Latest news with #CongressionalSpending
Fox News
5 days ago
- Business
- Fox News
WATCH: Republican senators react to Musk v. Trump feud: ‘He's not the CEO here'
Republican senators John Cornyn of Texas and Roger Marshall of Kansas shared their thoughts on the sudden, escalating feud between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump, with one senator saying Musk needs to realize "he's not the CEO here." After denying "outlandish" Democratic claims that the Trump-backed "big, beautiful bill" would result in cuts to Medicaid and SNAP benefits if passed, Cornyn addressed whether he believes Trump is wise to threaten to cancel all of Musk's companies' government contracts. Musk and Trump have been locked in an escalating war of words over their disagreement about the president's proposed budget bill, which is being considered by the Senate. In an X post Tuesday, Musk said: "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." Musk then asserted Thursday afternoon that Trump "is in the Epstein files" and "that is the real reason they have not been made public." Meanwhile, Trump has said Musk is "wearing thin" during his leadership at DOGE and asserted he "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 said on Truth Social. The president also said Thursday "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!" Cornyn stopped short of criticizing either side, telling Fox News Digital Musk "has done a great service to the nation" and "I'm grateful to President Trump for bringing him on board and initiating DOGE." Even through Musk's spat with the president, Cornyn said the Department of Government Efficiency is "going to now be a permanent part of our discussions up here." "Everybody believes, or understands, I should say, that the federal government is too big and too bloated and inefficient, and Elon and DOGE was very effective, I thought, at pointing out some of the most egregious examples of that," the Texas Republican said. Marshall responded to the controversy by telling Fox News Digital, "We appreciate what Elon did for the government, but it's time to move on. "What Elon doesn't realize is that he's not the CEO here. "Working for Congress, working for the people back home is so much different than being a CEO. [When] you're a CEO, you tell people jump, they say, 'How high do you got to go?' But President Trump is working with a board." Marshall described the president's role as "working with a board of a big business." "There's 435 across the Capitol way here. There's 100 in the Senate. We've all got opinions. And, right now, this bill, I think 90% of the folks up here, Republicans, thinks that it's where it needs to be," he said. Though acknowledging "there's opportunities for improvement" and "I agree with Elon that we're still spending too much money, that we need more cuts, I've learned a long time ago to stay locked in on my goal. And I am locked in on getting this one big, beautiful bill across the line." "I can guarantee you we're not paying any attention to this little feud going on," he concluded. Regarding Democratic accusations that the bill will drastically cut Medicaid and SNAP benefits, Marshall said, "We're going to do the right thing, but protect it for those who need it the most." He posited that the Medicaid system is rife with illegal aliens and other individuals using the program "fraudulently." Addressing the rest of those not using the system fraudulently, the senator said, "We're not going to take grandma out of the nursing home. We're going to make sure that she has her Medicaid. "Persons with disabilities, I will fight to keep their Medicaid for them, children as well. But, on the other hand, there's probably 7 million healthy American men out there, working age, that really should be working and not on Medicaid, not on food stamps," he added. "So, let's help those people get a job."
Fox News
5 days ago
- Business
- Fox News
WATCH: Republican senators react to Elon v. Trump feud: ‘He's not the CEO here'
Republican senators John Cornyn of Texas and Roger Marshall of Kansas shared their thoughts on the sudden, escalating feud between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump, with one senator saying Musk needs to realize "he's not the CEO here." After denying "outlandish" Democratic claims that the Trump-backed "big, beautiful bill" would result in cuts to Medicaid and SNAP benefits if passed, Cornyn addressed whether he believes Trump is wise to threaten to cancel all of Musk's companies' government contracts. Musk and Trump have been locked in an escalating war of words over their disagreement about the president's proposed budget bill, which is being considered by the Senate. In an X post Tuesday, Musk said: "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." Musk then asserted Thursday afternoon that Trump "is in the Epstein files" and "that is the real reason they have not been made public." Meanwhile, Trump has said Musk is "wearing thin" during his leadership at DOGE and asserted he "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 said on Truth Social. The president also said Thursday "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!" Cornyn stopped short of criticizing either side, telling Fox News Digital Musk "has done a great service to the nation" and "I'm grateful to President Trump for bringing him on board and initiating DOGE." Even through Musk's spat with the president, Cornyn said the Department of Government Efficiency is "going to now be a permanent part of our discussions up here." "Everybody believes, or understands, I should say, that the federal government is too big and too bloated and inefficient, and Elon and DOGE was very effective, I thought, at pointing out some of the most egregious examples of that," the Texas Republican said. Marshall responded to the controversy by telling Fox News Digital, "We appreciate what Elon did for the government, but it's time to move on. "What Elon doesn't realize is that he's not the CEO here. "Working for Congress, working for the people back home is so much different than being a CEO. [When] you're a CEO, you tell people jump, they say, 'How high do you got to go?' But President Trump is working with a board." Marshall described the president's role as "working with a board of a big business." "There's 435 across the Capitol way here. There's 100 in the Senate. We've all got opinions. And, right now, this bill, I think 90% of the folks up here, Republicans, thinks that it's where it needs to be," he said. Though acknowledging "there's opportunities for improvement" and "I agree with Elon that we're still spending too much money, that we need more cuts, I've learned a long time ago to stay locked in on my goal. And I am locked in on getting this one big, beautiful bill across the line." "I can guarantee you we're not paying any attention to this little feud going on," he concluded. Regarding Democratic accusations that the bill will drastically cut Medicaid and SNAP benefits, Marshall said, "We're going to do the right thing, but protect it for those who need it the most." He posited that the Medicaid system is rife with illegal aliens and other individuals using the program "fraudulently." Addressing the rest of those not using the system fraudulently, the senator said, "We're not going to take grandma out of the nursing home. We're going to make sure that she has her Medicaid. "Persons with disabilities, I will fight to keep their Medicaid for them, children as well. But, on the other hand, there's probably 7 million healthy American men out there, working age, that really should be working and not on Medicaid, not on food stamps," he added. "So, let's help those people get a job."
TechCrunch
5 days ago
- Business
- TechCrunch
Why are Elon Musk and Donald Trump fighting?
President Donald Trump and his biggest political supporter Elon Musk are breaking up in the most public and 21st century way — via their own social networks. And while many predicted the Trump-Musk pair up would eventually sour, it's still worth asking and trying to answer, 'How did we get here?' Until recently, Musk has been a key figure in Trump's inner circle. The connection has affected broad swaths of the government, notably through the 'Department of Government Efficiency,' an organization created by an executive order and advised by Musk. Musk, once a fixture at Trump's Mar-a-lago Resort in Palm Beach, Florida and the White House, has now turned against the president. The source of his discontent: the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a 1,038-page piece of legislation that was passed May 22 by the House of Representatives. It now heads to Senate, the next step in the bill's path toward becoming a law. Days later, Trump withdrew his nomination of Jared Isaacman , Musk's pick to head NASA — a move widely viewed as evidence of their faltering relationship. But even through the end of the month, Trump and Musk publicly played nice. The mood shifted — in a public, scorched earth kind of way — this week. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk wrote on X on Tuesday. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 3, 2025 The bill is presented as an effort to cut taxes and invest in American businesses. However, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that while the bill will cut taxes by $3.7 trillion, it will increase the national debt by $2.4 trillion over 10 years and raise the country's debt ceiling by $4 trillion. This impact on the country's existing debt crisis has two Republican Senators, Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) breaking from their party's stance to oppose the bill in its current state. The bill's impacts are vast; among numerous other effects, it removes taxes from social security income, tips, and overtime pay. The bill also makes massive cuts to federal healthcare programs like Medicaid and SNAP. The CBO estimates that, by making massive cuts to federal healthcare programs, almost 11 million more people will lack health insurance by 2034. Techcrunch event Save now through June 4 for TechCrunch Sessions: AI Save $300 on your ticket to TC Sessions: AI—and get 50% off a second. Hear from leaders at OpenAI, Anthropic, Khosla Ventures, and more during a full day of expert insights, hands-on workshops, and high-impact networking. These low-rate deals disappear when the doors open on June 5. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you've built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | REGISTER NOW The bill would also make the effects of Trump's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act from his first term permanent, though economists have found that these cuts had more benefit for the richest Americans than the poorest. Additional tax cuts in Trump's new bill are also expected to benefit wealthy families more than those in need. Musk isn't wrong when he says some representatives who voted for the bill are already regretting it. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) admitted that she had not read the thousand-page bill in its entirety and regrets endorsing it because it would prevent individual states regulating AI for the next decade. The dispute between Trump and Musk escalated further Thursday, when the president was asked about the Tesla and SpaceX leader's rejection of the bill. Trump claims that Musk was deeply familiar with his plans for the bill, but recoiled when he learned it would negatively impact his business. 'He only developed a problem when he found out that we're going to have to cut the EV mandate,' Trump said, referring to policies that incentivize the production and sale of electric vehicles, like the ones Tesla makes. 'That's billions and billions of dollars.' Musk went on to claim that Trump only won the election because of his help. Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 5, 2025 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate,' Musk said on X. The two entrepreneurs have continued to make jabs at each other on their respective social media platforms — and it's escalating. '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 on Truth Social. In another post, Trump added, '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!' Musk posted a screenshot of Trump's post and added that he would decommission SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft as a result of the president's statement. Musk has continued on with a tirade of posts on X against the president who he spent $288 million to help elect. Musk then accused Trump of being part of the Epstein Files, referring to the financier Jeffrey Epstein's sexual exploitation of children. Trump has not responded to the allegation. Musk also declared that the Trump tariffs will cause a recession in the latter half of this year, and he posted in agreement with another user's post saying that Trump should be impeached. While the public fight has launched frantic levels of posting on X, popcorn emojis, and memes declaring that 'the girls are fighting,' the fallout between the world's richest person and a sitting U.S. president promises to have broader implications for the tech industry. Following Trump's lead, other tech billionaires like Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and Apple CEO Tim Cook donated to Trump's inauguration fund. Trump's policies have already had negative repercussions for some of these companies' businesses through enforcing heavy tariffs on international imports.
CNN
6 days ago
- Business
- CNN
The White House's fuzzy math is starting to haunt the ‘Big, Beautiful Bill'
Elon Musk's 36-word social media missile directed at the cornerstone of President Donald Trump's legislative agenda marked the latest, if most visceral, example of a growing problem for the White House. Nobody buys its math. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk posted in the middle of the White House press briefing in a dramatic escalation of his initial objections to the giant domestic policy bill's cost. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination.' Musk's post (and its Wednesday follow up) landed at the most delicate moment for an essential pillar of Trump's entire domestic agenda. Senate Republicans are set to launch their high-stakes effort to pass the bill, while Trump and his top advisers seek to aggressively counter the widespread consensus among economists, nonpartisan budget scorekeepers and Wall Street analysts that the bill will pile trillions of dollars onto the soaring US debt. Trump's top economic officials insist, unequivocally and repeatedly, that the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' won't add to the debt over 10 years. The definitive statements serve as an unabashed outlier among the catalogue of budget scores, growth forecasts and macroeconomic analyses produced since House Republicans passed their version of Trump's agenda by the narrowest of margins. Differences of opinion between economists, scorekeepers and analysts are commonplace, as are the heated rhetorical attacks lobbed at the Congressional Budget Office. They aren't exclusive to this White House. But the near-universal agreement that the bill's combination of tax and spending cuts net out as a significant deficit driver lays bare an unusually dramatic disconnect with the view of Trump's economic team. White House officials defend their outlier projections with their view that the bill will spark a durable surge in economic activity that, paired with their broader economic agenda, will far outpace the median economic forecasts. That, in turn, would drive up federal tax receipts and fill most, if not all, of the hole created by $3.7 trillion loss of revenue to the government projected over 10 years at the same time Trump's tariffs would drive a dramatic surge in revenue not included in any budget score tied to the bill. The $1.3 trillion in mandatory spending cuts over a decade would mark the starting point White House officials will take into the looming spending battle on Capitol Hill, where Trump and Republican leaders will drive a hardline view that any bipartisan agreement must include deep discretionary spending cuts. To put it plainly, the White House rationale is tied to a combination of projections and assumptions that crash head-on with economic, political and geopolitical consensus views of reality. 'There are a lot of arguments Republicans can make here – and the White House makes them, too – about the merits of this package and our long-standing belief that scorekeepers consistently fail to capture the effect of tax cuts,' said a Republican economic official who has served in multiple GOP administrations. 'But I'm not sure why they insist on going this particular route given the design of the bill.' But White House officials, who regularly point to several projections that undershot Trump's first term economy, have elevated that message at a critical moment. The White House's messaging is intended to undercut public opposition from Republican Sens. Rand Paul and Ron Johnson, as well as the private anxiety of a handful of others as the Senate mulls changes to the House-passed version of the plan, according to multiple Senate GOP aides. 'I want to see the tax cuts made permanent, but I also want to see the $5 trillion in new debt removed from the bill,' Paul said Tuesday. 'At least four of us in the Senate feel this way.' But it's also directed at an audience that carries far more sway over Trump's economic agenda than any politician: bond investors, who have grown increasingly jittery in recent months. Escalating concern over stratospheric US debt levels drove last month's credit rating downgrade from Moody's, which helped spark another round of tumult in the world's largest and most liquid bond market. Investors had already signaled unease with Trump's expansive 'Liberation Day' tariffs in April, but as the House moved toward a vote on the bill last month, bond investors once again got jittery. That signaled bond investors' willingness to consider whether the decades-long warnings of a looming, but theoretical, US fiscal collapse may be inching closer to reality. 'You are going to see a crack in the bond market, OK?' said JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon during a May 30 discussion at the Reagan National Economic Forum in California. Dimon, who also said he supports the Republican bill because of the certainty it will bring to US tax policy, said he couldn't predict when exactly that kind of dramatic disruption would occur. But Dimon said the current US fiscal position, absent a major and sustained policy shift, makes a crisis inevitable. 'It's going to happen,' Dimon said. White House officials dismiss that worst-case scenario. They insist the administration isn't rattled by the spike in long-term US borrowing costs or the tumultuous few months in the US Treasury market. They say the bond market's fluctuations aren't aren't tethered to the realities underpinning the world's largest economy. 'I've known Jamie a long time, and for his entire career he's made predictions like this,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday on CBS' Face the Nation. 'Fortunately, none of them have come true.' Bessent's blunt dismissal of Dimon's prediction reflected a prevailing view inside the West Wing that boils down to, essentially (and sometimes, depending on the adviser, explicitly): 'Everyone else is wrong.' After all, the bill represents an essential component of Trump's economic agenda. The package is more or less what every Republican elected in 2024 campaigned on with Trump. This package includes the tax cuts at the heart of his economic agenda and a series of regulatory reforms that accelerate his sweeping deregulatory agenda. The bill also includes significant military and immigration enforcement spending that would fulfill campaign pledges. Narrow majorities in both chambers were always going to make the effort a high-wire act to balance the hardline fiscal hawks' desires with the needs of the more moderate members who populate the conferences in both chambers. But failure – and the devastating economic and political consequences it would bring – isn't really an option here for the White House or GOP leaders. Still, the deficit concerns are very real and pose the most acute risk at this stage of Senate consideration. They also represent a far higher-stakes threat if bond investor jitters turn into something more dire. White House officials are keenly aware they need to aggressively make their case to uneasy bond investors – and make it well. That reality, more than anything else, raises the question of why officials insist on declaring the bill won't drive up deficits by even a dollar over 10 years. The big assumptions that underpin that projection go something like this: 1) Tariffs will produce trillions of dollars in revenue without hurting US economic growth. 2) Courts allow the White House's sweeping deregulatory agenda, including DOGE cuts, to go forward. 3) Business investment surges, even after the front-loaded corporate tax incentives expire in a couple years. 4) Backloaded spending cuts remain in place over a four-year period and Republicans secure major discretionary spending cuts that will require Democratic support. You can see the sheer number of variables, many outside of Trump's control, inherent in those assertions. That underscores the connective tissue between Trump's first and second terms – and the number of Trump advisers who were by his side then and now. Trump's advisers remain animated by the unyielding belief that the economic experts were proven wrong in Trump's first term. They are betting that's the case again, with Trump's entire economic agenda hanging in the balance. Musk's social media unburdening this week certainly wasn't helpful to the cause. But there is no discussion about any major course change at the White House. 'Nothing has changed from our view of the world,' Vought told reporters outside the West Wing a couple of hours of Musk's Tuesday post.
CNN
6 days ago
- Business
- CNN
The White House's fuzzy math is starting to haunt the Big, Beautiful Bill
Elon Musk's 36-word social media missile directed at the cornerstone of President Donald Trump's legislative agenda marked the latest, if most visceral, example of a growing problem for the White House. Nobody buys its math. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk posted in the middle of the White House press briefing in a dramatic escalation of his initial objections to the giant domestic policy bill's cost. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination.' Musk's post (and its Wednesday follow up) landed at the most delicate moment for an essential pillar of Trump's entire domestic agenda. Senate Republicans are set to launch their high-stakes effort to pass the bill, while Trump and his top advisers seek to aggressively counter the widespread consensus among economists, nonpartisan budget scorekeepers and Wall Street analysts that the bill will pile trillions of dollars onto the soaring US debt. Trump's top economic officials insist, unequivocally and repeatedly, that the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' won't add to the debt over 10 years. The definitive statements serve as an unabashed outlier among the catalogue of budget scores, growth forecasts and macroeconomic analyses produced since House Republicans passed their version of Trump's agenda by the narrowest of margins. Differences of opinion between economists, scorekeepers and analysts are commonplace, as are the heated rhetorical attacks lobbed at the Congressional Budget Office. They aren't exclusive to this White House. But the near-universal agreement that the bill's combination of tax and spending cuts net out as a significant deficit driver lays bare an unusually dramatic disconnect with the view of Trump's economic team. White House officials defend their outlier projections with their view that the bill will spark a durable surge in economic activity that, paired with their broader economic agenda, will far outpace the median economic forecasts. That, in turn, would drive up federal tax receipts and fill most, if not all, of the hole created by $3.7 trillion loss of revenue to the government projected over 10 years at the same time Trump's tariffs would drive a dramatic surge in revenue not included in any budget score tied to the bill. The $1.3 trillion in mandatory spending cuts over a decade would mark the starting point White House officials will take into the looming spending battle on Capitol Hill, where Trump and Republican leaders will drive a hardline view that any bipartisan agreement must include deep discretionary spending cuts. To put it plainly, the White House rationale is tied to a combination of projections and assumptions that crash head-on with economic, political and geopolitical consensus views of reality. 'There are a lot of arguments Republicans can make here – and the White House makes them, too – about the merits of this package and our long-standing belief that scorekeepers consistently fail to capture the effect of tax cuts,' said a Republican economic official who has served in multiple GOP administrations. 'But I'm not sure why they insist on going this particular route given the design of the bill.' But White House officials, who regularly point to several projections that undershot Trump's first term economy, have elevated that message at a critical moment. The White House's messaging is intended to undercut public opposition from Republican Sens. Rand Paul and Ron Johnson, as well as the private anxiety of a handful of others as the Senate mulls changes to the House-passed version of the plan, according to multiple Senate GOP aides. 'I want to see the tax cuts made permanent, but I also want to see the $5 trillion in new debt removed from the bill,' Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul said Tuesday. 'At least four of us in the Senate feel this way.' But it's also directed at an audience that carries far more sway over Trump's economic agenda than any politician: bond investors, who have grown increasingly jittery in recent months. Escalating concern over stratospheric US debt levels drove last month's credit rating downgrade from Moody's, which helped spark another round of tumult in the world's largest and most liquid bond market. Investors had already signaled unease with Trump's expansive 'Liberation Day' tariffs in April, but as the House moved toward a vote on the bill last month, bond investors once again got jittery. That signaled bond investors' willingness to consider whether the decades-long warnings of a looming, but theoretical, US fiscal collapse may be inching closer to reality. 'You are going to see a crack in the bond market, OK?' said JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon during a May 30 discussion at the Reagan National Economic Forum in California. Dimon, who also said he supports the Republican bill because of the certainty it will bring to US tax policy, said he couldn't predict when exactly that kind of dramatic disruption would occur. But Dimon said the current US fiscal position, absent a major and sustained policy shift, makes a crisis inevitable. 'It's going to happen,' Dimon said. White House officials dismiss that worst-case scenario. They insist the administration isn't rattled by the spike in long-term US borrowing costs or the tumultuous few months in the US Treasury market. They say the bond market's fluctuations aren't aren't tethered to the realities underpinning the world's largest economy. 'I've known Jamie a long time, and for his entire career he's made predictions like this,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday on CBS' Face the Nation. 'Fortunately, none of them have come true.' Bessent's blunt dismissal of Dimon's prediction reflected a prevailing view inside the West Wing that boils down to, essentially (and sometimes, depending on the adviser, explicitly): 'Everyone else is wrong.' After all, the bill represents an essential component of Trump's economic agenda. The package is more or less what every Republican elected in 2024 campaigned on with Trump. This package includes the tax cuts at the heart of his economic agenda and a series of regulatory reforms that accelerate his sweeping deregulatory agenda. The bill also includes significant military and immigration enforcement spending that would fulfill campaign pledges. Narrow majorities in both chambers were always going to make the effort a high-wire act to balance the hardline fiscal hawks' desires with the needs of the more moderate members who populate the conferences in both chambers. But failure – and the devastating economic and political consequences it would bring – isn't really an option here for the White House or GOP leaders. Still, the deficit concerns are very real and pose the most acute risk at this stage of Senate consideration. They also represent a far higher-stakes threat if bond investor jitters turn into something more dire. White House officials are keenly aware they need to aggressively make their case to uneasy bond investors – and make it well. That reality, more than anything else, raises the question of why officials insist on declaring the bill won't drive up deficits by even a dollar over 10 years. The big assumptions that underpin that projection go something like this: 1) Tariffs will produce trillions of dollars in revenue without hurting US economic growth. 2) Courts allow the White House's sweeping deregulatory agenda, including DOGE cuts, to go forward. 3) Business investment surges, even after the front-loaded corporate tax incentives expire in a couple years. 4) Backloaded spending cuts remain in place over a four-year period and Republicans secure major discretionary spending cuts that will require Democratic support. You can see the sheer number of variables, many outside of Trump's control, in herent in those assertions. That underscores the connective tissue between Trump's first and second terms – and the number of Trump advisers who were by his side then and now. Trump's advisers remain animated by the unyielding belief that the economic experts were proven wrong in Trump's first term. They are betting that's the case again, with Trump's entire economic agenda hanging in the balance. Musk's social media unburdening this week certainly wasn't helpful to the cause. But there is no discussion about any major course change at the White House. 'Nothing has changed from our view of the world,' Vought told reporters outside the West Wing a couple of hours of Musk's Tuesday post.
