Fake Trump post on Musk's drug use spreads amid blowup
"Elon Musk or 'Mediocre Musk' is constantly high on ketamine. Always making promises he can't keep. NOT TO BE TRUSTED! He wants to go to Mars, how about you go back to Africa," reads the alleged post from Trump, timestamped to June 5, 2025 at 6:07 pm .
Image
Screenshot from X taken June 6, 2025
The image rocketed across platforms including X, Facebook, Instagram and Threads as the US leader and world's richest man traded barbs in what began as a dispute over the "big, beautiful" spending bill before Congress.
The pair hurled insults at each other online after Trump expressed disappointment in his top donor's criticism of the legislation, with Trump threatening to strip Musk of his huge government contracts and Musk claiming credit for the Republican's 2024 election victory. At one point, Musk alleged that the president was referenced in government documents on the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, who died by suicide in jail while awaiting trial for sex crimes.
The fallout came days after the New York Times reported that Musk used so much of while on the 2024 campaign trail that he developed bladder problems -- a charge Musk has denied.
But a review of live and archived versions of Trump's Truth Social feed reveals he did not invoke ketamine in his attacks on Musk.
"That is fake," the White House said of the purported screenshot circulating online, in a June 6, 2025 email to AFP.
The president did not post during the 6 pm (2200 GMT) hour Two hours earlier, he championed his bill and wrote: "I don't mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago" (archived here).
His next post, after 10:30 pm (0230 GMT), shared a link to a Newsmax article about his approval ratings (archived here).
Keyword searches returned no credible news articles referencing the alleged post.
AFP has debunked several fake osts erroneously attributed to Trump.
Read more of AFP's reporting on misinformation about US politics here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
an hour ago
- France 24
Trump threatens Musk with 'serious consequences' in spending bill row
The comments by Trump to NBC News come after the relationship between the world's most powerful person and the world's richest imploded in bitter and spectacular fashion this week. The blistering break-up -- largely carried out on social media before a riveted public on Thursday -- was ignited by Musk's harsh criticism of Trump's so-called "big, beautiful" spending bill, which is currently before Congress. Some lawmakers who were against the bill had called on Musk -- one of the Republican Party's biggest financial backers in last year's presidential election -- to fund primary challenges against Republicans who voted for the legislation. "He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that," Trump, who also branded Musk "disrespectful," told NBC News on Saturday, without specifying what those consequences would be. He also said he had "no" desire to repair his relationship with the South African-born Tesla and SpaceX chief, and that he has "no intention of speaking to him." Just last week, Trump gave Musk a glowing send-off as he left his cost-cutting role at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). But their relationship cracked within days as Musk described as an "abomination" the spending bill that, if passed by Congress, could define Trump's second term in office. Trump hit back in an Oval Office diatribe and from, there the row detonated, leaving Washington stunned. With real political and economic risks to their falling out, both had appeared to inch back from the brink on Friday, with Trump telling reporters "I just wish him well," and Musk responding on X: "Likewise." 'Old news' Trump spoke to NBC Saturday after Musk deleted one of the explosive allegations he had made during their fallout, linking the president with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. Musk had alleged that the Republican leader is featured in unreleased government files on former associates of Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while he faced sex trafficking charges. The Trump administration has acknowledged it is reviewing tens of thousands of documents, videos and investigative material that his "MAGA" movement says will unmask public figures complicit in Epstein's crimes. Trump was named in a trove of deposition and statements linked to Epstein that were unsealed by a New York judge in early 2024. The president has not been accused of any wrongdoing in the case. "Time to drop the really big bomb: (Trump) is in the Epstein files," Musk posted on his social media platform, X. "That is the real reason they have not been made public." Musk did not reveal which files he was talking about and offered no evidence for his claim. He initially doubled down on the claim, writing in a follow-up message: "Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out." However, he appeared to have deleted both tweets by Saturday morning. Trump dismissed the claim as "old news" in his comments to NBC on Saturday, adding: "Even Epstein's lawyer said I had nothing to do with it." Supporters on the conspiratorial end of Trump's "Make America Great Again" base allege that Epstein's associates had their roles in his crimes covered up by government officials and others. They point the finger at Democrats and Hollywood celebrities, although not at Trump himself. No official source has ever confirmed that the president appears in any of the as yet unreleased material. Trump knew and socialized with Epstein but has denied spending time on Little Saint James, the private redoubt in the US Virgin Islands where prosecutors alleged Epstein trafficked underage girls for sex. "Terrific guy," Trump, who was Epstein's neighbor in both Florida and New York, said in an early 2000s profile of the financier. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."
France 24
2 hours ago
- France 24
Gaza rescuers say Israel fire kills 36, six of them near aid centre
The Israeli military told AFP that troops had fired "warning shots" at individuals that it said were "advancing in a way that endangered the troops". The shooting deaths were the latest reported near the aid centre run by the Gaza Humanitarian Fund (GHF) in the southern district of Rafah and came after it resumed distributions following a brief suspension in the wake of similar deaths earlier this week. Meanwhile, an aid boat with 12 activists on board, including Swedish climate campaigner Greta Thunberg, was nearing Gaza in a bid to highlight the plight of Palestinians in the face of an Israeli blockade that has only been partially eased. Civil defence spokesman Mahmud Bassal told AFP that at around 7:00 am (0400 GMT), "six people were killed and several others wounded by the forces of the Israeli occupation near the Al-Alam roundabout", where they had gathered to seek humanitarian aid from the distribution centre around a kilometre (a little over half a mile) away. Palestinians have congregated at the roundabout almost daily since late May. AFP is unable to independently verify the tolls compiled by the civil defence agency or the circumstances of the deaths it reports. Samir Abu Hadid, who was there early Saturday, told AFP that thousands of people had gathered near the roundabout. "As soon as some people tried to advance towards the aid centre, the Israeli occupation forces opened fire from armoured vehicles stationed near the centre, firing into the air and then at civilians," Abu Hadid said. Activist boat nears Gaza The GHF, officially a private effort with opaque funding, began operations in late May as Israel partially eased a more than two-month-long aid blockade on the territory. UN agencies and major aid groups have declined to work with it, citing concerns it serves Israeli military goals. On Saturday, the health ministry in Hamas-run Gaza said that the overall toll for the Gaza war had reached 54,772, the majority civilians. The UN considers these figures reliable. The war was sparked by Hamas's October 2023 attack on Israel, which resulted in the deaths of 1,218 people on the Israeli side, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally of official figures. Israel has come under increasing international criticism over the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, where the UN warned in May that the entire population was at risk of famine. The aid boat Madleen, organised by an international activist coalition, was sailing towards Gaza on Saturday, aiming to breach Israel's naval blockade and deliver aid to the territory, organisers said. "We are now sailing off the Egyptian coast," German human rights activist Yasemin Acar told AFP. "We are all good," she added. In a statement from London, the International Committee for Breaking the Siege of Gaza -- a member organisation of the flotilla coalition -- said the ship had entered Egyptian waters. The group said it remains in contact with international legal and human rights bodies and warned that any interception would constitute "a blatant violation of international humanitarian law". The Palestinian territory was under Israeli naval blockade even before Hamas's October 2023 attack and the Israeli military has made clear it intends to enforce it. "For this case as well, we are prepared," army spokesman Brigadier General Effie Defrin said on Tuesday. Body of Thai hostage recovered "We have gained experience in recent years, and we will act accordingly." A 2010 commando raid on the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara, which was part of a similar attempt to breach Israel's naval blockade, left 10 civilians dead. The Israeli military has stepped up its operations in Gaza in recent weeks in what it says is a renewed push to defeat Hamas, whose October 2023 attack sparked the war. On Saturday, the military issued evacuation orders for neighbourhoods in northern Gaza, saying they had been used for rocket attacks. Separately, in a special operation in the Rafah area on Friday, Israeli forces retrieved the body of Thai hostage Nattapong Pinta, Defence Minister Israel Katz said. "Nattapong came to Israel from Thailand to work in agriculture, out of a desire to build a better future for himself and his family," Katz said. He was "brutally murdered in captivity by the terrorist organisation Mujahideen Brigades", the minister charged. The Mujahideen Brigades is an armed group close to Hamas ally Islamic Jihad that Israel has also accused over other deaths of hostages seized from Kibbutz Nir Oz near the border. The military said Nattapong's family and Thai officials had been notified of the operation. Thai Foreign Ministry spokesman Nikorndej Balankura said the country was "deeply saddened" by his death. During the October 2023 attack, militants abducted 251 hostages, 55 of whom remain in Gaza, including 31 the Israeli military says are dead.
Euronews
3 hours ago
- Euronews
Ukraine: Kharkiv hit by massive Russian aerial attack
The US administration has appointed Lt. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich as both the next top US general in Europe as well as the SACEUR. The appointment by Trump will be especially welcomed following media reports in recent months that the US was considering relinquishing the role of SACUER which has always been appointed by a US president to NATO. "It's a very important decision and there is relief from NATO's point of view as it's a positive sign of American engagement and staffing," a US-based source familiar with the issue told Euronews. US Army General Dwight D. Eisenhower was NATO's first SACEUR in 1951, and the role has remained with the US ever since. 'Upon completion of national confirmation processes, Grynkewich will take up his appointment as the successor to General Christopher G. Cavoli, United States Army, at a change of command ceremony at the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe in Mons, Belgium, expected in the summer of 2025,' a statement from NATO read. Meanwhile, NATO defence ministers agreed to a significant surge in defence capability targets for each country, as well as moving to spending 5% of GDP on defence. They've agreed that 3.5% of GDP would be used for 'core defence spending' - such as heavy weapons, tanks, air defence. Meanwhile 1.5% of GDP per year will be spent on defence- and security-related areas such as infrastructure, surveillance, and cyber. However, the full list of flexibility has not yet been negotiated. 'These targets describe exactly what capabilities Allies need to invest in over the coming years,' NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte told journalists. The US has been pushing NATO allies to dramatically increase spending, and expects to see 'credible progress' immediately, according to US Ambassador to NATO Mathew Whitaker. 'The threats facing NATO are growing and our adversaries are certainly not waiting for us to re-arm or be ready for them to make the first move," 'We would prefer our Allies move out urgently on reaching the 5%,' he told journalists in a briefing on the margins of the meetings. Ambassador Whitaker also said the US is 'counting on Europe' to the lead in providing Ukraine with the 'resources necessary to reach a durable peace' on the continent. Mark Rutte reiterated NATO's recent warnings that Russia could strike NATO territory within the next couple of years. 'If we don't act now, the next three years, we are fine, but we have to start now, because otherwise, from three, four or five years from now, we are really under threat," he said, adding: "I really mean this. Then you have to get your Russian language course out, or go to New Zealand.' 'It's good to have continuity about the US in NATO, but with Ukraine it's a different story. I just don't think Trump really cares about Ukraine," the US-based source told Euronews. 'Trump just doesn't care about Europe – it doesn't make him richer or help him politically,' the source said. Referring to the forthcoming NATO summit taking place next month in The Hague, the source said the presence of Ukraine at the summit "will likely be scaled back", since the US will say, "they're not members' so they don't need to be there". A large Russian attack with drones and missiles has hit Ukraine's eastern city of Kharkiv on Saturday, killing at least three people and injuring 21, local officials said. The barrage — the latest in near daily widescale attacks — included aerial glide bombs that have become part of a fierce Russian onslaught in the three-year-war . The intensity of the Russian attacks on Ukraine over the past weeks has further dampened hopes that the warring sides could reach a peace deal anytime soon — especially after Kyiv recently embarrassed the Kremlin with a surprise drone attack on military air bases deep inside Russia. According to Ukraine's Air Force, Russia struck with 215 missiles and drones overnight, and Ukrainian air defenses shot down and neutralised 87 drones and seven missiles. Several other areas in Ukraine were also hit, including the regions of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, Odesa, and the city of Ternopil, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said in a post on X. 'To put an end to Russia's killing and destruction, more pressure on Moscow is required, as are more steps to strengthen Ukraine,' he said. Kharkiv's mayor Ihor Terekhov said the attack also damaged 18 apartment buildings and 13 private homes. Terekhov said it was 'the most powerful attack' on the city since the full-scale invasion in 2022. Kharkiv's regional governor Oleh Syniehubov said two districts in the city were struck with three missiles, five aerial glide bombs and 48 drones. Among the injured were two children, a month and a half year old baby boy and a 14-year old girl, he added. The attack on Kharkiv comes one day after Russia launched one of the fiercest missile and drone barrages on Ukraine, striking six Ukrainian territories and killing at least killing at least six people and injuring about 80. Among the dead were three emergency responders in Kyiv, one person in Lutsk and two people in Chernihiv. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Air Force said it shot down a Russian Su-35 fighter jet on the Kursk front inside Russia, the Ukrainian daily Ukrainskaia Pravda reported. No more details were given immediately. U.S. President Donald Trump said this week that his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, told him Moscow would respond to Ukraine's attack on Russian military airfields last Sunday with "Operation Spiderweb" In a new statement bound to cause offense in Kyiv and amongst its allies, Trump told journalists on board Air Force One on Friday evening local time when asked about "Operation Spiderweb": "They gave Putin a reason to go in and bomb the hell out of them last night. That's the thing I didn't like about it. When I saw it I said 'Here we go, now it's going to be a strike'." The European Union is readying a new round of sanctions against Russia to pile extra pressure on the Kremlin and pressure it to agree to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine, a step that Western allies consider indispensable for serious peace negotiations. Ursula von der Leyen has already provided an outline of what that package, the 18th since February 2022, is supposed to target: Russia's financial sector, the "shadow fleet" and the Nord Stream pipelines, which are currently non-operational. On top of that, the president of the European Commission has pitched a downward revision of the price cap on Russian oil to further squeeze profits from worldwide sales, a crucial cash flow to sustain the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. "We need a real ceasefire, we need Russia at the negotiating table, and we need to end this war. Pressure works, as the Kremlin understands nothing else," von der Leyen said earlier this week after meeting with US Senator Lindsey Graham. But there's a catch: unlike other sanctions the bloc has imposed on Russia, such as the multiple export and import bans, the price cap has a political and practical dimension that exceeds the institutional sphere of Brussels and stretches across the ocean. More specifically, to Washington, DC. The price cap on Russian oil was introduced in December 2022 by the Group of Seven (G7) under the initiative of the Joe Biden administration. It was hailed as an ingenious, ground-breaking mechanism to mobilise the collective power of Western allies and cripple Russia's high-intensity war machine. As part of the plan, the G7, together with Australia, passed laws prohibiting their domestic companies from providing services, such as insurance, financing and flagging, to Russian tankers that sold seaborne crude oil above a predetermined price. The secret lay in market power: for decades, Western firms, particularly British ones, have dominated the sector of Protection and Indemnity (P&I), a type of insurance that gives shipowners broad protection and allows them to cover potentially huge costs from any accidental harm caused to the crew, their property or the environment. Due to the inherent risks of moving oil in high waters, P&I is today considered the norm in maritime trade and a must-have to be accepted in a foreign port. By leveraging their leading firms, the G7 intended to create an extraterritorial effect that would cap the price of Russian oil not only within their jurisdictions but all around the world. Following intense behind-the-scenes talks, the cap was set at $60 per barrel, a compromise between hard-line and cautious member states. The strategy only worked up to a point however. Although the price of Russian Urals oil gradually decreased, it consistently remained above the $60 mark, often exceeding the $70 threshold. The blatant circumvention was attributed to the "shadow fleet" that Russia deployed at high sea. These tankers are so old and poorly kept that they fall outside P&I standards and rely on alternative, obscure insurance systems that escape G7 surveillance. By the time the cap entered into force, Moscow "had spent months building a 'shadow fleet' of tankers, finding new buyers like India and China, and creating new payment systems, to the point that its oil does not need to be greatly discounted to sell," Luis Caricano, a professor at the London School of Economics, wrote in a recent analysis. "What should have been a blow became a manageable problem," Caricano said. With few sectors in the Russian economy left to sanction, Brussels has turned its sight to the cap as a means to tighten the screws on the Kremlin and secure a ceasefire in Ukraine. The Commission has reportedly pitched a revision between $50 and $45 per barrel, which the UK and Canada are believed to support. However, the US has so far refrained from endorsing a lower price cap, raising the stakes ahead of crunch talks at the G7 summit in Alberta, scheduled for mid-June. Now, a tough question emerges: Can the EU dare, and afford, to go it alone? In the strictest legalistic sense, the EU could, indeed, establish a lower price cap on its own. After all, the G7, as an organisation, lacks regulatory powers: each ally amends its laws individually to fulfil a collective mission. In this case, the EU introduced new legislation to prohibit EU companies – rather than, say, American or British companies – from servicing Russian tankers that bypassed the $60-per-barrel cap. Similarly, the bloc could now change the text to adjust that prohibition to a tighter price without waiting for other allies to reciprocate. Here appears the first roadblock: any change to sanctions must be approved by a unanimous vote among member states. It is highly unlikely that all 27 countries would choose to move forward with a lower cap without having an explicit guarantee that Washington will follow suit. Hungary, in particular, has fully aligned itself with the Trump administration and could veto any proposal opposed by the White House. Even if the bloc managed to overcome internal differences and agreed to a lower cap on its own, more formidable obstacles could impede its success. The bloc's revised cap would have to co-exist with America's existing cap. This means that one side of the Atlantic Ocean would apply a $50-per-barrel limit while the other side would apply a $60-per-barrel limit, creating a cacophony for all actors involved. "Different price caps across G7 countries could confuse maritime service providers and weaken overall enforcement," Petras Katinas, an energy analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), told Euronews. "A solo move by the EU could cause friction within the Price Cap Coalition, damaging trust and coordination, both of which are crucial for keeping pressure on Russian oil revenues," Katinas added, warning the project could be rendered "largely symbolic". The legislative chaos would immediately benefit the Kremlin, which has long sought to exploit loopholes to evade and undermine international sanctions. Moscow, though, would also face hurdles: the continued crackdown on "shadow fleet" vessels has forced the country to increase its reliance on G7 insurance, which, in theory, could make it easier for the EU to apply the revised measure. "If the EU alone decides to tighten the screws on the cap, it's an additional constraint on Russia's oil exports but not as tight as with a whole of G7 approach," said Elisabetta Cornago, a senior researcher at the Centre for European Reform (CER). Besides practical snags and legal matters, there is geopolitics to consider. One of the reasons why the G7 initiative has fallen short of expectations is that, as the name suggests, it has remained a G7-exclusive plan. Countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa have refused to play along and join the coalition. China and India openly buy Russian crude oil, sometimes to refine it and resell it under a different label. Having the EU and the US go separate ways would further destabilise the Western alliance and create the impression of a transatlantic break-up. But for many, that is already a reality: the "Coalition of the Willing", born after Donald Trump unilaterally launched negotiations with Vladimir Putin, bears testament to the political divide. "The price cap was a G7 + EU initiative, and so in its current form, I do not see any pathway in which the EU could adjust the cap without the support of the broader coalition, including the US," said Ben McWilliams, an affiliate fellow with Bruegel. "That said, the EU is free to implement whatever measures it wants on its own domestic ships and insurance companies, which it could likely encourage the UK to join," McWilliams added. "So the EU can still move ahead – it would just need to be under a different institutional format than currently exists."
