Elon Musk suggests Trump should be IMPEACHED and replaced with JD Vance as he makes chilling recession prediction
Elon Musk agreed Thursday that President Donald Trump should be impeached and replaced with 40-year-old Vice President J.D. Vance amid their fiery falling out on Thursday.
X User Ian Miles Cheong wrote: 'President vs Elon. Who wins? My money's on Elon. Trump should be impeached and JD Vance should replace him.'
'Yes,' Musk responded.
He also predicted that Trump's tariff policy would create economic turmoil.
'The Trump tariffs will cause a recession in the second half of this year,' Musk said.
The impeachment call comes after Musk made the eye-popping claim that the president is 'in the Epstein files' and as he also threatened to decommission the space ships that are taking NASA astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station.
That came after Trump threatened to cancel all of Musk's government contracts and said he had pushed the billionaire DOGE leader out and in turn the SpaceX CEO had gone 'CRAZY!'
One of Trump's oldest advisers, Steve Bannon, went even further and suggested that Musk should be deported.
'They should initiate a formal investigation of his immigration status because I am of the strong belief that he is an illegal alien, and he should be deported from the country immediately,' Bannon said in a phone interview with The New York Times.
The spectacular fallout between Trump and Musk - who were political allies for a little less than a year - started in recent weeks when the billionaire started resisting Republicans' 'big, beautiful bill,' arguing that the spending wiped out DOGE's efforts.
Then, on Thursday, when Trump was supposed to be hosting the new German Chancellor Friedrich Merz he was asked about Musk's recent criticism.
From there the dam broke.
'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will any more, I was surprised,' Trump told reporters.
The president suggested that Musk was angry - not over the bill ballooning the deficit - but because the Trump administration has pulled back on electric vehicle mandates, which negatively impacted Tesla, and replaced the Musk-approved nominee to lead NASA, which could hinder SpaceX 's government contracts.
'And you know, Elon's upset because we took the EV mandate, which was a lot of money for electric vehicles, and they're having a hard time the electric vehicles and they want us to pay billions of dollars in subsidy,' Trump said. 'I know that disburbed him.'
Over the weekend, Trump pulled the nomination of Jared Isaacman to lead NASA.
Isaacman had worked alongside Musk at SpaceX.
'He recommended somebody that I guess he knew very well, I'm sure he respected him, to run NASA and I didn't think it was appropriate and he happened to be a Democrat, like totally Democrat,' Trump continued. 'We won, we get certain privileges and one of the privileges is we don't have to appoint a Democrat.'
Musk posted to X as Trump's Q&A with reporters was ongoing.
'Whatever,' the billionaire wrote.
'Keep the EV/solar incentive cuts in the bill, even though no oil & gas subsidies are touched (very unfair!!), but ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill,' he advised.
'In the entire history of civilization, there has never been legislation that [is] both big and beautiful. Everyone knows this!' Musk continued. 'Either you get a big and ugly bill or a slim and beautiful bill. Slim and beautiful is the way.'
The spat quickly turned personal with Musk then posting that Trump would have lost the 2024 election had it not been for the world's richest man - him.
Musk had publicly endorsed Trump on the heels of the July 13th assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania and poured around $290 million of his fortune into the Republican's campaign.
The billionaire also joined Trump on the campaign trail when he returned to the site of the Butler shooting in early October, a month before Election Day.
Trump said in the Oval that he likely still would have won Pennsylvania without Musk's help and because Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris didn't choose the state's governor, Josh Shapiro, to be her running mate.
Even with Shapiro on the ticket, Trump claimed, 'I would have won Pennsylvania, I would have won by a lot.'
Musk said that was laughable.
'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate,' Musk claimed.
'Such ingratitude,' the billionaire added.
After his meeting with Merz, Trump continued to throw punches online.
Trump asserted that he had asked Musk to leave his administration and said the billionaire went 'CRAZY!'
'Elon was "wearing thin," I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' Trump wrote.
The president then threatened to pull SpaceX and Tesla'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. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' Trump wrote.
Musk then taunted Trump to act.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
22 minutes ago
- BBC News
Trump orders Ice to expand deportation of migrants
US President Donald Trump has ordered an expansion of the detention and deportation of migrants across the country as protests against his policies a post on Truth Social, Trump called on federal agencies to "do all in their power" to deliver "the single largest mass deportation programme in history", naming Los Angeles, Chicago and New York as specific cities are among the many where large-scale protests have broken out against raids on undocumented migrants since 6 has faced legal challenges and criticism for his response to the protests - particularly his deployment of the military to quell the demonstrations. Trump said he had directed the "entire administration to put every resource possible behind this effort". He also promised to prevent "anyone who undermines the domestic tranquility of the United States" from entering the various federal offices including the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice), he wrote "you have my unwavering support. Now go, get the job done!"The post came at the end of a day that saw a new wave of protests against Trump's policies across the 15 June, the "No Kings" movement demonstrated in cities stretching from Los Angeles to New York. Those demonstrations also coincided with a military parade in Washington DC to mark 250 years of the US army, which was held on the president's 79th person suffered life-threatening injuries after a shooting at a No Kings march in Salt Lake City, Utah. Police say it's not clear if this incident was politically also ordered immigration authorities to focus their efforts on sanctuary cities - those that limit their assistance to federal immigration authorities - which during the protests have become a source of tension between federal and state in these places have defended their legal rights to protect undocumented command to expand deportations signals a follow-through on Trump's campaign promise to provide the "largest deportation programme of criminals in the history of America".Opinion polls suggested this policy had widespread support in the build-up to the 2024 US election. Since the deportation programme has grown, however, protests have only new order came just hours after the Trump administration directed immigration officials to largely pause raids on farms, hotels, restaurants and meatpacking plants, according to the Reuters news agency.
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
What Sadiq Khan can learn from the city that crushed fare evasion
When Laura first moved to Washington three years ago, she thought the bus was a complimentary service paid for by the city. 'I assumed it was free when I took it the first couple of times because nobody was paying,' says the researcher. 'Everyone just walked straight on.' Across the world, fare evasion on public transport has exploded in the wake of the pandemic. It has left public transport companies reeling from hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenues. Now, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) – which manages the US capital's bus and subway systems – is at the forefront of a crackdown. It has had huge success in tackling fare evasion on its Metrorail network, and is now targeting the buses. Randy Clarke, the WMATA general manager, says the network has cut subway fare-dodging by as much as 85pc from its peak. Meanwhile, on the other side of the atlantic, Transport for London (TfL) haemorrhages £130m to fare dodgers. Sir Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, would do well to take note of Clarke's tactics. Almost one in 20 Tube passengers didn't pay last year. Fare dodging has become a political flashpoint in London. Last month, Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, filmed himself confronting fare dodgers pushing through the barriers at Stratford station in east London. He posted the video on X with the message: 'Sadiq Khan is driving a proud city into the ground. Lawbreaking is out of control. He's not acting. So, I did.' But what can Sir Sadiq learn from Washington? Across all US transport networks, the rate of fare evasion has nearly quadrupled since the pandemic. In 2018, it was 2pc. Last year, it was 7pc – according to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). But 7pc sounds quaint on large city networks. Clarke may have had success on Washington's subway network but WMATA data last autumn showed around 70pc of riders on DC buses were travelling without paying. Paul Skoutelas, APTA's president, blames a psychological shift during lockdown. Many transport systems stopped charging fares to reduce contact between people, or to boost passenger numbers. 'People are thinking, 'We didn't pay then, do we really need to pay now?'' says Skoutelas. In Washington, Metrobus fares were waived between March 2020 and January 2021. For many riders, the habit stuck. By 2022, WMATA was losing $40m (£29.5m) a year in revenues to fare evaders across Metrorail and Metrobus. Benjamin Lynn, of the Amalgamated Transit Union (AMT), says of the rail network: 'You'd see people climb over the fare gates on a daily basis.' Three steps to tackle fare evasions When Clarke joined WMATA as general manager in the summer of 2022, he launched a three-pronged attack to tackle fare evasion on DC's Metrorail network. First, he tightened the rules to introduce new penalties for failing to pay. Secondly, he stepped up police patrols to catch offenders. And thirdly, and most crucially, WMATA introduced new gates that are much harder to skip through. At the end of 2018, Washington had decriminalised fare evasion, meaning perpetrators only faced fines. Then during the pandemic, it largely stopped policing the policy. Fare evasion enforcements plunged from more than 15,000 in 2017 to just 297 in 2021. WMATA launched a new system of penalties shortly after Clarke joined in 2022, with $50 civil fines for fare evasion in Washington. In the states of Virginia and Maryland, which are also part of the transport network, fare evasion is a criminal offence with a fine of up to $100. But officers had limited means to impose these fines until District of Columbia council officials passed the Secure DC Bill in March 2024, which handed police greater powers to force offenders to provide their correct names and addresses. Anyone failing to comply can face an additional $100 fine. At the same time, Clarke increased police patrols by 70pc. Between 2023 and 2024, the number of citations and summonses issued by the Metro Transit Police surged by 136pc to hit nearly 16,000 – the highest total on record in at least a decade. In the first four months of 2025, citations were up by a further 45pc. WMATA also began rolling out new fare gates, with installations completed across all 98 stations last year. The old gates were only 28 inches high and consisted of small retracting fan-shaped gates. They were easy to push through, crawl under or climb over. The new gates are almost twice the height (55 inches) and consist of L-shaped polycarbonate door-panels with robust, motorised hinges and only a 10-inch gap underneath. Clarke's personal leadership style has also helped. One of his first steps after becoming general manager was to get remote workers back into the office. 'A lot of people didn't love that at the time,' he told the Statecraft politics podcast this month. However, he said the shift in policy helped get results. 'I think that is actually one of the reasons we produced so much.' The impact has been undeniable. The network has clawed back tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue and in two years the crime rate across WMATA has fallen by 65pc to a seven-year low. 'Not everyone who fare-evades commits crimes, but almost universally, everyone who commits serious crimes fare-evades,' Clarke told Statecraft. 'Not many people are going to tap in and then do armed robbery.' The Metrobus, however, is still something of a Wild West. This is Clarke's new frontier. At the end of last year, WMATA launched a new effort with transit police, plain-clothes officers and video monitoring. Digital signs on the front of Metrobuses now say 'fare required'. 'You would think, 'Geez, that's very simple.' But I think it needs to be said,' says Skoutelas. WMATA is at the aggressive forefront of a national effort to claw back lost revenues. City networks including New York, San Francisco and Seattle have all made major inroads on fare evasion with similar tactics. In London, TfL is on a campaign too, with a target to cut fare evasion from 3.4pc – or 4.7pc on the Tube – to 1.5pc by 2030. Sir Sadiq has taken similar efforts to tighten the rules, increasing fines for fare evasion from £80 to £100 in March last year. In April, TfL announced it was expanding its team of dedicated investigators to crack down on prolific repeat offenders. But there has so far been no word on improving fare gates. In response to a Freedom of Information request on the topic in March this year, TfL said: 'There are currently no plans to replace the ticket barriers.' It seems Sir Sadiq is missing a vital trick. Ultimately, the key to fixing the problem is psychological, Clarke believes. 'There is some truth to a larger societal idea. People want to see other people follow rules, and the more that people follow rules, the more people watching them follow rules,' he told Statecraft. 'There's a societal group-think at play.'
Scotsman
27 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Is it really all over for the Scottish Conservatives? Why Russell Findlay must fight against populism
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... For as long as I can remember, the Scottish Conservatives have allegedly been on the cusp of ruin. But is it actually true? Ahead of the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections, the Scottish Conservatives should, in theory, provide a comprehensive economic alternative to the incumbent SNP and the populist broad strokes of Reform UK. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad However, key policy announcements at this weekend's party conference look more interested in competing with Reform than solving Scotland's endemic social and economic problems. Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay | PA Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay rejected Scotland's 2045 net-zero target and pledged a Taxpayer Savings Act "to get the books in order" while cutting government spending and reducing the number of civil servants. He called it a "blueprint for a common‑sense future for Scotland'. There are even proposals for a new Scottish Agency of Value and Efficiency - "run by business leaders" - and an "Accountability and Transparency Index" to scrutinise organisations receiving public money, which sounds painfully like Elon Musk's former plaything, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Scotland has, does and always will need a centre-right electoral force. Now is the moment the Tories need a Ruth Davidson, and the question is whether Findlay has the same magnetism to draw together a tacit coalition of pro-union, pragmatic voices tired of rhetorical indulgence who can present that alternative without descending to a populist Reform-lite level. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Reform UK leader Nigel Farage is charismatic, but his proposals for Scotland are next to non-existent. And if there's one thing Farage should be wary of, and parties in Holyrood should have realised by now, it's that they pay the price for whatever happens at Westminster – something Scottish Labour and the Conservatives know extremely well, and the SNP has used to its advantage for decades. The Scottish Conservatives need to give voters a clear, demarcated choice between a populist clown show and centre-right policy. The trench between the two parties should be so profound that any speculation of merging or operating with a confidence and supply agreement at Holyrood is dismissed as patently absurd. Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay | PA Admittedly, the polls for the party ahead of the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections are not good. But only a fool would discount the party that has refused to evaporate since devolution and even longer in Scotland before that. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In the 19th century, the Liberals were the dominant political force in Scottish politics. From 1912 to 1965, the Unionist Party combined the pre-1912 Conservative Party in Scotland and the Liberal Unionists. In 1955, they achieved the only popular majority ever achieved by any party in Scotland, with over 50 per cent of the vote and 36 of the 71 seats at Westminster. After a staggered decline in the 1964 general election, several reforms amalgamated the Scottish Unionist Party with the Conservative and Unionist Party in England and Wales in 1965. The rhetoric that it is all over for the centre-right in Scotland and the Tories is hyperbolic and extremely unlikely. The Unionist Party relegated the Liberals at the start of the 20th century, and Labour, in turn, overtook them by the late 1950s until the SNP did the same by the 2010s. The key distinction here is that this shift was from a position of government-yielding power. The Scottish Conservatives' influence and importance are not in getting the keys to Bute House, but in ensuring that Reform does not beachhead populist nonsense at Holyrood and beyond. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Reform UK leader Nigel Farage speaks during a press conference at Church House in Westminster, London. Picture: Jeff Moore/PA Wire This seems a plausible ambition in a historical context. Between 1999 and 2016, the Scottish Tories achieved a low of 15 (2007) and a high of 18 (1999 and 2003) Members of Parliament out of 129 available seats. Until 2016, they were the third largest party at Holyrood, a record broken by the seismic mood change under Davidson's leadership. This propelled them to second place, overtaking Scottish Labour, and gave them a devolution high of 31 seats. In 2021, then-leader Douglas Ross broke even with Davidson's win. The years since have not been as kind - the Tories have endured defections to Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats. Reform UK is now a serious electoral challenge in Scotland, as evidenced by the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election on June 5, which Labour gained from the SNP. A more worrisome barometer was Reform taking a 26 per cent vote share, relegating the Tories from third to fourth place with 6 per cent, down from 11 per cent. Polling suggests the Tories will keep their constituency seats, but lose around 15 list seats. Reform UK is expected to split the vote, halving Conservative seats, with the new party gaining a projected 15 seats thanks to Holyrood's proportional representation list system. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad At the 2024 general election last year, Reform UK won five seats and 14 per cent of the vote, the third-highest vote share across the UK, and 7.0 per cent in Scotland (to the Tories' nearly 13 per cent). The Scottish Tories hold five of the 57 Scottish seats in the House of Commons, 30 of the 129 seats in the Scottish Parliament, and 206 of Scotland's 1,226 local councillors. If power is neither realistic nor tangible, the next best thing is to ensure a cemented intellectual home of centre-right thinking, creating a bulwark against ascending populism and stagnating nationalism. The Scottish Conservatives must play to the party's strengths in Scotland and not be anchored by the broader party's collapse at Westminster, or the temptation to fight populism with populism.
