EXCLUSIVE How JD Vance is embracing a new 'peacekeeper' role between Trump, Musk and other top advisors
As the battle between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump escalated on social media on Friday, the president pulled Vice President JD Vance aside to coordinate their response.
Vance was preparing a trip to Nashville, Tennessee, for an interview with podcast comedian Theo Von, and wanted to be prepared for the proper response to Musk.
While the president took a harder edge against Musk on social media and while speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, he wanted the vice president to be more diplomatic, sources familiar with the exchange told the Daily Mail.
By the time he entered the podcast studio in Nashville, however, the feud had escalated to new heights.
As Von described it to Vance, 'the fu**ing s**t missile is in the cannon.'
Von's audience was captivated as they watched Vance confronted in real time with posts from Musk declaring that Trump's name was in the Epstein files and even endorsed posts on X calling for Trump to be impeached to make him the president.
Vance dismissed Musk's claim as 'totally BS' and affirmed he would remain loyal to the president first.
At the same time, however, he praised Musk as 'incredible entrepreneur' and 'really good' even though he said it was a 'huge mistake' for him to go after the president that way.
But the vice president was also optimistic that Musk could patch up his relationship with Trump.
'I hope that eventually Elon kind of comes back into the fold,' he said.
Vance was puzzled by the exchanges but made excuses for Musk's behavior, describing him as 'an emotional guy' and whose 'heart is in the right place.'
By Friday, Vance joined White House chief of staff Susie Wiles to speak with Musk to help smooth things over after the very public blowup.
'The last four months of my life I've probably had a hundred calls with Elon Musk,' he confirmed to reporters after Musk admitted publicly that some of his attacks on Trump had gone 'too far.'
For Vance, a natural successor to Trump, it made sense to heal the relationship with the world's richest man if he ever wants to be president.
But Vance indicated he really wanted to heal the relationship for the good of the country and for the good of his friend.
'I think that if he and the president are in some blood feud, most importantly it's going to be bad for the country but I…don't think it's going to be good for Elon either,' he said to Von.
It was a rare display of diplomacy for the vice president, who spends a lot of his time on the global stage picking fights with journalists and politicians like Gavin Newsom on social media.
But his longstanding relationship with Musk helped smooth over the very public blowup with the president.
Vance first met Musk in June 2023, according to reports, as they were introduced by tech investor David Sacks, long before the native son of Ohio kicked off his political career by running for senate.
Musk also reportedly supported Vance as his preferred candidate for Trump's running mate, describing him as the 'smartest' of the potential vice presidents.
In the early days of the administration, Musk praised Vance on social media as the 'Best VP ever and our future President.'
Vance began his vice presidency in a very public blowup during the Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky and famously scolded Europe for their failure to commit to free speech.
His trip to Greenland was less than diplomatic, as he delivered the unpopular message to the island that it was time to team up with the United States.
But in recent weeks, the vice president's job has required him to be more of a diplomat.
On Tuesday, residents of Butte Montana was surprised to see Air Force Two land at their small airport and a motorcade for the vice president was spotted driving out into the country.
As tensions between Iran and Israel escalated, Vance visited the Murdoch Ranch in Dillon Montana, roughly 70 miles south.
Vance met with Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch and a group of other Fox News executives for dinner, according to reports.
The diplomatic visit took place even after his political advisors chaffed as Murdoch's media outlets were highly critical of his political record in the Summer 2024 as President Trump was still ruminating on his choice for vice president.
It was no secret that Murdoch wanted to see former North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum to be Trump's choice, as his media outlets spent significant resources criticizing Vance's anti-war views.
The vice president's office did not respond to the Daily Mail's requests for comment.
Although Vance's time in the Senate was short, he developed many relationships that have served the Trump administration well.
His personal touch with his former senate colleagues helped sooth some of the concerns that they had with the president's more controversial picks for his cabinet.
Prior to his departure for Montana, JD Vance traveled to Capitol Hill on Tuesday meet with Republican senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin.
Johnson was unhappy with the president's Big Beautiful Bill that was currently in negotiations with the Senate, but after Vance met wit the senator, the White House signaled they were more optimistic about getting him on board.
Unlike the president's movements, Vance's schedule remains mostly private allowing him to have the flexibility to have private meetings and move more quickly with his travel.
The job also runs into unexpected territory.
Just weeks after visiting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi with his wife and children, Vance found himself contacting Modi to help ward off a war between Pakistan and India.
In June, Vance also met with an all-party delegation from India to discuss ongoing tensions with Pakistan and possible business opportunities.
Vance also met with political activist Laura Loomer, and although the contents of the meeting remained private, there were no political fireworks after the meeting, suggesting their exchange was cordial enough to stay out of the headlines.
When the Papal conclave resulted in the election of Pope Leo XIV, an American, Trump asked Vance to lead the American delegation.
Despite the pope's previous criticism of both Vance and Trump on social media, the delegation was successful as a smiling Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio posed for pictures with the American pontiff.
Unlike many modern vice presidents who can go days without hearing directly from the president, Vance frequently communicates with Trump, people familiar with his interactions with the president say.
Vance is careful about not stepping out ahead of the president, and remaining tactful in his communications about what he is thinking.
His role as a jack-of-all trades vice president continues, as he continues his work confident that he has the president's trust.
'I know the president pretty well and I knew that he had a lot of trust in me, the role of the vice president is very derivative of what the president is doing,' Vance told Von while discussing his job.
'So if the president has trust in you and gives you a task and just lets you go and do it, that's kind of what your job is.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
33 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘No doubt' Trump will back nuclear submarine deal, says Starmer
There is 'no doubt' that Donald Trump will end up backing the Aukus nuclear submarine deal, Sir Keir Starmer has said during his trip to Canada ahead of the G7 summit. The pact between Australia, the UK and the US, known by its acronym, was thrown into doubt last week when the Pentagon announced a review into it. The agreement was signed in 2021 and is worth £176 billion, giving Australia nuclear-powered submarines for the first time. It is designed to counter the influence of China in the Indo-Pacific. The US president has appointed Elbridge Colby to head up the review. The former US deputy assistant secretary of defence questioned the deal in a speech last year, asking why the US was giving away 'this crown jewel asset when we most need it'. Both the US and the UK are under pressure to boost defence spending from Mr Trump, who has demanded Western allies do more to protect their own security. Sir Keir is expected to hold talks with Mr Trump during the G7 summit in Canada, giving him the opportunity to sway his counterpart to remain committed to the Aukus pact. Travelling with reporters on a plane to Canada, Sir Keir was asked what his message would be to Mr Trump about the importance of the alliance. Sir Keir said: 'Aukus is really important. We're fully committed to it. 'It's not unusual for an incoming government to do a review of a project like that. We, of course, looked into the issue when we came into government... and they're doing their own review. 'But I'm 100 per cent committed to it. I'm really clear about that.' Asked if he was confident Mr Trump would end up backing Aukus, Sir Keir said: 'Yeah, I think so. It's a really important project. So I don't have any doubt that this will progress.' The public optimism has been echoed in Australia, where Richard Marles, the defence minister, recently said of the review: 'I'm very confident this is going to happen.' Concerns about whether Mr Trump would remain fully behind Aukus were flagged early internally by Downing Street when he won the US presidential election last November. The agreement was signed by Joe Biden, the Democrat who defeated Mr Trump in the 2020 presidential election and has often been a focus of his criticism. Indeed, the other two leaders who signed the pact have also changed, with Boris Johnson and Scott Morrison long gone as the leaders of the UK and Australia respectively. Mr Trump appeared not to know what the acronym Aukus meant when it was mentioned in the Oval Office during Sir Keir's first visit to the new US president in February. But the Prime Minister seems hopeful that, like the deal to hand sovereignty over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius that was waved through by Mr Biden, Mr Trump will eventually give it his backing. A Pentagon official told the BBC last week when the review was announced that the process was to ensure Aukus meets 'common sense, America First criteria'. Australia is buying up to five nuclear-powered submarines at a huge expense from the US, potentially making it easy to frame the deal as a boost for the American economy. Meanwhile, the date for implementation of the UK-US free trade deal, signed off by Sir Keir and Mr Trump in May, appears to be days away. It is possible Sir Keir will announce that the agreement is finally kicking in during the G7 summit, should he hold a formal bilateral meeting with the US president.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Macron sends blunt Trump a message as he lands in Greenland ahead of G7
French President Emmanuel Macron delivered a blunt message to Donald Trump by stopping in Greenland Sunday en route to the G7 – a massive territory the U.S. president says the nation 'needs.' Macron stopped in Nuuk, the same city visited by Donald Trump, Jr. and Vice President JD Vance in separate stops that alarmed some locals who favor moves toward independence or continued association with Denmark. And the French president, eager to flex his own as a European leader as Trump pulls back rhetorically from European allies and pivots away from Ukraine, did not hold back in his public comments. 'I don't think that´s something to be done between allies,' Macron said on a brief visit where he met Danish PM Mette Frederiksen and Greenland's PM Jens-Frederik Nielsen. 'It´s important to show that Denmark and Europe are committed to this territory, which has very high strategic stakes and whose territorial integrity must be respected,' Marcon added. Macron's visit comes as Trump prepares to land in a country where locals are equally adamant against his call to make Canada the 51st U.S. state. ''I don't think he's playing around. I think he has intent around it. I think I think he's smart enough to know that we need them more than they need us, and he's willing to do whatever it takes,' local electrical contractor Curtis Reynard told the Daily Mail. With great powers scrambling for influence in the Arctic, Macron has also said the deep seas are not 'up for grabs.' Trump has been blunt in his claims about the need to obtain Greenland, which has stores of rare earth minerals under its permafrost and a strategic location between North America and Europe. 'We need Greenland for national security and international security,' Trump said in late March as the situation escalated. 'So we'll, I think, we'll go as far as we have to go,' Trump added. 'We need Greenland. And the world needs us to have Greenland, including Denmark. Denmark has to have us have Greenland. And, you know, we'll see what happens. But if we don't have Greenland, we can't have great international security.' 'I view it from a security standpoint, we have to be there,' said Trump. Last week, Denmark's parliament approved U.S. military bases on Danish soil, explanding a 2023 agreement. Denmarks PM has said Greenland 'will never, ever be a piece of property that can be bought by just anyone.' And early this year amid the pressure Denmark said it would pour $2 billion into Arctic defense. Last week Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told lawmakers the U.S. had plans to invade Greenland or Panama if necessary. 'Our job at the Defense Department is to have plans for any particular contingency,' Hegseth said under questioning at a hearing. 'I think the American people would want the Pentagon to have plans for any particular contingency,' Hegseth added. The remarks prompted pushback from Alaska Senate Repulbican Lisa Murkowski. She told the Daily Mail she didn't 'think the Trump administration would like to buy Greenland once they realize what the price of Greenland would be.' Macron's trip comes after Trump and first lady Melania Trump viwed U.S. military might during a 250th anniversary Army parade that fell on Trump's birthday. It was during a trip to France to watch Bastille Day celebrations with Macon that Trump got the idea for a parade in DC.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
STEPHEN DAISLEY: Swinney has no spark, no vision and no clue. If he were to quit now he'd leave no legacy ... just consequences
Reports of a plot to replace John Swinney as SNP leader prompt an obvious question: with whom? The First Minister's pitch when he took over the leadership was that he would be Mr Stability, a safe pair of hands who could move the party on from the Humza Yousaf disaster, factional disagreements over gender and independence strategy, and the never-ending police investigation. Now, there's a lot to be said for stability. After all, 'May you live in interesting times' is intended as a curse, not a blessing. But whose interests are served by Swinneyean 'stability'? Certainly not taxpayers who want to see their money spent wisely on the improvement of public services. Swinney, like his recent predecessors, is adept at raking money in and pouring it back out but the record on outcomes leaves a lot to be desired. The finance secretary who gutted funding for local government. The education secretary who tried to fix an exams disaster by downgrading the results of working-class children. The Covid recovery secretary who produced no recovery in hospitals or on high streets. The first minister who, over a long and undistinguished ministerial career, has had a hand in every calamity to issue from St Andrew's House, from the educational attainment gap to the unlawful named persons scheme, the Ferguson Marine ferries to the Gender Recognition Reform Bill, the secrecy that bedevilled the Alex Salmond inquiry to the brazen deletion of ministerial messages from the Covid pandemic. Internal rivals might be displeased with his absolutely honking performance in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, losing a safe SNP seat to a Labour party that he said wasn't even in the race, but if anyone is entitled to vent about the man's performance it is the general public. They thought they were getting a political handyman, someone who would roll up his sleeves and fix the breaks, cracks, squeaks and grumbles across government. Thirteen months later, the same faults remain. Decrepitude has become the norm. Which brings us back to the 'who' question. Let's say the plotters give Swinney his jotters. Who follows him into Bute House? Stephen Flynn is a name insiders keep bringing up, and I keep advising them to put right back down. Flynn is a wide boy with a restless mouth and a smug manner and zero in the way of executive experience. He is a less qualified Humza Yousaf. Angus Robertson? Cold, aloof, and unrelatable. If Scottish elections were held only in Stockbridge and Kelvinbridge, he'd romp home, but the farther you get from a university, a Waitrose or a book festival, the further his appeal diminishes. Kate Forbes could make a decent fist of it but the green-haired brigade would sooner see Reform in government than allow a Bible-believing Christian to lead the party. Not that any of this matters, of course. The problem is the SNP itself, its failure to govern and its shifting priorities. Scotland will not flourish under Swinney. It will not flourish under Flynn or anyone else touted as a possible successor. The SNP is not a party that exists to make Scotland flourish; it exists to make Scotland independent. Yet the Nationalists are no closer today to achieving either than they were 18 years ago when they entered government. Scotland did not flourish under Alex Salmond, whose energies were directed to the SNP's raison d'etre. It was of little consolation to those who hoped for economic and social progress during those first seven years, but Salmond spoke often of independence as the necessary condition for transforming the country into a powerhouse of prosperity, innovation and fairness. Unionists could dislike his objectives and his personality while recognising that he had ambition for the country, however misguided. Scotland is still not flourishing but nor is it making much progress towards independence. Under the post-Salmond leadership of the SNP, the unholy trinity of Nicola Sturgeon, Humza Yousaf and John Swinney, the journey has not merely stalled, the destination has changed. The immediate objective is not tending, growing or marshalling the independence movement, but entrenching and expanding their own ruling caste, a self-perpetuating elite whose purpose is not social or constitutional change but the acquisition of power and status for their own sake. They are in office to be in office and every decision is taken with the maintenance of office in mind. They are embedding themselves as the new Scottish establishment, helpfully sporting yellow rather than red rosettes so they may be distinguished from the old establishment, and nothing - not the improvement of education, nor the recovery of the NHS, nor even independence - will get in their way. That establishment was on full display last week in John Swinney's mini reshuffle, an ingathering of the inconsequential, an anointing of the adequate. It's hard to be disappointed in the calibre of ministers, for how do you work up any kind of feeling towards a Tom Arthur or a Màiri McAllan? There is nothing there to oppose because there is nothing there. At the head of this committee of beige sits Swinney, the beigest man of all.. No spark, no passion, no vision, no clue. Tomorrow, the First Minister will address the Scotland 2050 conference in Edinburgh where he will urge us to reject 'another 25 years of Westminster mismanagement' and instead 'look around us at our immense potential today, and have the confidence that we can do better with the full powers of independence'. The party that proclaimed 'Scotland free by 93', and then 'Nationalist heaven in 2007', now wants its followers to believe independence will be nifty in 2050. At some point, the party faithful will have to accept that they are not being led but strung along. The SNP will not deliver a booming economy and radically improved public services to ordinary voters, and nor will it, in its current incarnation, deliver independence to those for whom the constitution comes before all else. The SNP will deliver only for the nomenklatura in whose grips it has been held for more than a decade now. That ruling elite has its priorities but they are not those of the general public nor, for the most part, of the rank and file of the independence movement. They are nationalists who put themselves before the nation. Why remove John Swinney as leader when he is the ideal figurehead of today's SNP? A man with a lanyard, indistinguishable in ideology or political purpose from all the other men and women with lanyards, no more or less likely to grow the economy, close the attainment gap, meet A&E targets or secure another referendum on independence. If Swinney were to go now, he would leave no legacy, only consequences, fashioned by his failings but borne by others. The young people denied a quality, life-changing education. The local government services cut and the people who relied upon them abandoned. The hollowed out town centres, the boarded up shops and businesses, the pervasive economic despair and societal gloom of a country where venturing beyond the major cities will bring you face to face with communities that have been given up on for so long they have given up on themselves. A first minister worthy of the office would set about tackling these social ailments, but John Swinney is not worthy of the office, and nor are any of those who would be likely to succeed him.
