A Rocky Time in the White House For Elon Musk ‘Comes to an End'
A Rocky Time in the White House For Elon Musk 'Comes to an End' originally appeared on L.A. Mag.
A destructive Tesla boycott, viral chainsaw video and alleged Nazi salute later, tech mogul Elon Musk is booking his ticket out of Washington.
After months as a major player in the Trump Administration, from his part in co-creating DOGE to his key presence on the campaign trail, Musk announced that his time as a special government employee is over.The Tesla founder, who once called himself 'first buddy' to the president, is distancing himself from the administration he helped build, being named the biggest political spender of the 2024 presidential campaign, donating almost $300 million.
Musk said he is grateful to President Trump for the opportunity to reduce 'wasteful spending,' in a post on X yesterday. The announcement comes after a noticeable departure from Musk, who is putting greater focus on Tesla and SpaceX, while also shedding light on his own concerns for the president.
In an upcoming appearance on CBS Sunday Morning, Musk shares some criticism of the 'big, beautiful bill' his former partner is proposing, set to add $3.8 trillion to the current budget deficit. A bill like this can maybe be big or it can be beautiful, but it cannot be both, he explains in the CBS trailer.
'I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit…and undermines the work the DOGE team is doing,' Musk said in the interview, airing Sunday, June 1.
DOGE, a Trump-era branch of government, stands for the Department of Government Efficiency, which was put in place to streamline government operations and cut overall expenditures. The new initiative, started by President Trump just after his inauguration, appointed Musk special advisor and dedicated a spot for him as a special employee.
His time with the president was a 'scheduled time,' Musk said on X, where he was given just 130 days to make his dent in White House operations.
President Trump was offered the opportunity to fire back at Musk's critiques of the bill, but he declined to comment directly; instead saying at the White House yesterday, 'I'm not happy about certain aspects of [the bill], but I'm thrilled by other aspects of it.'
This story was originally reported by L.A. Mag on May 29, 2025, where it first appeared.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
17 minutes ago
- New York Times
Quote of the Day: Pardons Prop Up Crimes of a Certain Collar
'Of course, stealing by fraud is still stealing. It's just that this is the way rich people do it.' BARBARA L. MCQUADE, a U.S. attorney in Michigan during the Obama administration, on how President Trump's pardons of white-collar criminals could normalize nonviolent offenses.
Politico
38 minutes ago
- Politico
Appeals court keeps block on Trump administration's downsizing of the federal workforce
SAN FRANCISCO — An appeals court on Friday refused to freeze a California-based judge's order halting the Trump administration from downsizing the federal workforce, which means that the Department of Government Efficiency-led cuts remain on pause for now. A split three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that the downsizing could have significant ripple effects on everything from the nation's food-safety system to veteran health care, and should stay on hold while a lawsuit plays out. The judge who dissented, however, said President Donald Trump likely does have the legal authority to downsize the executive branch and there is a separate process for workers to appeal. The Republican administration had sought an emergency stay of an injunction issued by U.S. Judge Susan Illston of San Francisco in a lawsuit brought by labor unions and cities, including San Francisco and Chicago, and the group Democracy Forward. The Justice Department has also previously appealed her ruling to the Supreme Court, one of a string of emergency appeals arguing federal judges had overstepped their authority. The judge's order questioned whether Trump's administration was acting lawfully in trying to pare the federal workforce. Trump has repeatedly said voters gave him a mandate to remake the federal government, and he tapped billionaire Elon Musk to lead the charge through the Department of Government Efficiency. Tens of thousands of federal workers have been fired, have left their jobs via deferred resignation programs, or have been placed on leave. There is no official figure for the job cuts, but at least 75,000 federal employees took deferred resignation, and thousands of probationary workers have already been let go. Illston's order directs numerous federal agencies to halt acting on the president's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by DOGE and the Office of Personnel Management. Illston, who was nominated to the bench by former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, wrote in her ruling that presidents can make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies, but only with the cooperation of Congress. Lawyers for the government say that the executive order and memo calling for large-scale personnel reductions and reorganization plans provided only general principles that agencies should follow in exercising their own decision-making process.
an hour ago
Appeals court keeps block on Trump administration's downsizing of federal workforce
SAN FRANCISCO -- An appeals court on Friday refused to freeze a California-based judge's order halting the Trump administration from downsizing the federal workforce, which means that the Department of Government Efficiency-led cuts remain on pause for now. A split three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that the downsizing could have significant ripple effects on everything from the nation's food-safety system to veteran health care, and should stay on hold while a lawsuit plays out. The judge who dissented, however, said President Donald Trump likely does have the legal authority to downsize the executive branch and there is a separate process for workers to appeal. The Republican administration had sought an emergency stay of an injunction issued by U.S. Judge Susan Illston of San Francisco in a lawsuit brought by labor unions and cities, including San Francisco and Chicago, and the group Democracy Forward. The Justice Department has also previously appealed her ruling to the Supreme Court, one of a string of emergency appeals arguing federal judges had overstepped their authority. The judge's order questioned whether Trump's administration was acting lawfully in trying to pare the federal workforce. Trump has repeatedly said voters gave him a mandate to remake the federal government, and he tapped billionaire Elon Musk to lead the charge through the Department of Government Efficiency. Tens of thousands of federal workers have been fired, have left their jobs via deferred resignation programs, or have been placed on leave. There is no official figure for the job cuts, but at least 75,000 federal employees took deferred resignation, and thousands of probationary workers have already been let go. Illston's order directs numerous federal agencies to halt acting on the president's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by DOGE and the Office of Personnel Management. Illston, who was nominated to the bench by former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, wrote in her ruling that presidents can make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies, but only with the cooperation of Congress. Lawyers for the government say that the executive order and memo calling for large-scale personnel reductions and reorganization plans provided only general principles that agencies should follow in exercising their own decision-making process. __
