Neil Young Invites Donald Trump to Summer Tour ‘If There Is Not Martial Law by Then'
Young's comments appeared in a new post on his Archives website on Monday (June 2), which saw him ruminating on the current state of affairs in the U.S. ahead of the launch of his North American tour dates in August.
More from Billboard
Jessie J Reveals 'Early Breast Cancer' Diagnosis: 'Cancer Sucks in Any Form'
Big Thief Announce New Album, 'Double Infinity'
Offset Deactivates Social Media Amid Ongoing Drama With Cardi B & Stefon Diggs
'Our country and our way of life, that which our fathers and theirs fought for, is now threatened by our government,' Young wrote. 'This is not what we voted for. This is our new reality. Our government is out of control, not standing for us. You can stand up for American values this summer, for our children and theirs.
'When I tour the USA this summer, if there is not martial law by then which would make it impossible, let's all come together and stand for American values,' he added. 'We will not be doing a political show. We will be playing the music we love for all of us to enjoy together. President Trump, you are invited. Come and hear our music just as you did for decades.'
Young's invitation to Trump aligns with the President's previous comments about his fondness for the Canadian rocker's music. 'He's got something very special,' Trump told Rolling Stone in 2008, reflecting on his numerous times seeing Young in concert and having him perform at his casinos. 'I've met him on occasions and he's a terrific guy.'
However, the pair have undeniably altered their opinions of each other since then, with Young having become increasingly more outspoken regarding Trump's policies since his first term as President. In April, Young had even noted that he feared constant criticism of Trump may result in a potential blacklisting from the country ahead of his upcoming tour dates.
'If the fact that I think Donald Trump is the worst president in the history of our great country could stop me from coming back, what does that say for Freedom?' Young mused. 'I love America and its people and its music and its culture.'
More recently, Young labelled Trump 'out of control' in May after he made a Truth Social post which saw the POTUS describe Bruce Springsteen as 'highly overrated' and 'dumb as a rock,' while saying that Taylor Swift is 'no longer 'HOT.''
'Bruce and thousands of musicians think you are ruining America,' Young wrote in response to Trump's comments. 'You worry about that instead of the dyin' kids in Gaza. That's your problem. I am not scared of you. Neither are the rest of us. You shut down FEMA when we needed it most. That's your problem Trump. STOP THINKING ABOUT WHAT ROCKERS ARE SAYING. Think about saving America from the mess you made.'
Young is currently scheduled to launch his forthcoming tour with the Chrome Hearts in Rättvik, Sweden on June 18, with North American dates set to begin in Charlotte, NC on Aug. 8
Best of Billboard
Chart Rewind: In 1989, New Kids on the Block Were 'Hangin' Tough' at No. 1
Janet Jackson's Biggest Billboard Hot 100 Hits
H.E.R. & Chris Brown 'Come Through' to No. 1 on Adult R&B Airplay Chart
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
4 minutes ago
- Axios
Senate committee urged to reject Emil Bove's judicial nomination
Over 75 former federal and state judges signed a letter urging lawmakers to reject the "deeply inappropriate" nomination of President Trump's former attorney Emil Bove to serve as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Why it matters: The letter sounds the alarm over Bove's "egregious record" amid mounting controversies. Former Department of Justice attorney Erez Reuveni and a whistleblower identified as a fired DOJ lawyer told the department's internal watchdog and lawmakers in a letter last month that Bove told department attorneys to ignore court orders barring Trump from deporting immigrants. Bove, who represented Trump in both his classified documents and election obstruction cases, was also among the DOJ officials who pushed to drop bribery and fraud charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. What they're saying: The former judges described Bove's role in the mass firing of Justice Department prosecutors who investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack as "disqualifying" and his refusal to denounce the attack as "reprehensible." Also disqualifying, they said in the letter addressed to Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), was his leadership in the effort to drop the DOJ's prosecution of Adams, prompting several prosecutors to resign. "These are not actions of someone committed to equal justice under the law," the judges wrote. "Rather, they reflect a troubling pattern of abusing prosecutorial discretion to shield political allies." The DOJ did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment. Zoom out: Beyond his record, the judges say it is "deeply inappropriate" for a president to nominate their own criminal defense attorney for a federal judgeship. They pointed to the president's Truth Social post announcing Bove's nomination, in which Trump wrote his former attorney would "do anything else that is necessary to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN." The former judges argued, "That statement underscores the peril of confirming a nominee whose principal qualification appears to be personal loyalty to the president." Context: Among those who signed the letter was former Circuit Judge J. Michael Luttig, who was put on the bench by former President George H.W. Bush and advised former Vice President Mike Pence. What we're watching: Proceeding with Bove's nomination, they write, " would be a disservice to the constitution, to law enforcement, and to the rule of law."
USA Today
7 minutes ago
- USA Today
What does the Education Department do? Trump gets the OK to gut it
President Donald Trump was given the green light to gut the Department of Education after the Supreme Court ruled to allow the administration's mass firings that will significantly hobble the agency. The Education Department has long been a target for conservatives who want to see it abolished. An executive order Trump signed in March directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to "facilitate the closure of the Department of Education." While the department cannot be entirely shuttered without approval from Congress, which the White House and education Secretary Linda McMahon have acknowledged, the decision does authorize the administration's attempts at serious downsizing. McMahon fired 1,300 workers in March, while another 572 employees accepted buyouts, resulting in a slash in workforce of nearly 50%. Here's what to know about the department as the Trump administration moves forward with efforts to dismantle it. Latest education news: Trump paused funding for after-school programs. States are suing. More: Student loan interest will restart for millions of SAVE borrowers What does the Department of Education do? The department, established as a Cabinet-level agency by Congress in 1979, manages federal loans and financial aid for college, administers billions of dollars in grants for K-12 schools, records student achievement and enrollment and enforces civil rights laws and safety in schools, among other duties. They include: The Department says its elementary and secondary programs annually serve nearly 18,200 school districts and over 50 million students among roughly 98,000 public schools and 32,000 private schools. Its programs also provide grant, loan, and work-study assistance to more than 12 million postsecondary students, according to the Department website. What does the Department of Education fund? Despite claims to the contrary by proponents of closing the Department, including the Trump administration, K-12 curricula is largely under the purview of local governments. More than 90% of K-12 funding comes from non-federal sources, such as state and local governments and private organizations. According to USA Spending, the Education Department received $241.66 billion in budgetary resources in the 2024 fiscal year − just 2% of the entire federal budget. The funding is divided further into 10 subcomponents within the agency, but the vast majority of it goes to just one: the Office of Federal Student Aid, which received $179.65 billion in 2024. How big is the Education Department? At the start of the Trump administration, the department had a little over 4,000 employees. The layoffs and buyouts earlier this year leave staffing at half that number, the Department said in a March statement. While the department has a relatively high discretionary spending budget, it has the smallest staff of the 15 Cabinet agencies, the website states. Contributing: Kinsey Crowley and Zac Anderson, USA TODAY. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
End wasteful spending now, fix the budget next
With two minutes to midnight, the Senate is taking up President Trump's $9.4 billion rescission request to cancel unneeded appropriations this week. The House approved it on June 12. If the Senate amends the bill on the floor, the House will have to pass it again. Friday, July 18, is the deadline. The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 sets the terms for a president to ask Congress to cancel appropriated spending. If Congress does not act within 45 days, the administration must spend the funds. After all, Congress exercises legislative powers, and the president must take care that the laws are faithfully executed. Congress should agree to cancel these funds. Incorporating the savings into the baseline would reduce spending by around $100 billion over the next decade. That's one-eightieth of the next decade's $8 trillion in new borrowing, but Congress has to start somewhere. Approving the request would open the door for the Office of Management and Budget to propose additional savings with far larger impacts. This isn't just about dollars, of course. Governments destroy value when the benefits of additional spending are less than the costs, including not only the deadweight losses from taxation or debt financing, but also other effects on private initiative, the capacity of other governments, and more. Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought has also suggested that Congress's refusal to eliminate waste would encourage the administration to use other tools. Those tools could ruffle feathers on Capitol Hill, but Congress's ability to vindicate its powers isn't as strong as it could be. Returning to the request before the Senate, it seeks savings in certain foreign affairs accounts and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Vought testified about it before the Senate Appropriations Committee late last month. He was clear that the administration had more than satisfied responsible funding to fulfill the programs' purposes and simply could not find tolerable uses for the remnant. Senators were especially concerned about PEPFAR, the bilateral President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief established in 2003 during the George W. Bush administration. The program has done and continues to do much good in the world, and the vast majority of its funding would continue. Across PEPFAR and other foreign affairs activities, only the funds that could not be used reasonably well would be canceled. The request also proposes eliminating pre-funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in fiscal 2026 and 2027 without touching current funding. Setting aside whether the federal government should subsidize reporting (no), the Office of Management and Budget is committed to working with senators to preserve support for remote radio stations in upcoming appropriations. A possible funding gap at the end of the fiscal year is a related concern, but Congress could easily resolve it by enacting automatic continuing appropriations like in the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act. After all, President Jimmy Carter's administration created government shutdowns, not Congress. And for those already unhappy with executive discretion on spending, just wait until a shutdown gives the administration total authority to decide which activities are 'essential' and 'non-essential.' Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) have argued that presidential rescission requests are polarizing and make appropriations negotiations more difficult. True, it would be better for robust reprogramming and rescissions to be in each year's budget legislation. For that to work, however, Congress and the president must enact new appropriations well before the new fiscal year, probably not later than July. That can only happen if other committees and their members have bigger stakes each cycle by managing their portfolios in a comprehensive congressional budget that includes appropriations. Unfortunately, it's too late for Congress to fix its dysfunctional budget process for the fiscal year that's about to start. The immediate opportunity is for Congress to cancel wasteful spending that lacks a good use. Members of both parties should support the current rescissions request, consider further savings proposals in good faith, and then prioritize fixes for congressional budgeting.
