Government expert on Elon Musk and DOGE's "slash-and-burn exercise"
It was a remarkable moment last Tuesday: President Trump standing beside a shiny electric car at the White House making a pitch for the car's maker, Elon Musk: "This man has devoted his energy and his life to doing this. I think he's been treated very unfairly by a very small group of people."
For Musk – who spent about $300 million to help Trump win the White House, and who has reportedly pledged millions more to Trump's political efforts – it was a boost for Tesla's image, and a show of solidarity from the president. As he climbed into the driver's seat, Mr. Trump gushed, "Everything's computers!"
Tesla protests across the country have been a response to the "Department of Government Efficiency" initiative, known as DOGE. And as the man at its helm, Musk has been presidential confidant, cost-cutter, and government contractor all at once.
Molotov cocktails, arson and graffiti: Tesla facilities attacked in wake of Elon Musk's role in the White House
When asked about possible conflicts of interest given Musk's role in the Trump administration, Katie Drummond, the global editorial director of Wired (the technology publication that has scored recent scoops about Musk and his associates), says, "It is very clear that there are conflicts of interest across the board. I mean, Elon Musk himself is one giant conflict of interest.
"When you think about SpaceX, Starlink, Tesla, you think about all of these companies that are in some way, shape or form regulated and overseen by different agencies of the federal government," Drummond said. "And then you remember that the person who owns and runs all of these companies is flying on Air Force One with President Trump. Of course it's a conflict of interest."
Inside Elon Musk's "Digital Coup" (Wired)DOGE's foreign aid cuts have sparked "total chaos" around the world (Wired)
After years of covering Silicon Valley, Wired was ready to cover the ascent of tech billionaires into politics. [Last year, the magazine endorsed Trump's opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris.]
But in January, present at Trump's inauguration were Musk and other Silicon Valley billionaires.
Asked if that represented a new power structure in this country, Drummond said, "It's a power structure that has been growing for a while now. But I thought that the inauguration was such a stark moment of realization – I think should be a moment of realization for everyone in the United States – about who really runs this country."
And who is running it? Elon Musk? Or President Trump?
"The technology industry," Drummond replied. "You think about the trillions of dollars involved in all of those companies and those businesses. There is so much power in the technology industry, and when you combine that with, you know, essentially collusion with the federal administration, or at least a willingness to work hand-in-hand with the Trump administration, that's what we're about to see."
Newt Gingrich is a Republican former Speaker of the House, and a long-time Trump ally. Asked if he is concerned about possible conflicts of interest given the world's richest man's many business dealings with the federal government, Gingrich said, "Well, I think you always have to look at the danger of conflicts of interest with anybody. But at the same time, I would say that one of the virtues of being as wealthy as he is, is he hardly needs to rig the game."
Asked who has oversight over Musk at this point, Gingrich replied, "Donald J. Trump. He is the chief executive officer of the United States. He was elected by the American people, and he's acting as the President of the United States."
Gingrich became a household name three decades ago for his own push to shrink the federal government. Asked how today is different, Gingrich opined that the government is "much sicker" now than it was in 1995. "It's had a huge growth of bureaucracy, a huge growth of left-wing ideology, much bigger deficits," he said. "Trump has been campaigning for 10 years. He's found in Elon Musk the kind of person who has the drive, the toughness, the intelligence to really fundamentally take on the 'deep state' and change it in ways that would normally be unthinkable."
In the 1990s, Gingrich pressured the Democratic administration of President Bill Clinton to embrace conservative budget cuts. But in the Clinton-era, most reforms came only after months of deliberation and Congressional action – in stark contrast to what's happening today.
What is DOGE? Here's what to know about Elon Musk's latest cost-cutting effortsMusk is not an employee of DOGE and "has no actual or formal authority," White House says
"Let's be clear: Some people are gonna get hurt, let's be honest," Gingrich said of DOGE's broad cuts to federal programs and staff in virtually every agency. "There'll be some people laid off that probably shouldn't have been. There'll be some contracts that are dropped that probably shouldn't have been."
"Or some things that happen where the government just isn't functioning well," I said.
"Then the question you have to ask yourself is, on balance, does this system need to be fixed, even if the risk of fixing is gonna be some things that aren't totally a hundred percent?" Gingrich said. "Because you slow down enough to try to avoid any possible mistake, you'll get nothing done."
But Elaine Kamarck, a scholar at Washington's Brookings Institution, countered, "You can't just start lopping off whole categories of workers."
And what is the outcome if the table of government is tipped over? "People will die," Kamarck said. "It's that serious."
In the 1990s, Karmack was effectively the Clinton administration's counterpart to Gingrich, administering what was called Rego: Reinventing Government. She said it was very different from what is being implemented by DOGE and the White House. "What Musk is doing, and Trump, is they're testing the limits of executive power in a way that we did not," she said. "We went through it the old-fashioned way: If we thought a law needed to be changed, we went to Congress and asked them to change it."
Asked whether Democrats should work with Musk and President Trump, as Democrats tried with Republicans in the '90s, Karmack said, "I think Democrats should try where they can, absolutely. I think they should try to work with Musk. The problem is there's a total lack of transparency. We don't know who they're cutting. There's no rationale for why they're cutting. They're saying these people are wasteful? What do you mean? What are they doing that is a waste of taxpayers' money? We've gotten none of this.
"This is just a sort of slash-and-burn exercise," Karmack said. "This is not a thought-out exercise."
In a statement to "CBS Sunday Morning," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that DOGE has been "incredibly transparent," and that "President Trump has stated he will not allow conflicts, and Elon himself has committed to recusing himself from potential conflicts."
But Katie Drummond of Wired says concerns about Musk are not going away … and Elon Musk, for now, remains empowered.
"It's very clear, and I think should be very clear to anyone who has watched Elon Musk and how he operates for any period of time, his work ethic and his ambitions are limitless," said Drummond. "I think we are really sort of only at the beginning of what has the potential to be a much more seismic transformation of these federal agencies, of the federal infrastructure, for as long as Elon Musk is involved in this transformation."
For more info:
Wired"The United States of Elon Musk Inc." (Wired Magazine)Elaine Kamarck, founding director, Center for Effective Public Management, Brookings InstitutionNewt Gingrich (gingrich360.com)
Story produced by Ed Forgotson. Editor: Remington Korper.
Trump sends Iran a warning while ordering strikes against Houthis in Yemen
Retail giants like Macy's, Walgreens face financial turmoil
Senate passes short-term funding bill, averting a government shutdown
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sometimes a Parade Is Just a Parade
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. President Donald Trump has gotten his way and will oversee a military parade in Washington, D.C., this summer on the Army's birthday, which also happens to be his own. Plans call for nearly 7,000 troops to march through the streets as 50 helicopters buzz overhead and tanks chew up the pavement. One option has the president presiding from a viewing stand on Constitution Avenue as the Army's parachute team lands to present him with an American flag. The prospect of all this martial pomp, scheduled for June 14, has elicited criticism from many quarters. Some of it is fair—this president does not shy away from celebrating himself or flexing executive power, and the parade could be seen as an example of both—but some of it is misguided. Trump has a genius for showmanship, and showcasing the American military can be, and should be, a patriotic celebration. The president wanted just such a tribute during his first term, after seeing France's impressive Bastille Day celebrations. Then–Secretary of Defense James Mattis reportedly refused, effectively threatening to resign by telling the president to ask his next secretary of defense. Three secretaries of defense later, Trump has gotten enthusiastic agreement from current Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Criticism of the display begins with its price tag, estimated as high as $45 million. The projected outlay comes at a time of draconian budget cuts elsewhere: 'Cutting cancer research while wasting money on this? Shameful,' Republicans Against Trump posted on X. 'Peanuts compared to the value of doing it,' Trump replied when asked about the expense. 'We have the greatest missiles in the world. We have the greatest submarines in the world. We have the greatest army tanks in the world. We have the greatest weapons in the world. And we're going to celebrate it.' [Read: The case for a big, beautiful military parade] Other prominent critics of the Trump administration have expressed concern that the parade's real purpose is to use the military to intimidate the president's critics. The historian Heather Cox Richardson wrote on her Substack, 'Trump's aspirations to authoritarianism are showing today in the announcement that there will be a military parade on Trump's 79th birthday.' Ron Filipkowski, the editor in chief of the progressive media company MeidasTouch, posted, 'The Fuhrer wants a Nuremberg style parade on his birthday.' Experts on civil-military relations in the United States also expressed consternation. 'Having tanks rolling down streets of the capital doesn't look like something consistent with the tradition of a professional, highly capable military,' the scholar Risa Brooks told The New York Times. 'It looks instead like a military that is politicized and turning inwardly, focusing on domestic-oriented adversaries instead of external ones.' Even the military leadership has been chary. During Trump's first term, then–Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Paul Selva reflected that military parades are 'what dictators do.' But these critics may well be projecting more general concerns about Trump onto a parade. Not everything the Trump administration does is destructive to democracy—and the French example suggests that dictatorships are not the only governments to hold military displays. The U.S. itself has been known to mount victory parades after successful military campaigns. In today's climate, a military parade could offer an opportunity to counter misperceptions about the armed forces. It could bring Americans closer to service members and juice military recruitment—all of which is sorely needed. The American military is shrinking, not due to a policy determination about the size of the force needed, but because the services cannot recruit enough Americans to defend the country. In 2022, 77 percent of American youth did not qualify for military service, for reasons that included physical or mental-health problems, misconduct, inaptitude, being overweight, abuse of drugs or alcohol, or being a dependent. Just 9 percent of Americans ages of 16 to 24 (a prime recruitment window) are even interested in signing up. In 2023, only the Marine Corps and Space Force met their recruiting goals; the Army and Navy recruited less than 70 percent of their goals and fell 41,000 recruits short of sustaining their current force. Recruiting picked up dramatically in 2024 but remains cause for concern. One possible reason for this is that most Americans have little exposure to men and women in uniform. Less than 0.5 percent of Americans are currently serving in the military—and many who do so live, shop, and worship on cordoned military bases. Misperceptions about military service are therefore rife. One is that the U.S. military primarily recruits from minority groups and the poor. In fact, 17 percent of the poorest quintile of Americans serve, as do 12 percent of the richest quintile. The rest of the military is from middle-income families. Those who live near military bases and come from military families are disproportionately represented. The Army's polling indicates that concerns about being injured, killed, or suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder are major impediments to recruitment. Women worry that they will be sexually harassed or assaulted (the known figures on this in the U.S. military are 6.2 percent of women and 0.7 percent of men). Additionally, a Wall Street Journal–NORC poll found that far fewer American adults considered patriotism important in 2023 (23 percent) than did in 1998 (70 percent)—another possible reason that enthusiasm for joining up has dampened. [Read: The all-volunteer force is in crisis] A celebratory parade could be helpful here, and it does not have to set the country on edge. Americans seem comfortable with thanking military men and women for their service, having them pre-board airplanes, applauding them at sporting events, and admiring military-aircraft flybys. None of those practices is suspected of corroding America's democracy or militarizing its society. Surely the nation can bear up under a military parade once every decade or two, especially if the parade serves to reconnect veterans of recent wars, who often—rightly—grumble that the country tends to disown its wars as matters of concern to only those who serve in them. The risk, of course, is that Trump will use the occasion not to celebrate the troops but to corrode their professionalism by proclaiming them his military and his generals. This is, after all, the president who claimed that Dan Caine, his nominee to become chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wore a MAGA hat and attested his willingness to kill for Trump, all of which Caine denies. This is also a president known to mix politics with honoring the military, as he did in Michigan, at Arlington National Cemetery, at West Point's commencement, and in a Memorial Day post on Truth Social calling his opponents 'scum.' Even so, the commander in chief has a right to engage with the military that Americans elected him to lead. The responsibility of the military—and of the country—is to look past the president's hollow solipsism and embrace the men and women who defend the United States. Being from a military family or living near a military base has been shown to predispose people toward military service. This suggests that the more exposure people have to the military, the likelier they are to serve in it. A big celebration of the country's armed forces—with static displays on the National Mall afterward, and opportunities for soldiers to mix with civilians—could familiarize civilians with their armed forces and, in doing so, draw talented young Americans to serve. A version of this essay originally appeared on AEIdeas from the American Enterprise Institute. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk's Allegation Against Trump Is Deleted From Social Media
President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference with Elon Musk in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C, on May 30, 2025. Credit - Allison Robbert—Getty Images Amid President Donald Trump and Elon Musk's bitter online war of words, key posts have been deleted from social media. The most divisive post from Musk alleged that Trump is listed in the files related to the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and that this is why they have not been fully released to the public. Musk made the allegation on Thursday, in a post shared on his social media platform, X (formerly Twitter). But as of early Saturday morning, Musk's Epstein-related post was no longer showing, with X users instead receiving a notice that reads: "Sorry, that post has been deleted." And it's not the only post of Musk's that has been deleted. Another inflammatory post from Thursday, which saw Musk respond 'yes,' endorsing a message that said 'Trump should be impeached' and that Vance 'should replace him,' is also no longer viewable on X. The deleted posts suggest that the explosive feud between Trump and his one-time ally could be thawing. Read More: Where Things Stand With the Epstein Files Following Musk's Allegation Against Trump Musk's original posts came as Trump also lobbed insults and threatened to take away government funding and contracts related to billionaire Musk's Space X company. Although things appear, for now, to be simmering down, Trump has made it clear he does not have plans to reconcile with Musk. When asked on Friday night by reporters if he intends to speak with Musk—who until recently lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—the President gave a clear response. 'No I don't have plans… I'm not even thinking about it,' Trump said on Air Force One. 'I'm not really interested in that, I'm really interested in the country, and solving problems.' However, when asked if he plans to take back the symbolic White House key that he gifted to Musk, Trump said that he has no intention of doing that."I don't take things back, I gave him a key, he tried very hard,' the President told reporters, praising the efforts of DOGE. Read More: J.D. Vance Speaks Out After He's Dragged Into Explosive Row Between Trump and Musk Trump also appeared to defend Musk against the New York Times' reported allegations that the Tesla CEO regularly consumed ketamine, ecstasy, and psychedelic mushrooms when traveling with Trump on the campaign trail in 2024. 'I don't want to comment on his drug use. I don't know what his status is,' Trump said, when asked by reporters if he had concerns. 'I read an article in the New York Times. I thought it was, frankly, it sounded very unfair to me.' Trump's Air Force One remarks, issued late on Friday, came hours after he told ABC News that Musk had 'lost his mind.' Contact us at letters@
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk deletes Epstein tweet after Trump rift
Elon Musk has deleted a tweet in which he alleged that Donald Trump was 'in the Epstein files'. The social media post was written on Thursday during a fierce war of words between the tech billionaire and the US president, after a dispute over Mr Trump's flagship spending Bill marked an abrupt end to their close alliance. As the disagreement escalated, Mr Musk also suggested that his former boss should be removed from office. 'The Epstein files' is a phrase colloquially used to describe intelligence the US authorities hold on Jeffrey Epstein, the paedophile financier who died in 2019. However, by Saturday morning, Mr Musk had deleted his post on X, in a sign the row could be winding down. Mr Trump also appeared to suggest he was moving on from the spat, telling reporters during a flight to New Jersey: 'Honestly I've been so busy working on China, working on Russia, working on Iran... I'm not thinking about Elon Musk. I just wish him well.' The row began when Mr Musk – who last week stepped down as head of the Department of Government Efficiency – criticised the president's upcoming Bill as a 'disgusting abomination' and claimed it would increase the national debt. Mr Trump retaliated by saying the billionaire was upset because one of his allies had not been chosen for a role in the new Nasa administration. The president also suggested Mr Musk was annoyed because the White House's 'big beautiful Bill' would end tax breaks for electric vehicles worth billions of dollars to his car company Tesla. 'He knew it better than almost anybody, and he never had a problem until right after he left,' Mr Trump said. The president later said, during an Oval Office meeting with Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, that Mr Musk had 'Trump derangement syndrome'. The Republican later added that he was 'very disappointed' in the entrepreneur. However, Mr Musk was quick to hit back, alleging that the president had only won last year's election because of his support. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election. Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate... Such ingratitude,' he wrote on X. The world's richest man then published his post about the president and the Epstein files – but provided no evidence to back up his claim. Mr Trump and Epstein ran in the same social circles in New York and were pictured partying together on various occasions in the 1980s and 1990s. Epstein killed himself in 2019 in a Manhattan jail cell while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. In February, Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, pledged to release the Epstein files. However, the 'phase one' documents that were released to a hand-picked group of conservative influencers contained information that was largely already in the public domain. As the row escalated, Mr Musk said he would decommission his Dragon spacecraft, which is used by Nasa to deliver and collect astronauts from the International Space Station. Mr Trump in turn threatened to cancel all the Tesla and SpaceX owner's government contracts. 'The easiest way to save money in our budget, billions and billions of dollars, is to terminate Elon's governmental subsidies and contracts,' he said. The president also reportedly considered selling or giving away the red Tesla car he purchased earlier this year. Tesla shares tanked as the rift intensified, amid investor fears that Mr Trump might hinder the roll-out of self-driving cars in the US, hitting the company's growth potential. Shares closed down 14.3 per cent on Thursday and lost about £111 billion, although the firm staged a partial recovery on Friday. An administration official claimed Mr Musk was 'clearly having an episode', while Steve Bannon, Mr Trump's former adviser, encouraged the president to initiate a formal investigation into Mr Musk's immigration status and have him 'deported from the country immediately'. As well as deleting the Epstein post, Mr Musk also appeared to walk back on his threat to decommission the Dragon spacecraft. When an X user suggested Mr Musk and Mr Trump 'take a step back for a couple days', the Tesla chief executive wrote: 'Good advice. Ok, we won't decommission Dragon.' However, the billionaire has continued to keep a poll pinned to the top of his X profile which invites users of the social media platform to vote on whether it is time for a new political party in the US. Mr Musk wrote on Friday night: 'The people have spoken. A new political party is needed in America to represent the 80 per cent in the middle! This is fate.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.