Elon Musk issues ominous message to Rep. Maxine Waters after Melania Trump threat
Rep. Maxine Waters, 86, came under fire from Musk after the video of her making threats about Melania during an anti-Department of Government Efficiency rally at the weekend in Los Angeles, California, went viral.
Musk commented on the video of Waters' late Tuesday on X writing: 'At some point, the many crimes of Maxine Waters will catch up to her.'
In the clip, published by X account 'End Wokeness' and also posted by Fox News host Sean Hannity Tuesday, Waters is heard saying: 'If he wants to start looking so closely to find those who were born here and their parents were undocumented, maybe he ought to first look at Melania.'
During the speech, Waters then issues an empty threat on the First Lady, declaring: 'We don't know whether or not her parents were documented. And maybe we better just take a look.'
Her comments came in relation to the Trump administration's pledge to stamp out birthright citizenship in the U.S. – a bid that has faced multiple hurdles from judiciary officials.
The Los Angeles Times pictured Waters amid the fray of hundreds of others protesting at the rally.
Despite Musk's remarks about 'crimes,' according to public records, Waters has no criminal record.
Melania was born in Slovenia in 1970 and moved to New York in 1996 to embark on her modeling career. While in New York, Melania met Trump at a party in 1998, and seven years later, the pair exchanged vows a Mar-a-Lago.
The First Lady was initially granted U.S. entry on an "Einstein Visa," also known as an EB-1, which is traditionally reserved for highly acclaimed people in their field.
According to her White House biography, she was granted U.S. citizenship in 2006 and is now the only First Lady to become a naturalized citizen.
Melania'ss parents were able to follow her to the U.S. on green cards that she sponsored in 2018.
Before floating the idea of investigating the First Lady, Waters is heard in the video slamming the President's calls to rebuke birthright citizenship.
'When he [Trump] talks about birthright, and he's going to undo the fact that the Constitution allows those who are born here, even if the parents are undocumented, they have a right to stay in America,' she says.
The clip was shared by Hannity on Tuesday, who titled the footage: 'MAD MAXINE! Crazy California Rep Suggests First Lady Should Be Deported in Unhinged Rant.'
The Saturday rally is one of several events that have occurred across the nation since Musk began actively participating in the second Trump administration.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Why Trump could take over DC police and deploy National Guard
Trump also has special authority to deploy the National Guard in DC, in contrast to governors traditionally overseeing mobilizations in their states. But the military is typically blocked from participating directly in law enforcement, which is why California filed a federal lawsuit against Trump's recent deployment of thousands of troops in Los Angeles. "DC as a federal enclave is fundamentally different than a state or a local government," Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University, told USA TODAY. Here's what to know about Trump's authority to bolster law enforcement in states and cities - and the limitations on that power: Trump becomes first to take over DC police under 1973 Home Rule Act The Constitution ratified in 1787 provided for a federal capital district to serve as the seat of government controlled by Congress, and DC was founded a few years later. In 1973, Congress approved the Home Rule Act that gave the city a mayor and city council. But Congress kept control over the city's spending and the ability to overturn DC laws, as happened in 2023 when the council tried to reduce penalties for some crimes. A provision in DC law allows the president to take control of the Metropolitan Police Force temporarily during an emergency. "I think Washington DC is the only city where the president can do that," Tom Manger, the former chief of Capitol police and departments in the DC suburbs of Montgomery County in Maryland and Fairfax County in Virginia, told USA TODAY. Trump invoked the provision for the first time Aug. 11 aiming to rid the city of what he called "crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse." He said the city was overrun with "violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals," despite a declining crime rate. Trump had to notify the leaders of congressional committees overseeing DC in order for him to keep control of the police for 30 days. A longer extension would require authorization by lawmakers. Trump told reporters Aug. 13 that he would ask Congress to "long-term extensions" for him to remain control of the DC police, which he expected to be approved "pretty much unanimously." But he said he could call a national emergency if needed. "We're going to be essentially crime free," Trump said. "This is going to be a beacon." Trump declared the initial emergency despite DC reporting a 35% drop in violent crime from 2023 to 2024, and a 26% drop in crime so far in 2025. Kreis said "a lot of people would contest" the declaration of an emergency, but the challenge would be difficult to litigate. "You almost by default have to defer to the president's judgment on this, no matter who the president is," Kreis said. Taking away DC home rule would require change in federal law Trump is unlikely to be able to take control of the entire DC government because that would require a change in federal law. The legislation could be blocked by filibuster in the Senate, which requires 60 votes to overcome in a chamber with 53 of Trump's fellow Republicans and 47 members of the Democratic caucus. Trump threatened to expand the deployment of the National Guard to help fight crime in other states and cities. He specifically cited New York, Chicago and other cities as targets for more troops. "We're not going to lose our cities over this. This will go further. We're starting very strongly with DC," Trump said. "We're going to take back our capital," Trump added. "And then we'll look at other cities also. But other cities and states aren't part of the federal government, so experts say he could not directly take over their police or local governments."The federal government does not have the authority to commandeer state and local officials against their will to do (its) bidding," Kreis said. "He just fundamentally cannot do that as a federalism matter." DC Mayor Muriel Bowser called Trump's takeover of the police force "unsettling and unprecedented" but didn't challenge it in court. "It's times like these when America needs to know that DC should be the 51st state," Bowser said in a social media post Aug. 12. Trump leads DC National Guard as commander in chief Trump didn't need any additional authority Aug. 11 to assign 800 National Guard troops to bolster crime fighting in DC because as commander in chief he oversees the Guard in the federal city. Joseph Nunn, national security counsel at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice, said presidents can deploy the National Guard where they want, but the troops are prevented from directly participating in law enforcement such as making arrests under a law called the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. This is why California National Guard troops in Los Angeles were described as protecting federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and buildings rather than helping arrest undocumented immigrants. "He can put those troops wherever he wants to put them, but they will be constrained by the Posse Comitatus Act," Nunn told USA TODAY. National Guard deployments have been routine Before Trump's latest directives, National Guard deployments were routine in DC and elsewhere for purposes other than law enforcement. For example, after the Capitol attack Jan. 6, 2021, Congress gave Manger the authority to request reinforcements from the National Guard on his own as chief of Capitol police, as opposed to having requests come from a three-member board. Manger said he appreciated the extra staffing to protect the Capitol or help with traffic during protests, such as when he set up dozens of traffic posts to keep vehicles moving during a protest by truckers against COVID-19 mandates. "The National Guard is terrific," Manger said. Local authorities also often coordinate with federal law enforcement such as the FBI to fight organized crime or the Drug Enforcement Administration to combat drug trafficking. "There's a symbiotic relationship between federal and local police across the country," Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum think tank, told USA TODAY. "What happened in Washington is distinctly different from what happens in pretty much any city in the country." Wexler added that the National Guard has a role to play, but troops are traditionally use "sparingly." The military "will never be a replacement for local police," Wexler said. "No police chief I know would ever put the National Guard in a position where they're making an arrest or their dealing directly with a volatile crowd. They have to be used strategically." But Manger was uncertain how Trump would move homeless people out of the capital. "I'm not aware of any other cities or towns around the country that are clamoring for homeless," Manger said. "Where is he going to put them?" Richard Stengel, a former undersecretary of state during the Obama administration, warned against the use of military to bolster law enforcement at a time when violent crime in DC is at a 30-year low. "Throughout history, autocrats use a false pretext to impose government control over local law enforcement as a prelude to a more national takeover," Stengel said in a social media post Aug. 11. "That's far more dangerous than the situation he says he is fixing." Trump bolsters immigration enforcement with National Guard The Pentagon announced on July 25 that 1,700 National Guard personnel - 1,200 already deployed plus 500 additional troops - will work on "case management, transportation and logistical support, and clerical support for the in- and out-processing" of ICE arrests. The troops were sent to more than a dozen cities. The duties of some will also include taking DNA swabs, photographs and fingerprints of people held at ICE facilities, according to a defense official speaking on condition of anonymity. California fights Trump's use of National Guard for law enforcement A landmark federal trial began Aug. 11 in San Francisco challenging Trump's deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 active-duty Marines to support deportations and quell immigration protests in Los Angeles. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco will determine if the government violated the Posse Comitatus Act. California sued the Trump administration by arguing the deployment violated federal law and state sovereignty. But a federal appeals court allowed Trump to retain control of California's National Guard during the legal fight. California Gov. Gavin Newsom seeks a ruling that would return its National Guard troops to state control and a declaration that Trump's action was illegal. What is the Insurrection Act? One option for Trump to get around the prohibition on troops conducting law enforcement would be to invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act, which aimed to suppress armed rebellion or insurrection. Despite the harsh terms, president have invoked the law throughout the country's history. Former President George H.W. Bush was the last to invoke the law in 1992, when he deployed the National Guard in Los Angeles in response to rioting after the acquittal of four white police officers charged with beating a Black motorist, Rodney King. Trump threatened repeatedly after Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 to invoke the Insurrection Act but hasn't done so recently. Legal experts said any challenge to Trump invoking that law would turn on similar semantics defining whether the emergency or rebellion justified taking over the DC police or deploying National Guard troops in other cities. "I think it would be naive to suggest that the president would not try or could not try to stretch the definitions of insurrection or rebellion beyond their common political usage to suit his political needs," Kreis said. "The law might say one thing but its ability to be stretched and molded into a political weapon for the president's benefit is not really purely speculative." Contributing: Cybele Mayes-Osterman and Reuters
The Independent
5 hours ago
- The Independent
Photos of the National Guard and federal agents in Washington
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
Spectator
10 hours ago
- Spectator
What is there to be optimistic about for British business?
In this season of scant corporate news – a Ryanair rant against the French here, a new BP oilfield there – it's hard to know what business leaders are thinking about the cold months to come. Until, that is, you read a survey conducted last month for the Institute of Directors. Given that I'm writing from France this month, I'd call it an absolute croissant-dropper. The nub is that 639 UK businesses, large and small, report 'optimism in prospects for the UK economy' at -72, lower even than their darkest pandemic sentiment at -69 in April 2020. Export hopes and investment intentions are down, wage expectations are sharply up and, unsurprisingly, headcounts are set to fall. No less than 85 per cent of respondents believe 'government policy so far will be unsuccessful in driving up economic growth'. Significantly, this isn't just traditional anti-Labour boardroom sentiment: the confidence index spiked in positive territory immediately after Sir Keir Starmer's election victory. But it plunged after Rachel Reeves's October Budget and is now at its lowest since the series began in 2016. Many firms are 'struggling to plan amid a cacophony of risk', adds the Institute's chief economist Anna Leach. 'The government must urgently quash rumours of further tax rises for business this autumn, and accelerate planning reforms and deregulation.' To which Downing Street spinners might respond, 'Who listens to the diminished IoD these days?' But then again, who else out there is trying to interpret the exigencies of hard-pressed business to Labour's cabinet of incompetents and union toadies? Where are they now, the 121 'business leaders and investors' (albeit many we'd never heard of) who signed a pre-election letter last May endorsing Labour's plan for growth which so rapidly turned to dust? The bitter truth is that this is the least business-savvy government for the past 50 years. And if a cross-section of frontline corporate chiefs are as utterly disheartened as the IoD survey suggests, things can only get worse. Airport scuffle I hesitate to wade into an airport scuffle between two entities I admire, namely Ryanair and, in a very broad sense, the French Republic. But the airline claims that 36,000 of its flights between January and July suffered delays caused by mismanagement and strikes in French air traffic control. It also says that a hike in 'solidarity tax' on short-haul fares from €2.63 to €7.40 has rendered many French routes uneconomic, necessitating a 750,000-seat cull for the coming winter and further cuts in 2026 that will 'leave French regional airports half empty' – where it might otherwise have invested $2.5 billion for a doubling of passenger numbers. Normally I'd cheerlead for Ryanair here, but its stand-off includes the total closure of services to two airports, Bergerac and Brive, I use often – and I won't be taking private jets instead, since they now incur a tax of €420 per passenger. Perhaps Donald Trump's special diplomatic envoy Steve Witkoff could usefully be re-routed to negotiate a peace settlement. Shape-shifting BP Even the most ardent climate-change activist – though perhaps not Ed Miliband – should admire the resilience of BP. The energy giant has announced a major oil and gas discovery in the Santos basin off Brazil following finds in Trinidad and north Africa and, in defiance of Miliband, the reopening of the mothballed Murlach field in the North Sea. This is the company that suffered huge flak for its Texas City refinery fire in 2005 and Deepwater Horizon rig explosion in 2010, took write-offs of $24 billion on its exit from Russia in 2022 – and declared a pivot towards renewables which it has lately abandoned in favour of lots more oil and gas. Meanwhile its share price stands lower than 20 years ago, as does its reputation among peers, summed up by a rival director as 'leaden-footed, high-cost and over-bureaucratic'. Just as the once world-scale Royal Bank of Scotland has shrunk to a string of north-of-the-border branches, so by rights BP ought to have survived as little more than a filling-station logo. But it's still a global player – and that shape-shifting power of self-renewal is, for me, what makes the big corporate world such a fascinating field of study. The hat man's lament The hat merchant of Monpazier is so lugubrious, despite selling my party several sunhats then inviting himself to join us for a beer, that I wonder whether he might be president of a French branch of the Institute of Directors. Consumer spending really is flatter than a flat cap this summer, he tells me, especially by the tribe of campeurs hollondais who are the paradigm of tight-fisted tourism in these parts. And as a purveyor of cheap baseball caps from India and pricier Panamas from Ecuador, he's a tiny cog in a global trade machine that's spluttering under the onslaught of Trump's tariffs and the retreat of globalisation. So his doom-laden tour d'horizon is not without cause. It rhymes with reports that unemployment for French 15- to 24-year-olds persists at around 19 per cent, within an overall rate of 7.5 per cent – compared with ours at 4.7 per cent, if you believe the way it's measured – and that tens of thousands more jobs are at the mercy of Trump's whim. Against that backdrop, did I perhaps over-egg the francophilia when I wrote last week about the animal spirits of my own revivified village of St Pompon? Saturday's marché gourmand nocturne offers a test. In early evening heat close to 40°C, the crowd and the trade are thin. But as the sun sets, the trestle tables fill up, the food queues lengthen, even the Dutch campers spend freely – and at dusk the DJ plays a version of 'Le Madison' that brings out 30 spontaneous line dancers, including the village postmaster, in perfect formation. Rosé from Puy l'Évêque at €7 a bottle helps, but the upbeat energy I was looking for is here – and my eyes are filled with tears.
