Donald Trump responds to Elon Musk's late-night apology after ugly public feud
President Trump is feeling good about Elon Musk's apology after the former 'first buddy' admitted late Tuesday he had gone 'too far' in his personal attacks on the commander-in-chief.
'I thought it was very nice that he did that,' the president told The Post in a brief phone conversation Wednesday morning, but didn't say whether he was willing to let bygones be bygones with the Tesla and SpaceX CEO.
Musk, 53, went off on Trump in a series of social media messages this past Thursday, at one point claiming the Republican would not have won the 2024 election without his help and suggesting the president was responsible for preventing the release of files on convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein due to his past association with the late financier.
'I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far,' Musk wrote late Tuesday after previously deleting his post about the Epstein files.
Efforts have been made by Trump's allies to ease tensions between the two men.
On Friday, Vice President JD Vance and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles held a phone call with Musk to talk about his relationship with Trump, according to a source familiar with the conversation.
The Post could not independently confirm other reports that Musk reached out to Trump personally on Monday.
The president has expressed openness to potentially burying the hatchet with Musk — who he accused last week of having 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' and being bitter about both leaving his special government employee position and the House GOP removing electric vehicle tax incentives from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Trump told CNN on Friday that Musk was 'crazy' — and threatened on Truth Social to look into revoking his company's federal government contracts.
But the president also told The Post on Friday that 'nothing surprises him' — not even his onetime ally turning against him.
Trump told Post columnist Miranda Devine Monday that he doesn't 'blame' Musk for the blow-up that started with the former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) figure's criticisms of the Big Beautiful Bill — but maintained that he's 'a little disappointed.'
'Look, I have no hard feelings,' Trump said. 'I was really surprised that that happened. He went after a bill that's phenomenal. …He just — I think he feels very badly that he said that, actually.'
When asked whether he would ever go back to a regular relationship with Musk, Trump told Devine's 'Pod Force One' podcast: 'I guess I could, but we have to straighten out the country.'
'And my sole function now is getting this country back to a level higher than it's ever been. And I think we can do that.'
Originally published as Donald Trump responds to Elon Musk's late-night apology after ugly public feud
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
22 minutes ago
- The Age
Netanyahu knew the lethal risk of striking Iran. But he did it anyway
The attack without warning by Israel against a range of targets across Iran is unprecedented, even by the new standards of behaviour established since the April 2024 Iranian strike against Israel. That attack, in turn, was carried out in response to Israel's strike against Iranian military personnel in Iran's diplomatic compound in Damascus. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has characterised it as a necessary action to forestall the existential threat posed to his country by Iran's desire to weaponise its stockpiles of enriched uranium. Yet only a few months earlier, US President Donald Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, testified before the Senate intelligence committee that the intelligence community assessed Iran was not actively pursuing nuclear weapons and nor had its supreme leader allowed such a program to be commenced. If they weren't reacting to an imminent threat, then why choose to bomb Iranian targets now? The answer is because they could. Or more particularly because the environment that would allow them to do so would not be any better in the future. They had long wanted to conduct such an attack, but the political and military conditions have not allowed them to. That has changed. To begin with, Iran's air defences were significantly degraded as a result of Israel's October 2024 air attack. It takes some time to rebuild such a capability, and the longer Israel waited, the more likely it would be that Iran could mount some sort of air defence against an attack. In addition, Tehran's 'Axis of Resistance' had been significantly degraded over the past 18 months – in particular, Lebanese Hezbollah has suffered leadership decapitation and significant personnel and materiel losses. Its resupply routes through Syria have also been significantly compromised with the fall of the Assad regime. In the past, such an attack by Israel could be expected to elicit a robust response from Hezbollah against northern Israel; today the group is both able to respond but also must determine whether its priority is to rebuild domestically or to support its Iranian ideological and financial sponsor. And for all its public signalling, there are many in the Trump administration who support the attack against Iran. Trump has cast himself as the master dealmaker and as someone who wants to avoid war. He has described the Iranians as tough negotiators and claimed they were close to a deal. But Netanyahu accused the Iranians of stalling and dragging out the talks with no prospect of acceding to Washington's non-negotiable demand to stop processing any uranium. Loading Trump denied any US involvement in the attack, but Netanyahu was quick to praise him in his televised address following the attack. Trump is playing coy. While the next round of talks with Iran were to be held on Sunday, there is virtually no chance of them going on while Iran is being attacked. Diplomacy is a slow process, and there is a feeling that the diplomatic track had by no means been exhausted.
Sydney Morning Herald
23 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Netanyahu knew the lethal risk of striking Iran. But he did it anyway
The attack without warning by Israel against a range of targets across Iran is unprecedented, even by the new standards of behaviour established since the April 2024 Iranian strike against Israel. That attack, in turn, was carried out in response to Israel's strike against Iranian military personnel in Iran's diplomatic compound in Damascus. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has characterised it as a necessary action to forestall the existential threat posed to his country by Iran's desire to weaponise its stockpiles of enriched uranium. Yet only a few months earlier, US President Donald Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, testified before the Senate intelligence committee that the intelligence community assessed Iran was not actively pursuing nuclear weapons and nor had its supreme leader allowed such a program to be commenced. If they weren't reacting to an imminent threat, then why choose to bomb Iranian targets now? The answer is because they could. Or more particularly because the environment that would allow them to do so would not be any better in the future. They had long wanted to conduct such an attack, but the political and military conditions have not allowed them to. That has changed. To begin with, Iran's air defences were significantly degraded as a result of Israel's October 2024 air attack. It takes some time to rebuild such a capability, and the longer Israel waited, the more likely it would be that Iran could mount some sort of air defence against an attack. In addition, Tehran's 'Axis of Resistance' had been significantly degraded over the past 18 months – in particular, Lebanese Hezbollah has suffered leadership decapitation and significant personnel and materiel losses. Its resupply routes through Syria have also been significantly compromised with the fall of the Assad regime. In the past, such an attack by Israel could be expected to elicit a robust response from Hezbollah against northern Israel; today the group is both able to respond but also must determine whether its priority is to rebuild domestically or to support its Iranian ideological and financial sponsor. And for all its public signalling, there are many in the Trump administration who support the attack against Iran. Trump has cast himself as the master dealmaker and as someone who wants to avoid war. He has described the Iranians as tough negotiators and claimed they were close to a deal. But Netanyahu accused the Iranians of stalling and dragging out the talks with no prospect of acceding to Washington's non-negotiable demand to stop processing any uranium. Loading Trump denied any US involvement in the attack, but Netanyahu was quick to praise him in his televised address following the attack. Trump is playing coy. While the next round of talks with Iran were to be held on Sunday, there is virtually no chance of them going on while Iran is being attacked. Diplomacy is a slow process, and there is a feeling that the diplomatic track had by no means been exhausted.
AU Financial Review
28 minutes ago
- AU Financial Review
Investors are piling back into the momentum trade, hoping for records
Investors are increasingly shrugging off the months-long sharemarket volatility sparked by the Trump administration's aggressive trade policies and have become hopeful that, with the worst of the tariff shocks over, Australian stocks will keep breaking records over the next six months. While the S&P/ASX 200 pulled back from its all-time high on Friday amid news of Israeli missile and drone strikes on Iran, the benchmark index has still jumped 19 per cent since its April low. That puts it on the cusp of a technical bull market, or a 20 per cent climb from its recent trough.
