Elon Musk gave $10 million to Republican midterm efforts just before announcing his own America Party
Congressional newsFacebookTweetLink
Follow
Billionaire Elon Musk donated a total of $10 million to a pair of super PACs aimed at helping Republicans retain their majorities in Congress after next year's midterm elections, new campaign finance reports show.
The donations of $5 million each to the Senate Leadership Fund and the Congressional Leadership Fund came on June 27 – amid Musk's bitter feuding with President Donald Trump over federal spending legislation – and just days before the world's richest man declared he would form his own political party.
The newly disclosed donations underscore Musk's outsize influence in US politics and raise fresh questions about what role the mercurial businessman might play in elections moving forward.
The Tesla CEO emerged in Thursday's filings as the largest individual contributor to each of those congressional super PACs. Separately, campaign reports with the Federal Election Commission show Musk this year plowed more than $45 million of his own money into America PAC, the super PAC he oversees – as he worked, unsuccessfully, to shape the outcome of a Wisconsin Supreme Court race.
In the 2024 election, Musk spent more than $290 million to help elect Trump and his favored congressional candidates. He served as a top White House adviser and the leader of the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency for several months this year before stepping back from government work to focus on his companies.
At the time, he signaled he also might pull back on his political spending.
But by early July, Musk was publicly battling again with Trump and congressional Republicans over domestic policy legislation Musk said would explode the deficit.
He also pledged to form the America Party, although there are few signs that he has taken concrete steps in that direction.
Thursday's report with the FEC covers his super PAC's activity only through the end of June.
CNN's Alex Leeds Matthews and David Adkins contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
a few seconds ago
- CBS News
Denver Board Of Ethics investigating flight prices at Denver International Airport
Denver's independent Board of Ethics is investigating the purchase of business and first-class tickets this past April for nine Denver International Airport executives to fly to a conference in Madrid, according to three sources aware of the ongoing investigation. The probe was sparked by a CBS News Colorado investigation in May that revealed the airport spent as much as $19,000 for one of its executives to fly to the three-day conference. Another ticket cost about $16,000. All of the executives flew either business class or first class to the conference and back to Denver. "Our policy allows us to do that," said Denver International Airport CEO Phil Washington. Travel websites showed round-trip tickets from Denver to Madrid cost as little as $1,300, and upgraded seats in premium economy sold for about $3,000. "Those costs may seem high," said Washington, but, he said, "they are an investment in our people. We sent who we sent, and they are going to pay dividends as we build out this infrastructure." But the spending elicited widespread criticism, which made its way to the Board of Ethics, according to CBS Colorado sources, who said the board was querying whether the spending amounted to using public money for private gain. Lori Weiser, the executive director for the Board of Ethics, said she could not comment on any board investigations. "The Denver Code of Ethics prohibits public disclosure of any complaint that has been received," wrote Weiser, "until it passes through a screening process, and an investigation process, if the Board requests investigation." In 2024, the board received 78 cases and issued 13 advisory opinions. Washington did not provide any comment about the ethics investigation. His own employees raised ethical concerns about the trip, saying it created a "rift" between executives and lower-level employees. The CBS Colorado report prompted Washington and his staff to reevaluate airport employees' travel policy. On Aug. 1, the airport completed an updated travel policy that addressed some of the issues spotlighted in the original CBS Colorado investigation. A spokesperson for Washington said he "doesn't have anything to add" regarding the new travel policy. The total cost of the Madrid trip was about $165,000 and was paid for out of Denver International Airport revenues, which are derived from what passengers pay for concessions, parking fees, rental car revenues, and other user fees.
Fox News
13 minutes ago
- Fox News
STEVE HILTON: Why I'm launching a legal war against California Democrats' unconstitutional power grab
California Democrats are once again trying to rig the system, overturn elections and steal congressional seats from Republicans. Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta are planning to redraw California's congressional maps in 2025 or 2026, halfway through the decade and years before the next census. This isn't about "fairness" or "democracy." It's a blatant, unconstitutional power grab designed to silence millions of voters and cement one-party rule in California. Democrats are already trying to rewrite the history of this redistricting fight, claiming it's just retaliation for Republican maps in Texas. But let's be clear: California started this. The last redistricting cycle was corrupted by partisan operatives who rigged California's so-called "independent" Citizens Redistricting Commission to deliver a gerrymandered map. Republicans received 40% of the vote for Congress in 2022 but just 17% of the seats. Now, rather than wait for the next census as required by law, Newsom and Bonta are pushing to redraw the maps mid-decade to squeeze out even more unfair representation for their party. I'm not going to let it happen. I will fight this in the courts and in the court of public opinion because California belongs to all of us, not just the Democrat elites trying to cling to power. It's obviously wrong to redraw maps without another population count. Since the last census, millions have fled California, driven out by COVID lockdowns, high taxes, and unaffordable housing. Add to that the devastation of wildfires like the 2025 Los Angeles inferno that destroyed entire communities. Where did all those people go? Gavin Newsom doesn't know and doesn't care. He wants to redraw the maps anyway. California lost a congressional seat in 2020 for the first time in our history and we've seen a further net population loss of nearly 500,000 more since then. Redistricting must reflect these realities. That's just common sense. But it's not just obviously wrong to redraw maps without a census, it's illegal. Article 21 of the California Constitution is crystal clear: redistricting happens once per decade, in the year after the national census. That was the law before voters approved the Citizens Redistricting Commission, and it was re-stated afterwards. In fact, the California Supreme Court already ruled on this exact issue. In Legislature v. Deukmejian, the Court said redistricting is a once-a-decade process, tied directly to the census. A rushed redistricting scheme, five years after the last census, would blatantly violate the state Constitution. You can't just ignore the rules when they don't benefit your party. Newsom and Bonta have an answer to that: their power-grab scheme includes a rushed "special election" to overturn Article 21 of the state constitution, seize power from the Citizens Redistricting Commission, and redraw maps to steal five congressional seats from Republicans. But here's the flaw in their plan. It's not just Article 21 of the state constitution they would be violating. In fact it's not even just California's Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees every citizen equal protection under the law, including equal principle was reaffirmed in Reynolds v. Sims, a landmark Supreme Court case that held all legislative districts must have roughly equal populations. The federal equal protection clause is also mirrored in California's state constitution, in Article 1. Without a new census, there's no way to ensure that the equal protection standard -- that legislative districts must have roughly equal populations -- is met. Any redistricting done now would be based on guesswork, not facts. So here's what I will do. If Newsom and Bonta move forward with their illegal scheme, I will mount a two-pronged legal challenge. First, we will file a case in state court to stop the plan under California's constitution and long-standing legal precedent. At the same time, we'll take the fight to federal court, arguing that their actions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court precedent. We'll use every legal tool available to stop this outrageous attempt to gerrymander California still further in Democrats' favor. For all their endless lectures on "protecting our democracy," Democrats really only care about preserving their power. The last round of redistricting in California was supposed to be nonpartisan, handled by the Citizens Redistricting Commission. But left-wing pressure groups hijacked the process, pushing vague standards like "communities of interest" to justify partisan gerrymandering. That's why Republicans have just 17% of House districts for roughly 40% of the statewide vote. Now they want to take it even further, cutting Republican congressional representation to just 7% even though millions of Californians vote Republican. That's not "democracy." That's rigging the system. If we had fair representation in California, Republicans would have an additional 12 House seats. And the Democrat "super-majority" in the state legislature -- which has enabled them to pass ultra-left extreme legislation for over a decade -- would disappear. We don't have to put up with these Democrat assaults on our democracy. I've already proposed reforms to make redistricting truly fair and nonpartisan. That includes using artificial intelligence to draw maps based on neutral criteria like compactness and city and county boundaries instead of vague standards that enable gerrymandering. I will not let Newsom and Bonta silence the voices of millions of Californians for their own partisan and personal ends. I will fight this every step of the way with action, with urgency, and with the full force of the law behind us. And when I'm governor, I will reverse the Democrat gerrymander and ensure fair representation for everyone in California. Republican Steve Hilton is a candidate for governor of California. He previously served as senior policy and strategy advisor to former U.K. prime minister David Cameron. He is a former host of "The Next Revolution" on Fox News.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
"What The F**ck": People Are Losing Their Minds Over This Really, Really Bizarre AI Interview With A Dead Teenager From The Parkland Shooting
Former CNN host Jim Acosta faced backlash on Monday after sharing what he called a 'one-of-a-kind interview' with an AI version of Parkland school shooting victim Joaquin Oliver, a bot created by his parents to honor their son on what would have been his 25th birthday. The interview — shared to Acosta's SubStack page — depicts Oliver, one of 17 who died in the 2018 massacre, remarking on the cause of death and stressing why it's 'important' to talk about gun violence in schools. The AI — when asked for its 'solution' to gun violence — emphasized a need for a mix of stronger gun-control laws, mental health support and community engagement. Related: The bot of Oliver proceeded to speak in a noticeably higher tone before discussing the late teen's interests in the Miami Heat and Star Wars. Acosta — who declared that the technology left him 'speechless' — called the conversation 'so insightful,' telling the late teen's father, Manuel Oliver, that it felt like the first time he really got to know his son. 'I felt like I was communicating with him, which is just so remarkable,' Acosta said. 'People say, 'Well, AI, you know, it could be bad, it could cause all these destructive things.' This is an example of how it might actually do some good, it might help some people who have suffered tremendous losses like your family have a way to hold on to who this person was, which I think is a beautiful thing.' @JimAcosta Related: Manuel Oliver and his wife, Patricia Oliver — co-founders of the gun-control advocacy group Change the Ref — have been involved in other projects that demand action against gun violence, including a school shooting video game, a play and a site that uses AI to recreate victims' voices for calls to Congress. Manuel Oliver — in a video shared to X, formerly Twitter — acknowledged that the AI was his and his wife's idea, adding that Acosta shouldn't be blamed for 'what he was able to do' in the 'interview.' 'If the problem that you have is with the AI, then you have the wrong problem,' he said. 'The real problem is that my son was shot eight years ago. So if you believe that that is not the problem, you are part of the problem.' Related: While Acosta restricted those who could reply to his posts on X, it wasn't the same case on his BlueSky account, where a number of critics were stunned by the AI move. 'Hey Jim. Quick question. What the fuck is wrong with you,' replied one user. And, naturally, users on X had a lot to say regardless. Check out what users said on Bluesky and X below. Related: This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds:
