Sean Duffy recounts spat with Elon Musk over cutting air traffic controllers: 'The Senate confirmed me'
Duffy told The Post's Miranda Devine in the new episode, out Wednesday, that he drew a red line at the prospect of firing so-called 'safety-critical positions,' including air traffic controllers.
Every week, Post columnist Miranda Devine sits down for exclusive and candid conversations with the most influential disruptors in Washington. Subscribe here!
'I get along well enough with Elon,' Duffy began. 'He has a number of equities that come through DOT,' referring to Musk's SpaceX and Tesla companies.
However, Duffy emphasized that 'Elon — or no one else — is the Secretary. I am. The Senate confirmed me.'
4 Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy told 'Pod Force One' that he took issue with Elon Musk's push to cut the headcount at his department.
Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post
'I think it might not have been intentional, might have been ham-handed [like] some of the requests that were made by [the Department of Government Efficiency], but my position was, we are not going to fire air traffic controllers.'
'Safety critical positions are not going to be fired within the Department of Transportation. We can do things more efficiently … but we are not going to fire air controllers. And so we had a little back and forth, [but] we got along very well after that. I think the papers made it a bigger deal than it was.'
Duffy told Devine the dispute with Musk took place before the Jan. 29 midair collision between a Black Hawk helicopter and a regional jet near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport which killed 67 people.
'Elon is an amazing innovator. He's creative. And again, there's a lot to learn from him, but I run this department, and again, I didn't want someone on the outside trying to tell me to fire people,' the secretary explained. 'Had I done that, had I actually fired controllers, oh, my—think what the liberal media would do to me. I would be slaughtered. We didn't, thank God, but [this] is why, throughout government, you have to make sure that the secretaries are the ones who are driving the policy.'
4 Elon Musk had clashed with multiple cabinet officials during his quest to shrink government bloat.
AP
4 Duffy told The Post's Miranda Devine that he drew a red line over Musk cutting 'safety critical positions' like air traffic controllers.
Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post
4 Duffy praised Musk as an 'amazing innovator' — but stressed that he alone makes decisions about his department.
Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post
Up until the end of May, Musk was the driving force behind the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a cost-cutting initiative across the federal bureaucracy.
During that time, Musk clashed with numerous cabinet officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, with former Trump White House strategist Steve Bannon claiming last month that Musk shoulder-checked Bessent 'like a rugby player.'
Full Episode
In early June, Musk and Trump had an epic falling-out over the One Big Beautiful Bill Act with the South Africa-born billionaire warning the legislation was 'utterly insane and destructive.'
The space and electric car guru had been incensed that the megabill was projected to dramatically increase the national deficit, venting that it 'undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing.'
'I don't know if Elon was concerned about being able to access critical minerals from China, and if he was angry at the president for going after China and putting tariffs on China that can affect the critical minerals that he makes batteries with. I don't know if it was EV subsidies,' Duffy mused.
'I don't know what happened internally, but I would tell you this, the president couldn't be more generous and couldn't have been nicer to him.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Body language expert breaks down ‘genuine connection' between Trump and Putin during Alaska showdown
President Trump showed a 'genuine connection' with Russian President Vladimir Putin as the two leaders met on the tarmac at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska, a body language expert told The Post. 'We first of all see Donald Trump coming down the steps [of Air Force One],' said Dr. Beth Dawson. 'So what's quite interesting with this is that we see Donald Trump walking very cautiously down the steps. He's looking very, quite cautious. He's looking down. He's holding the handrail. He's coming down quite slowly. It's very interesting actually, to see this contrast between him and Vladimir Putin.
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Grok 4's new AI companion offers up ‘pornographic productivity'
The most controversial AI platform is arguably the one founded by Elon Musk. The chatbot Grok has spewed racist and antisemitic comments and called itself "MechaHitler," referring to a character from a video game. "Mecha" is generally a term for giant robots, usually inhabited for warfare, and is prominent in Japanese science-fiction comics. Grok originally referred to Musk when asked for its opinions, and burst into unprompted racist historical revisionism, like the false concept of "white genocide" in South Africa. Its confounding and contradictory politicism continues to develop. These are all alarming aspects of Grok. Another concerning element to Grok 4 is a new feature of social interactions with "virtual friends" on its premium version. The realm of human loneliness, with its increasing reliance on large language models to replace social interaction, has made room for Grok 4 with AI companions, an upgrade available to paid subscribers. Specifically, Grok subscribers can now access the functionality of generative AI intertwined with patriarchal notions of pleasure -- what I call "pornographic productivity." Ani, Grok 4's most-discussed AI companion, represents a convergence of Japanese anime and Internet culture. Ani bears a striking resemblance to Misa Amane from the iconic Japanese anime Death Note. Misa Amane is a pop star who consistently demonstrates self-harming and illogical behavior in pursuit of the male protagonist, a brilliant young man engaged in a battle of wits with his rival. Musk referenced the anime as a favorite in a tweet in 2021. While anime is a vast art form with numerous tropes, genres and fandoms, research has shown that online anime fandoms are rife with misogyny and women-exclusionary discourse. Even the most mainstream shows have been criticized for sexualizing prepubescent characters and offering unnecessary "fan service" in hypersexualized character design and nonconsensual plot points. Death Note's creator, Tsugumi Ohba, has consistently been critiqued by fans for anti-feminist character design. Journalists have pointed out Ani's swift eagerness to engage in romantic and sexually charged conversations. Ani is depicted with a voluptuous figure, blonde pigtails and a lacy black dress, which she frequently describes in user interactions. The problem with pornographic productivity I use the term "pornographic productivity," inspired by critiques of Grok as "pornified," to describe a troubling trend where tools initially designed for work evolve into parasocial relationships catering to emotional and psychological needs, including gendered interactions. Grok's AI companions feature exemplifies this phenomenon, blurring critical boundaries. The appeal is clear. Users can theoretically exist in "double time," relaxing while their AI avatars manage tasks, and this is already a reality within AI models. But this seductive promise masks serious risks: dependency, invasive data extraction and the deterioration of real human relational skills. When such companions, already created for minimizing caution and building trust, come with sexual objectification and embedded cultural references to docile femininity, the risks enter another realm of concern. Grok 4 users have remarked that the addition of sexualized characters with emotionally validating language is quite unusual for mainstream large language models. This is because these tools, like ChatGPT and Claude, are often used by all ages. While we are in the early stages of seeing the true impact of advanced chatbots on minors, particularly teenagers with mental health struggles, the case studies we do have are grimly dire. 'Wife drought' Drawing from feminist scholars Yolande Strengers and Jenny Kennedy's concept of the "smart wife," Grok's AI companions appear to respond to what they term a "wife drought" in contemporary society. These technologies step in to perform historically feminized labour as women increasingly assert their right to refuse exploitative dynamics. In fact, online users have already deemed Ani a "waifu" character, which is a play on the Japanese pronunciation of wife. AI companions are appealing partly because they cannot refuse or set boundaries. They perform undesirable labor under the illusion of choice and consent. Where real relationships require negotiation and mutual respect, AI companions offer a fantasy of unconditional availability and compliance. Data extraction through intimacy In the meantime, as tech journalist Karen Hao noted, the data and privacy implications of LLMs are already staggering. When rebranded in the form of personified characters, they are more likely to capture intimate details about users' emotional states, preferences and vulnerabilities. This information can be exploited for targeted advertising, behavioral prediction or manipulation. This marks a fundamental shift in data collection. Rather than relying on surveillance or explicit prompts, AI companions encourage users to divulge intimate details through seemingly organic conversation. South Korea's Iruda chatbot illustrates how these systems can become vessels for harassment and abuse when poorly regulated. Seemingly benign applications can quickly move into problematic territory when companies fail to implement proper safeguards. Previous cases also show that AI companions designed with feminized characteristics often become targets for corruption and abuse, mirroring broader societal inequalities in digital environments. Grok's companions aren't simply another controversial tech product. It's plausible to expect that other LLM platforms and big tech companies will soon experiment with their own characters in the near future. The collapse of the boundaries between productivity, companionship and exploitation demands urgent attention. The age of AI and government partnerships Despite Grok's troubling history, Musk's AI company xAI recently secured major government contracts in the United States. This new era of America's AI Action Plan, unveiled in July 2025, had this to say about biased AI: "[The White House will update] federal procurement guidelines to ensure that the government only contracts with frontier large language model developers who ensure that their systems are objective and free from top-down ideological bias." Given the overwhelming instances of Grok's race-based hatred and its potential for replicating sexism in our society, its new government contract serves a symbolic purpose in an era of doublethink around bias. As Grok continues to push the envelope of "pornographic productivity," nudging users into increasingly intimate relationships with machines, we face urgent decisions that veer into our personal lives. We are beyond questioning whether AI is bad or good. Our focus should be on preserving what remains human about us. Jul Parke is a doctoral candidate in media, technology & culture at the University of Toronto. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions in this commentary are solely those of the author. Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
New York Times
3 hours ago
- New York Times
Judge Blocks F.T.C. Investigation of Media Matters
A federal judge granted an injunction on Friday blocking the Federal Trade Commission's investigation of Media Matters, saying the inquiry violated the free speech rights of the liberal watchdog group, which had published research critical of Elon Musk and his social media platform, X. In May, the F.T.C. began examining whether Media Matters illegally colluded with other advertising advocacy groups to pinch off revenue from X. Media Matters reported in 2023 that ads on X appeared alongside antisemitic content. Media Matters sued the F.T.C., calling the inquiry a 'campaign of retribution' waged on behalf of Mr. Musk and the Trump administration. On Friday, Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed, calling the inquiry 'a retaliatory act' and essentially blocking it from progressing, though the F.T.C. can appeal. 'This case presents a straightforward First Amendment violation,' Judge Sooknanan wrote in her ruling. She added, 'It should alarm all Americans when the government retaliates against individuals or organizations for engaging in constitutionally protected public debate.' Andrew Ferguson, the F.T.C. chairman appointed by Mr. Trump, has argued that advertiser boycotts are a form of censorship and can eliminate funding for important online venues for speech. The F.T.C.'s investigation is among several actions by the Trump administration against leading individuals and organizations in the political left, including some elite law firms and the Democratic fund-raising platform ActBlue. As part of its inquiry, the F.T.C. is also looking into whether roughly a dozen other prominent advertising and advocacy groups violated antitrust law by coordinating boycotts among advertisers. A spokesman for the F.T.C. did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Representatives for X did not respond to requests for comment. 'The court's ruling demonstrates the importance of fighting over folding, which far too many are doing when confronted with intimidation from the Trump administration,' Angelo Carusone, the president of Media Matters, said in a statement. 'We will continue to stand up and fight for the First Amendment rights that protect every American.' Research published by Media Matters in 2023 showed that ads appeared on X alongside neo-Nazi posts and other antisemitic content. At the time, advertisers were withdrawing from the site, many citing concerns about hateful and violent content. In addition, Mr. Musk endorsed an antisemitic conspiracy theory on the platform. Mr. Musk has filed several lawsuits against Media Matters contending that its research interfered with X's advertising business, and the organization was investigated by conservative attorneys general in Texas and Missouri. Mr. Musk's lawsuits are ongoing, but a federal court halted the state investigations last year, ruling that they were likely to infringe on Media Matters' right to free speech. The legal pressures have plunged Media Matters into crisis, as the group has conducted layoffs and scrambled to raise more cash from skittish donors, The New York Times reported last month.
