability. Conversely, this would also imply that higher earners also benefit with their liability from income across all brackets being reduced. However, the proposed legislation also enhances the standard deduction by $1,000 for individual taxpayers, $1,500 for heads of households and $2,000 for married couples until 2028, that is, until the expiry of President Trump's tenure. Additionally, OBBB seeks individual taxpayer be allowed to forego up to $25,000 in taxes they earn in tips, and $12,500 in overtime pay. This is provided the individual income does not exceed $150,000. The two provisions combined have been suggested to particularly benefit the working class. Broadly, concerns in the realm exist on two fronts, namely, loss of taxable income – especially the wealthier quartile and the potential impact on income, especially the working class. According to the U.S.-based Yale School of Management's recent analysis, the budget passed on July 1 would add $3 trillion in debt between 2025 and 2034. This would be about 0.84% of the GDP. Furthermore, analysing the bill proposed to the Senate, the lab estimated the lowest quartile's income would decrease by 2.5% in contrast to the higher quartile witnessing a 2.4% growth. What happens to social security schemes for food and medical needs? Concerns here relate to the introduction of stricter eligibility requirements potentially leading to exclusion from health and food security programmes. U.S.' Medicaid is a joint federal and state health insurance program to help people with limited income and resources cover their medical costs. The OBBB introduces an eighty-hour work requirement to be eligible for the programme. Additionally, re-enrolments, which would now also entail establishing eligibility, would now have to be done every six months and not annually. Thus, as observed by U.S.-based health news publication KFF, it would translate enrolees to filing the additional paperwork more often. The White House argues the eligibility requirement would strengthen Medicaid for those who rely on it, such as pregnant women, children, seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income families. Enforcing work requirements, it held, would only eliminate 'waste, fraud and abuse'. However, a KFF study from 2023 observed that 64% of adults below 65 years enrolled in Medicaid were either working full or part-time. 8% were either retired or unable to find work, whilst the remainder were not working due to caregiving responsibilities, illness or disability, or school attendance. The eligibility requirement thus would be of direct consequence to the latter segment. Furthermore, the bipartisan Congressional Budgetary Office (CBO) estimated the amendment would leave 11.8 million people without insurance in 2034. A similar paradigm extends to the food security programme, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which helps low-income families to supplement their grocery budgets. At present, the federal government bears the entire cost of facilitating the benefits and splits the cost of administering the program with states, which operate it. Herein, OBBB envisages continued support to states based subject to error rates, or the measure of accuracy of each state's eligibility and benefit determinations, being below 6%. Anything beyond would call for states to bear 5-15% of their costs. Think tank Center for Budget and Policy Priorities' research note (June 30) observes that most of the errors are 'unintentional mistakes by state agencies or families'. It added, 'Error rates fluctuate, sometimes significantly, from year to year. There is also a substantial lag between the end of a fiscal year and when error rates for that year are finalised.' The amendment thus has prompted fears about cut in spending in the realm as well. What does it do to clean energy? OBBB seeks a sharp reduction in accessing former President Joe Biden era's 30% tax credit for building wind and solar projects, among other clean energy projects, that were projected to run until 2032. The bill requires that the projects be ready to operate before 2028 to avail of any subsidy. Lena Moffitt, Executive Director at the advocacy group Evergreen Action held the proposed legislation could culminate in the collapse of planned clean energy projects. Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) further observed, 'Now many of the brand-new factories will be forced to shut down and lay off thousands of workers, gutting communities that were finally seeing the kind of industrial revival rural America needs and handing an untimely and strategic victory to China.' Refuting the assertions, the White House holds the proposed legislation 'unleashes American energy, refills the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and repeals the Green New Scam policies' to reduce the cost of living for Americans. The proposed legislation would also put an end to taxpayers availing breaks of up to $7,500 on clean energy vehicles. Essential to recall, President Trump and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, also a vocal Republican supporter, had voiced their disagreement on ending the subsidies. Is that the only reason why the two sparred recently? The other point of contention concerns the proposed legislation's debt ceiling. OBBB seeks to increase the government's borrowing limit of $36.1 trillion, which it was projected to touch later this year by another $5 trillion. It is imperative to note that the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) latest estimates, based on January 2025 baseline budget projections, hold that the bill would increase deficits by $3.4 trillion between 2025 and 2034. All in all, this prompts concerns about a potential fall in receipts and, therefore, an increase in the maximum amount that can be borrowed. 'What's the point of a debt ceiling if we keep raising it?' he posted on social media platform 'X'. Furthermore, responding to a separate post, the Tesla CEO held that all he was seeking is to not 'bankrupt America'. In fact, Mr. Musk vowed to form a new 'America Party' if the bill was passed. If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day. Our country needs an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a VOICE. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 30, 2025 President Trump has maintained that the billionaire industrialist's opposition primarily stemmed from the termination of the EV mandate. 'Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa,' he posted on social media. Furthermore, he sought if his Dept of Government Efficiency, which he once co-headed, should investigate Mr. Musk. 'Big Money to be saved,' he wrote. Is there anything India should keep an eye out for? The bill passed by the Senate seeks to impose 1% excise tax on all remittance transfers. The U.S.' share in overall remittances reaching India stood at 27.7% in 2023-24. However, it is poignant to note that an analysis of the RBI's sixth round of remittance surveys for the same period had pointed to the UAE being the biggest employer of migrant workers from India. However, as enumerated in the analysis, Indian migrants in the U.S. being primarily employed in white-collar jobs explained their higher remittances notwithstanding the smaller diaspora. OBBB's initial version sought to impose a 5% tax on such remittances, which was brought down to 3.5% before the latest bill sought to keep it at 1%. Ajay Srivastava, founder of the India-based Global Trade Research Initiative told The Hindu that at the erstwhile 3.5% rate, there might have been a tendency to find a workaround but not with the latest 1% rate. He explained that most people may eventually think of it as an inevitable tax and move on. However, assessing the broader paradigm, Mr. Srivastava stated, 'The U.S. is trying to scrap the last dollar from everywhere it can, maybe by increase in the base rate or via import duty, to make a small dent in their deficit, debt.' Mr. Srivastava further apprehended the rationale for imposing the tax in the first place. 'Indian diaspora pay all taxes like U.S. citizens pay so this tax is morally reprehensible,' he argued. The GTRI founder held the recurrent revision in rates aalso made the overall paradigm 'questionable'.
