Trump's mistrust of Vance grows day by day after Musk turns against him: Report
Speaking on The Daily Beast Podcast, journalist and best-selling Trump biographer Michael Wolff painted a picture of a president feeling cornered by people within his own camp. One of those people is Vance, the Ohio senator-turned-vice president.
Wolff pointed out that Trump never fully trusted Vance and viewed him as 'an unlikely Republican' with most of his grassroots energy coming not from traditional conservatives but from 'the tech bro community.'
ALSO READ| How did things get from bad to worse between Donald Trump and Elon Musk? A step-by-step guide
POTUS' decision to name Vance as his running mate was not entirely his own it came partly under pressure from Musk. Now, 'He will set up what we will see as a set of tests that Vance is going to have to endure and pass,' Wolff said. '(Vance has) got to profess his absolute loyalty to Trump, or he will just be marginalized within the administration.'
Vance has already started trying to reassure Trump of his loyalty, saying during the Musk-Trump spat, 'I'm the vice president to President Trump. My loyalties are always going to be with the president,' before adding, 'I think it's a huge mistake for (Musk) to go after the president like that.'
'Trump demands flattery on a constant basis,' Wolff said, suggesting that Vance will need to walk a very fine line if he wants to maintain Trump's trust.
Following a claim Musk made on X that Trump's name appeared in Jeffrey Epstein's files, Wolff called it another 'existential threat.'
'The Epstein stuff floats around Trump as a consistent threat, as a consistent silver bullet really,' Wolff said. 'Musk could always bring back the threat/'
The White House Communications Director, Steven Chung, quickly hit back with, 'He (Wolff) is an imbecile of the highest order, and his Trump Derangement Syndrome-addled brain has caused him to lead a miserable existence devoid of reality,' per Daily Beast.
ALSO READ| 'Does Musk have access to Epstein files?' Kash Patel reacts to Tesla CEO's 'crazy' Trump claim
'Nothing he says is the truth and he resorts to outlandish falsehoods in order to stay relevant since Father Time has passed him by 20 years ago,' Chung added, calling Wolff 'a blithering idiot who has been widely discredited due to his blatant lies and fabrications.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
30 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Why Donald Trump is wrong to take over the DC police
AMERICA'S CAPITAL city was designed as a showcase for its democracy: sweeping boulevards, white-marble palaces of administration, monuments aplenty. This week, however, Washington, DC has become a manifestation of something less inspiring: the grandstanding instincts of the current president. This time, Donald Trump's preoccupation is violent crime. Mr Trump has been banging this drum for decades. 'Roving bands of wild criminals roam our neighbourhoods dispensing their own brand of twisted hatred,' warned Mr Trump nearly 40 years ago. The occasion then was the rape and assault of a white woman in New York's Central Park, for which five black and Hispanic men were later wrongfully convicted. On August 11th Mr Trump all but quoted himself: 'Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals, roving mobs of wild youth, drugged-out maniacs and homeless people,' he said from the White House briefing room. Then he deployed the National Guard to Washington; took control of its police force; and promised to 'get rid of the slums' and clear out its homeless population. This is not the president's first use of the armed forces for civilian law enforcement in a city that reviles him and that he reviles right back. Earlier this summer Mr Trump sent National Guard troops to protect federal property during protests over immigration raids in Los Angeles. In 2020 he ordered them to disperse Black Lives Matter demonstrators in Washington. In neither instance did local Democratic leaders ask for his intervention. Now Mr Trump hints that the Washington deployment could be a blueprint for other troublesome (ie, Democratic-run) places. That will be easier said than done, however. The capital has an unusual legal status as a territory of the federal government granted qualified home rule. Elsewhere the president would face more legal impediments. The practical impact of the president's order may be modest. He has authorised the DC National Guard—which is tiny—to act as cops. About 200 troops will support law enforcement. By law his control of the city police can last for only 30 days; after that Congress would need to extend it. It is a far cry from a federal takeover of Washington. Seeking to justify his order, Mr Trump cited several awful attacks against government workers. In early August carjackers beat up and bloodied a former DOGE staffer. In June stray gunfire killed a congressional intern. Last year an official at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission was shot to death in a carjacking. In 2023 a Senate aide was stabbed and a congressman was robbed at gunpoint. 'It's becoming a situation of complete and total lawlessness,' said Mr Trump, likening the capital to Baghdad and Bogotá. The president is right that violent crime in Washington surged in 2023 and that it numbers among the most dangerous cities in America. He neglected to say that crime there has since tumbled. This year's murder rate is falling towards the pre-pandemic trend. The number of carjackings, which doubled between 2022 and 2023, is declining too, though they are still more frequent than they were before the pandemic. Overall the capital is considerably safer than it was in the 1990s, when it had the highest murder rate in the country, and it is a bit less dangerous than it was a decade ago. Mr Trump's action will irk the 700,000-odd citizens of Washington, whose elected government is being sidelined. And it is hypocritical. Mr Trump and his fellow Republicans in Congress have been impeding the city government, preventing it from spending the taxes it has raised and forcing cuts to services like policing. Republicans have thus exacerbated Washington's crime problem. Mr Trump's focus on the city over more violent ones is not just because he can see it from his bedroom window. It is because the federal government retains more authority over the capital than over states or even other federal territories. The president commands the DC National Guard—in states, governors have that job—and he can take temporary control over the police department. Washington's unique status means these same tactics cannot easily be replicated outside the capital. To 'federalise' the National Guard for arrest purposes elsewhere—to empower troops to act as cops—Mr Trump would have to invoke the Insurrection Act. Only then can the armed forces legally be put to use to quell a domestic uprising. The act was last used in 1992. Invoking it again would be immensely controversial. Mr Trump's approach in Washington, then, is clever when viewed through a lawyer's lens. Which is not to say that his order is justified or good policy. Stay on top of American politics with The US in brief, our daily newsletter with fast analysis of the most important political news, and Checks and Balance, a weekly note from our Lexington columnist that examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
Intel issues statement on CEO's meeting with US President Trump after he asked for his resignation; says: Mr. Tan had…
Intel issued a conciliatory statement Monday following CEO Lip-Bu Tan 's White House visit, emphasizing the company's commitment to American technology leadership after President Trump 's recent call for the executive's resignation over alleged China ties . "Earlier today, Mr. Tan had the honor of meeting with President Trump for a candid and constructive discussion on Intel's commitment to strengthening US technology and manufacturing leadership," Intel said. "We appreciate the President's strong leadership to advance these critical priorities and look forward to working closely with him and his Administration as we restore this great American company." The corporate statement followed Trump 's own social media post describing the meeting as "very interesting" and calling Tan 's career rise "an amazing story." The president announced that Tan and cabinet members would continue discussions next week to "bring suggestions to me," signalling a collaborative approach after days of public tension. Intel responds to Presidential criticism with diplomatic messaging by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Khurd Users Prefers Toothsi Aligners Toothsi by MakeO Book Now Undo The company's measured response follows Trump's social media post declaring Tan "highly CONFLICTED and must resign, immediately." The president's criticism centered on concerns raised by Senator Tom Cotton about the CEO's previous business relationships with Chinese companies and his leadership history at Cadence Design Systems . Tan had previously served as CEO of Cadence until 2021, during which time the company recently admitted to unlawfully exporting semiconductor design software to a Chinese university involved in nuclear research. The Justice Department settlement required Cadence to pay nearly $118 million in criminal penalties for the violations. Intel's statement notably avoided addressing these specific allegations while positioning the company as aligned with Trump's America First technology agenda. American chipmaker seeks to protect federal funding and business relationships The diplomatic outreach reflects Intel's vulnerable position as a major recipient of federal CHIPS Act investments totalling $8.5 billion for domestic manufacturing expansion. The company has committed to building advanced semiconductor facilities in Arizona, Ohio, and New Mexico as part of the national security initiative. Tan assumed Intel's leadership in March after the board removed Pat Gelsinger, inheriting significant operational challenges including declining market share and intense competition from rivals like Nvidia in emerging AI chip markets. His White House meeting represents Intel's effort to maintain crucial government partnerships while addressing political concerns about foreign business connections in the increasingly sensitive semiconductor industry. AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Time of India
43 minutes ago
- Time of India
Raghuram Rajan flags a 'bigger issue' if India stops buying Russian oil
President Donald Trump has been cranking up the pressure on India, a country the US has courted as a strategic counterweight against China. Trump has announced a 50 per cent tariff on the country, a higher rate than many other major economies in Asia. His message to India is clear: Stop buying Russian oil . This raises a crucial question: Can India afford to stop buying Russian oil? As per former Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Governor Raghuram Rajan , 'It wouldn't be a disaster for India', but he pointed to a 'bigger issue' that might be of concern. 'Stopping purchases of Russian oil wouldn't be a disaster for India, since current prices aren't much higher than for Russian crude.' If Russian oil were cut off entirely, prices would rise, but India could handle that, he stated in an interview with International Valor. The bigger issue is 'political: an overt public decision to stop buying from Russia would be seen domestically as bowing to U.S. pressure, which plays badly in any democracy.' If Washington had quietly asked India to phase out Russian oil, it might have been acceptable, the former RBI Governor said. 'Making it public, and tying it to a tariff threat makes it much harder politically.' On trade, there are many areas where liberalisation would be good for India, he stated adding that lowering tariffs can help our economy. 'But, it's hard to negotiate with a gun to your head. I hope that tempers cool and talks resume, because a 50 per cent tariff is unsustainable—not just for India, but also for the U.S., which risks alienating a country it hopes will be a strategic partner. People remember these things for a long time, and turning them away is rarely smart geopolitics.' Although a deal is still possible to avoid the higher rate, Trump's recent barrage against India has quickly damaged ties with a nation that successive administrations have sought to court as a counterweight to China. He's called India's economy 'dead,' its tariff barriers 'obnoxious' and its people indifferent to the plight of Ukrainians — adding to tensions after Trump angered India by claiming to have brokered peace with Pakistan earlier this year. The Indian government has fired back at Trump's tariff threats, saying the purchases are necessary for the nation's energy security and has blasted Trump for singling out India when other countries are also buying Russian oil. 'We reiterate that these actions are unfair, unjustified and unreasonable,' a spokesperson for the Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement. 'India will take all actions necessary to protect its national interests.' If implemented, the higher rates would be a further hit to India's economy. Bloomberg Economics estimated that a 50 per cent tariff may cut US-bound exports by 60%, putting 0.9 per cent of gross domestic product at risk. It would particularly hit labor-intensive industries such as gems and jewelry, textiles, footwear, carpets and agricultural goods. While India is still open to talks, Trump's tariff threats are eroding goodwill and risk prompting India to shift closer to Russia and China. Prime Minister Modi is planning to visit China later this month for the first time in more than seven years.
