Wednesday Reads

Posted: December 10, 2025 | Author: | Filed under: just because | Tags: , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Good Day!!

I’m still in my “avoiding the news” phase. Of course, I can’t help hearing about big events–I’m just not spending huge swaths of time reading Substacks and social media posts. Unread emails pile up as I fritter away my time indulging my guilty TV pleasures–animal shows and true crime dramas. So this morning I’ve been looking around to see what’s been happening while I was checked out. Here are the stories that grabbed my attention.

Hopeful Signs?

Democrats are continuing to do well in off-year elections. Yesterday, there were big wins in Florida and Georgia.

Kimberly Leonard at Politico: Miami elects first woman mayor, marking first win by Democrat in 28 years.

MIAMI — Democrats can now add a major city in Donald Trump’s home state — and one set to host his future presidential library — to its list of off-cycle election wins.

In a Tuesday runoff, Miamians elected Eileen Higgins as mayor, the first woman in the city’s history to hold the job and the first Democrat in 28 years. Higgins, a former county commissioner, defeated Republican Emilio González, an ex-city manager who had the endorsement of Trump and Gov. Ron DeSantis, with 60 percent of the vote.

Eileen Higgins

“Miami chose a new direction,” Higgins said during her victory speech at the Miami Woman’s Club. “You chose competence over chaos, results over excuses and a city government that finally works for you.”

The election could boost messaging for Florida Democrats, who’ve faced setbacks in recent election cycles and have a 1.4 million registered voter disadvantage in this former swing state.

“Tonight’s victory shows that the pendulum is swinging in our favor and that when we commit to relentless, year-round organizing and invest in a long-term strategic field program, we can, in fact, win,” FDP Chair Nikki Fried said in a statement Tuesday night.

Ethan Cohen at CNN: Georgia Democrat Eric Gisler flips a state House seat in district Trump won by double digits, CNN projects.

Democrats continued their run of successes in special elections by flipping a state House seat in Georgia Tuesday, according to a projection from the CNN Decision Desk.

The Democratic victory, in a district that voted for President Donald Trump by about 12 percentage points last year, comes ahead of next year’s critical midterms, when Georgians will vote in closely watched races for Senate and governor.

Eric Gisler

Eric Gisler, a Democrat who owns a local olive oil store, will defeat Republican Mack “Dutch” Guest in the 121st House District, in the northeastern part of the state, near the college town of Athens.

Between regularly scheduled elections in Virginia and New Jersey and special elections held on newly redrawn maps in Mississippi, Democrats flipped about 20 state legislative seats on Election Day last month. Those victories came after Democrats flipped two seats in Iowa and one in Pennsylvania during special elections earlier in the year.

Republicans still control a significant majority in the Georgia House, but Tuesday’s results come just a month after Democrats won two statewide elections to flip two seats on the state’s Public Service Commission….

The Democratic Party of Georgia congratulated Gisler in a statement Tuesday evening, “This isn’t just a win for Georgia Democrats – it’s a win for every family in Oconee and Clarke Counties who has been struggling to get ahead under 22 years of failed Republican leadership.”

Trump’s “Affordability” Speech in Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania

Matt Viser at The Washington Post: At the first stop on his affordability tour, Trump mocks affordability.

He mocked the word “affordability,” touted how high the stock market had risen and said Americans didn’t need so many pencils. He launched into a number of digressions to disparage the country of Somalia, the concept of climate change and the news media in the back of the room.

Trump spoke from a 1,200-capacity ballroom at the Mount Airy Resort and Casino in the Pocono Mountains for what White House officials have suggested would be a kickoff to promote Trump’s economic policies — and an attempt to wrangle an issue that has become a political liability ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Instead, the 90-minute speech was a greatest hits of his campaign trail appearances — complimenting the power of his chief of staff, Susie Wiles, and “the lips that don’t stop” of White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt — with occasional nods to the current economic anxieties. He promoted his trade policies, without speaking to the impact they’ve had on consumer prices, and he promised lower energy costs.

“We inherited the highest prices ever, and we’re bringing them down,” he said several times.

“We’re getting inflation — we’re crushing it, and you’re getting much higher wages,” he said. “I mean, the only thing that is really going up big, it’s called the stock market and your 401(k).”

While suggesting prices were no longer going up, Trump also ridiculed Democrats for suggesting that voters cared about affordability, an issue that was a focus of their successful campaigns last month in New Jersey, Virginia and New York City.

“They said, ‘Oh, he doesn’t realize prices are higher.’ Prices are coming down very substantially,” Trump said. “But they have a new word. You know, they always have a hoax. The new word is affordability. So they look at the camera and they say, ‘This election is all about affordability.’”

Trump talks affordability in PA.

The election may very well be about people’s ability to afford basics–food, clothing, and housing. Trump has never had to worry about those things, so he mocks people who do.

Later, he attempted to clarify.

“I can’t say affordability is a hoax because I agree the prices were too high. So I can’t go to call it a hoax because they’ll misconstrue that,” he said. “But they use the word affordability. And that’s the only word they say. Affordability. And that’s their only word. They say, ‘Affordability.’ And everyone says, ‘Oh, that must mean Trump has high prices.’ No. Our prices are coming down tremendously from the highest prices in the history of our country.”

Trump also returned to a comment he made earlier in his presidency, saying that Americans needed to go without.

“You know, you can give up certain products. You can give up pencils,” he said, suggesting that he was focused on promoting American-made steel while China was focused on providing multiple pencils to its citizens.

“You always need steel. You don’t need 37 dolls for your daughter,” he said. “Two or three is nice, but you don’t need 37 dolls. So, we’re doing things right. We’re running this country right well.”

“Affordability” is another word like “groceries” to Trump–words for things outside his own experience. He doesn’t have to worry about getting enough to eat or staying warm in his home–so other people shouldn’t care about those things either. Just deal with it while he has fun with his tariffs.

Paul Krugman at his Substack: Trump Says That You Are the Problem. Everything is perfect. Why aren’t you grateful?

Last night Donald Trump gave an important speech on the economy in Pennsylvania — supposedly in a working-class area, although the actual venue was a luxury casino resort. The event was initially touted as the start of an “affordability tour,” the first of a series of speeches intended to reverse Trump’s cratering approval on his handling of inflation and the economy. A number of news analyses suggested that he would use the occasion to blame Democrats for the economy’s troubles.

King Trump doesn’t care about your affordability concerns.

That was never going to happen. Trump did, of course, take many swipes at Joe Biden, as well as attacking immigrants, women and windmills. But to blame Democrats for the economy’s problems he would have to admit that the Trump economy has problems. And the speech was important because it revealed that he won’t make any such admission, and will continue to gaslight the public.

On Monday Politico interviewed Trump, asking him, among other things, what grade he would give the current economy. His answer: “A-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus.”

In fact, until very recently Trump wouldn’t even accept the reality that ordinary Americans don’t share his triumphalism. When Fox News’s Laura Ingraham asked him a month ago why people are anxious about the economy, Trump replied

“I don’t know they are saying that. The polls are fake. We have the greatest economy we’ve ever had.”

Scott Bessent, billionaire

Since then Trump and his minions seem to have come around to admitting that Americans are, in fact, unhappy with the state of the economy. But if the economy is A+++++, why don’t people see it? The problem can’t possibly lie with him — so it must lie with you. “The American people don’t know how good they have it.”

I put that line in quotes because it isn’t a caricature or a paraphrase. It is, in fact, literally what Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, said the other day:

“We’ve made a lot of gains, but remember, we’ve got this embedded inflation from the Biden years, where mainstream media, whether it’s Greg Ip at the Wall Street Journal, toxic Paul Krugman at New York Times or former Vice Chair, Alan Blinder, all said it was a vibecession. The American people don’t know how good they have it.”

Krugman’s response:

I may not be a political strategist, but I don’t think “You’re all a bunch of ingrates” is a winning message. It was, however, really the only message Trump could deliver, given his utter lack of empathy or humility.

At this point I could bombard you with a lot of data showing that the economy is not, in fact, A+++++. But it isn’t a disaster area, at least not yet. So why are Americans feeling so down? The main culprit is Trump himself.

First, during the 2024 campaign Trump repeatedly promised to bring consumer prices way down beginning on “day one.” We’re now 11 months in, prices are still rising, and voters who believed him feel, with reason, that they were lied to. Last night Trump insisted that prices are, in fact, coming way down. Again, “Who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?” is a self-destructive political strategy.

Second, Trump would be in much better political shape right now if he had basically continued Biden’s policies, with only a few cosmetic changes. When he took office inflation was on a declining trajectory. Consumer sentiment was relatively favorable at the start of 2025. Americans were still angry about high prices, but the inflation surge of 2021-3 had happened on Biden’s watch and was receding into the past. My guess is that many voters would have accepted Trump’s claims that high prices were Democrats’ fault and given him the benefit of the doubt about the economy’s future if he had simply done nothing drastic and left policies mostly as they were.

Instead, he brought chaos: Massive and massively unpopular tariffs, DOGE disruptions, masked ICE agents grabbing people off the street, saber-rattling and war crimes in the Caribbean. Many swing voters, I believe, supported Trump out of nostalgia for the relative calm that prevailed before Covid struck. They didn’t think they were voting for nonstop political PTSD.

And there’s more to come. Health insurance costs are about to spike, because Republicans refuse to extend Biden-era subsidies. Inflation may pick up in the next few months as retailers, who have so far absorbed much of the cost of Trump’s tariffs, begin passing them on to consumers.

Chris Cameron at The New York Times: Trump’s Speech on Economy Veers Into an Anti-Immigrant Tirade.

In a speech that the White House billed as an address on the economy, amid a backlash driven in part by Mr. Trump’s sweeping tariffs, Mr. Trump veered between assurances that life was better than ever under his administration and blaming immigrants for the country’s economic woes.

Mr. Trump revived what had been an effective campaign message, promising that sending immigrants home would mean “more jobs, better wages and higher income for American citizens,” though the early stages of his mass deportation campaign have so far coincided with widespread economic anxiety.

He earned raucous cheers from his supporters as he spoke of “reverse migration” and trumpeted what he called a “permanent pause” on immigration from “hellholes like Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia and many other countries.”

Soon after, a member of the crowd yelled out a crude term that Mr. Trump used during his first administration to disparage Haiti and some nations in Africa. The president laughed.

“I didn’t say ‘shithole,’ you did!” Mr. Trump replied with a grin. He then recounted his use of the term at a White House meeting in 2018 to describe countries that he was balking at accepting immigrants from. Mr. Trump had then denied saying that after it was publicly reported. Nearly six years later, he appeared proud of the remark.

Quiet, Piggy!

Throughout the speech, Mr. Trump doubled down on a barrage of incendiary attacks that he has unleashed against immigrants since the shooting of two National Guard members near the White House last month. The day after the shooting, Mr. Trump floated the possibility of stripping naturalized American citizens of their citizenship (which is only done in rare cases) and vowed to deport all immigrants that he saw as “non-compatible with Western civilization.”

During his xenophobic tirade, Mr. Trump made little distinction between unauthorized migrants and those who followed all the correct procedures to enter the country and eventually become American citizens. He described Somali immigrants as lazy, murderous and “garbage,” and said the home countries of many immigrants were “filthy, dirty, disgusting.”

Quiet, Piggy!! He is disgusting.

Politico polled Americans on what they really think of Trump’s economy. Erin Doherty writes: New poll paints a grim picture of a nation under financial strain.

Americans are struggling with affordability pressures that are squeezing everything from their everyday necessities to their biggest-ticket expenses

Nearly half of Americans said they find groceries, utility bills, health care, housing and transportation difficult to afford, according to The POLITICO Poll conducted last month by Public First. The results paint a grim portrait of spending constraints: More than a quarter, 27 percent, said they have skipped a medical check-up because of costs within the last two years, and 23 percent said they have skipped a prescription dose for the same reason.

The strain is also reshaping how Americans spend their free time. More than a third — 37 percent — said they could not afford to attend a professional sports event with their family or friends, and almost half — 46 percent — said they could not pay for a vacation that involves air travel.

Trump insists that “prices are all coming down,” as he told Burns, but the results pose a challenge for Trump and the Republican Party ahead of the 2026 midterms, with even some of the president’s own voters showing signs that their patience with high costs is wearing thin.

POLITICO reporters covering a variety of beats have spent the past few weeks poring over the poll results. We asked some of them to unpack the data for us and tell us what stood out most.

Read about these specific findings at the link.

Trump/Hegseth’s Boat Strikes

Damien Cave, Edward Wong, and Maria Abi-Habib at The New York Times (gift link): Inside the Pentagon’s Scramble to Deal With Boat Strike Survivors.

The Pentagon was in a bind. The military had plucked two survivors from the Caribbean Sea in mid-October after striking a boat that U.S. officials said was carrying drugs, and it needed to figure out what to do with them.

On a call with counterparts at the State Department, Pentagon lawyers floated an idea. They asked whether the two survivors could be put into a notorious prison in El Salvador to which the Trump administration had sent hundreds of Venezuelan deportees, three officials said.

The State Department lawyers were stunned, one official said, and rejected the idea. The survivors ended up being repatriated to their home countries of Colombia and Ecuador.

A little under two weeks later, on Oct. 29, Pentagon officials convened another session about boat strike survivors, a video conference involving dozens of American diplomats from across the Western Hemisphere. The message was that any rescued survivors should be sent back to their home countries or to a third country, said three other officials, who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

Behind that policy was a quieter goal: to ensure survivors did not end up in the U.S. judicial system, where court cases could force the administration to show evidence justifying President Trump’s military campaign in the region.

The previously unreported calls demonstrate the haphazard and sometimes tense nature of the process within the Trump administration to weigh what to do with the survivors of U.S. attacks on boats that the military asserts — without presenting evidence — are drug-smuggling vessels posing an immediate threat to Americans.

Pentagon officials largely kept State Department counterparts in the dark about strike operations, then scrambled to try to enlist diplomats to help deal with survivors, whom military officials referred to by specific terms that included “distressed mariners.” That phrase is usually used in a peacetime and civilian context.

The talks took place after the first attack on Sept. 2, when the U.S. military killed two survivors with a second strike. Pentagon officials have not fully explained the process for handling survivors to other agencies or Congress, even as the campaign has continued, killing at least 87 people in 22 attacks.

Use the gift link to read the rest.

Haley Britzky at CNN: 3 separate US strikes on alleged drug boats have initially left survivors. Each time they’ve been treated differently

As the US military has undertaken a campaign of attacks against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, at least five people have survived initial strikes ending up in the water after explosions killed fellow crew members and disabled their ships.

But what happened next to the survivors varied greatly – two were detained by the US Navy only to be returned to their home countries, one was left to float in the ocean and is presumed dead, and two more have been at the center of intense scrutiny in recent weeks following reporting that the US military conducted a second strike killing them as they clung to their flipped and damaged boat on September 2.

The contrast in treatment has happened while policy on how the military will handle survivors remains steady, according to defense officials….

Democratic lawmakers have demanded answers about the follow-up strike with some suggesting that the US military may have violated international law by killing the survivors.

Last week, Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley met with lawmakers on Capitol Hill in closed-door meetings to explain the attack. Bradley was the commander of Joint Special Operations Command at the time of the strike and oversaw the attack; Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the White House have said Bradley was ultimately the official who directed the follow-on strikes, and that they support his decision.

Bradley told lawmakers he ordered a second strike to destroy the remains of the vessel, killing the two survivors, on the grounds that it appeared that part of the vessel remained afloat because it still held cocaine, CNN has reported. The survivors could hypothetically have floated to safety, been rescued, and carried on with trafficking the drugs, the logic went.

People briefed on the follow-up strike said they were concerned that it could violate the law of armed conflict, which prohibits the execution of an enemy combatant who is “hors de combat,” or taken out of the fight due to injury or surrender.

Read more at CNN.

More Interesting Stories to Check Out

Media Matters: Right-wing media are poised to escalate attacks on women as MAGA cracks emerge.

AP: Justice Department can unseal records from Epstein’s 2019 sex trafficking case, judge says.

CNN: Third federal judge grants request to unseal Jeffrey Epstein-related court records.

The New York Times: Judge Says Trump Must End Guard Deployment in Los Angeles.

The New York Times: U.S. Plans to Scrutinize Foreign Tourists’ Social Media History.

Politico: Trump aides and allies float potential Noem successors as speculation grows over her tenure.

Boston.com: Rümeysa Öztürk can return to research at Tufts after judge orders reinstatement of student immigration record.

That’s it for me today. What’s on your mind?

Lazy Caturday Reads: Elon’s Last Day: Really?

Posted: May 31, 2025 | Author: | Filed under: cat art, caturday, Donald Trump, just because | Tags: , , , , , , | 9 Comments

Catzilla poster

Good Afternoon!!

I hope this post will make some kind of sense, but I’m not that confident about it. I’m completely stressed out and exhausted. Last night I did not sleep at all. Now I’ll have to try to make it up with naps today.

I’ve had insomnia for years now, beginning after menopause. It got worse after Trump was elected in 2016, and now we’ve had nearly 10 years of this horrible man and his endless stupidity, my sleepless nights come more often.

Obviously, Trump’s second term has been much much worse than the first. He’s now surrounded by sycophants and not the so-called “adults in the room” who tried to check some of his worst impulses in his first term. He is openly enriching himself and his fellow billionaires. He’s pardoning violent criminals. Everything is awful. We are beginning to resemble Orban’s Hungary and Putin’s Russia. I don’t see how we ever repair this country’s reputation in the free world.

This is from Stephen Beschloss at America America: What Do You Hope For America?

France’s gift to America has stood majestically in New York harbor since 1886. The original idea for the Statue of Liberty grew out of the desire to exemplify the American ideals of liberty and freedom. Lady Liberty’s spiked crown was meant to symbolize rays of sun beaming out to the world. Her tablet was inscribed with July 4, 1776. Sculptor Frédéric-Auguste Bartholdi placed a broken shackle and chains at her feet to represent the end of slavery.

For more than 140 years, she has held her torch high, providing a beacon to the world, an expression of freedom and a welcome to those in trouble. So has been the inspiring poem of Emma Lazarus, “The New Collossus,” etched in bronze and placed at the pedestal: “Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Millions of arriving immigrants saw this symbol of compassion and hope for a better life with their own eyes. Millions more yearned to see it and experience its promise for themselves.

I have always taken pride in America’s commitment to immigration and its burgeoning diversity. I have done so knowing that our history has been fraught with conflict as bigotry and competition have often pitted Americans against newcomers. I’m still moved by Hakeem Jeffries’ first speech after becoming House Minority Leader in 2023. “We believe that in America our diversity is a strength. It is not a weakness. An economic strength, a competitive strength, a cultural strength,” he said, adding, “Out of many we are one. That’s what makes America a great country.”

I won’t recount now the myriad ways the current cruel and hostile regime is exploiting its power to try and force millions of migrants out of the country without due process. The daily stories of masked men without proper identification grabbing people off the streets and taking them away in unmarked cars is an intolerable horror.

Add to this the Supreme Court ruling yesterday, enabling the Trump administration to revoke temporary legal status for more than 530,000 immigrants from Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela—a humanitarian program created by the Biden administration in 2023 to address the peril they faced in their home countries. It’s hard to overstate the heartbreak and fear this ruling will cause, as all the previously protected people (adults and children) now face the possibility of being deported back to danger. We are all paying for decades of failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform, which has provided the conditions for a hateful demagogue to target migrants as a key reason for all that ails us.

Beschloss urges us to hold on to hope and not to give in to fear and despair. He asks us to think about what we hope for America.

…it’s important that we don’t lose sight of what we’re fighting for; this tyrannical regime is hoping to replace our dreams with their nightmares. The more we keep alive the vision of the future we want, the more we will be motivated to make it happen.

I’m trying to hold on to hope. I really am. But it’s hard.

Here’s what I’m thinking about today: Elon Musk is leaving government and politics–supposedly.

Yesterday Elon Musk appeared in the Oval Office with a black eye and several other  small bruises on his face. He appeared to be stoned on something–he was doing that weird thing where he rolls his head around over and over again. He was also wearing a t-shire and rumpled jacket and a DOGE baseball cap. He was there because he is supposedly ending his role in the government and returning to running his own companies.

After the New York Times wrote about his drug use (see Dakinikat’s Friday post), a reporter asked about his use of ketamine. CBS News: Elon Musk lashes out in Oval Office when asked about report on his ketamine use.

During an Oval Office send-off Friday marking the end of his formal role with the Trump administration, Elon Musk lashed out when asked about a New York Times report alleging he was a frequent user of the drug ketamine during the 2024 campaign.

“The New York Times. Is that the same publication that got a Pulitzer Prize for false reporting on the Russiagate?” Musk asked while standing alongside President Trump, cutting off a question from Fox News reporter Peter Doocy about the Times. “Let’s move on.”

Musk’s remarks came on the same day that the Times reported he used ketamine — which can be used both recreationally and medically — as often as once a day in 2024. Musk has told people he took ketamine so frequently that it affected his bladder, and he has also used ecstasy and magic mushrooms at times, the paper said, citing unnamed sources….

Musk has said publicly he has a prescription for ketamine. But he told journalist Don Lemon last year he uses it infrequently, taking a “small amount once every other week” to help him get out of a “depressive mindstate.” He told Lemon he doesn’t feel he’s abused the drug, saying, “if you use too much ketamine, you can’t really get work done…and I have a lot of work.”

Yeah, right. He talks like every addict under the sun: “I can quit any time…”

The Wall Street Journal reported last year that some Musk associates worry his reported drug use could harm his businesses, which include Tesla, SpaceX, social network X and several other firms. The billionaire has brushed off any concerns about the impact on his companies, telling Lemon, “what matters is execution.”

Musk has said he has a top-secret security clearance, which typically requires drug testing.

But not for Trump’s buddies, of course.

And what about the black eye? Shawn McCreesh at The New York Times: A Black Eye at the White House: Did Somebody Punch Elon?

It was like metaphor turned reality.

After 130 days spent fighting the federal government, Elon Musk turned up with a black eye at the White House on Friday for his last day as a “special government employee.” If you squinted, you could see it: His right eye socket was puffy and empurpled. No doubt about it, that was a big, fat shiner.

His project in Washington more or less finished, he never came close to cutting the $1 trillion from the federal government he had promised. His businesses and his public image got somewhat battered, and now, apparently, so had his face.

Did somebody beat him up?

The list of possible suspects seemed long. An abridged lineup of people and constituencies currently unhappy with Mr. Musk includes: at least two of the many women with whom he has fathered children; pretty much the entire federal bureaucracy; his neighbors in a suburb of Austin, Texas; Tesla shareholders; old friends of his; Republicans on Capitol Hill; his 20-year-old daughter; all those people who have lit Teslas on fire; and even some Trump voters.

But Musk claimed his 5-year-old son did it.

“I was just horsing around with little X, and I said, ‘Go ahead, punch me in the face,’ and he did,” Mr. Musk explained after a reporter asked him if he was OK.

Svetlana Petrova, Hokusai, Under-the-Mannen Bridge at-Fukagawa (Fat Cat Art)

It was an odd moment in a news conference that was quite odd to begin with. Moments earlier, Mr. Musk had angrily refused to engage with a question put to him about a new report in The New York Times detailing his drug use. Mr. Trump remained mostly mute as Mr. Musk batted back that question. Now the tech mogul was explaining why he looked beaten up….

Mr. Trump has spent a considerable amount of time around the little slugger over these last 130 days. He and Mr. Musk have even brought the child to sit ringside with them at Ultimate Fighting Championship matches. Mr. Trump thought about the explanation that was being offered for the black eye. “X could do it,” he concluded, sounding almost impressed. “If you knew X, he could do it.” The way the president said this, you’d never guess he was talking about a 5-year-old.

I call bullshit. There’s no way a 5-year old did that. Maybe it was Scott Bessent. Those two had at least one knock down, drag out fight. The Daily Mail: Insane moment Elon Musk ‘SHOVED’ Trump’s treasury secretary Scott Bessent during screaming match.

Elon Musk‘s swift departure from his signature Department of Government Efficiency and the White House was escalated by an outburst that turned violent, according to a high-profile insider.

Former Chief Strategist Steve Bannon told DailyMail.com that Musk’s turbulent time in the White House was marred when he physically ‘shoved’ 62-year-old Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent after he was confronted over wild promises to save the administration ‘a trillion dollars’.

‘Scott Bessent called him out and said, ‘You promised us a trillion dollars (in cuts), and now you’re at like $100 billion, and nobody can find anything, what are you doing?” the prominent MAGA figure revealed.

‘And that’s when Elon got physical. It’s a sore subject with him.

‘It wasn’t an argument, it was a physical confrontation. Elon basically shoved him.’

Catzilla

Bannon said the physical altercation came as the two billionaires moved from the Oval Office to outside Chief of Staff Susie Wiles’ office, and then outside the office of the then National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz.

‘Trump 100%’ sided with Bessent after the clash, he added. ‘I don’t think Bessent has any bad blood, but he’s got a job to do and he’s going to do it’.

The revelation of a confrontation between the pair was confirmed by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Friday….

The revelations of the Musk-Bessant clash follow an explosive New York Times report that alleged Musk was using a cocktail of drugs on the campaign trail including ketamine, ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms.

Bannon added that Musk also lost status in Trump’s orbit when it was leaked to the New York Times in March that the billionaire was preparing to receive top-secret military briefings on China, which Trump abruptly stopped.

he former chief strategist in Trump’s first administration said the mounting issues with DOGE and the China briefings led to Musk losing face in the White House.

Marina Hyde mocks Musk at The Guardian: So long, Elon: the cuts didn’t go to plan, but you completely shredded your reputation.

I can’t believe that Elon Musk is leaving Doge, the government department he named after a tired and basic meme that most of the internet had moved on from around a decade ago. “As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end,” Musk wrote this week (capital letters: model’s own), “I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful government spending.” Oh man. “Thank you for the opportunity”?! At some level you have to salute Donald Trump’s ability to turn even the world’s richest man into an Apprentice candidate who leaves in week four after completely wiping out in the hotdog stand task.

Musk arrived in government promising to slash spending by $2tn. He leaves it a mere $1.86tn short of that target, even by his own estimations. Meanwhile, the president’s new tax bill is set to add $2.3tn to the deficit. I imagine Musk thought his government finale would be a spectacular extravaganza – “you’re welcome, Washington!” – involving 2,000 chainsaw-wielding chorus girls. Instead, it’s a tweet. And yes – we DO all still call them tweets.

Ironically, the thing that Musk has been most stunningly effective at slashing is his own reputation. Think about it. He arrived in Trump’s orbit as a somewhat mysterious man, widely regarded as a tech genius, and a titan of the age. He leaves it with vast numbers of people woken up to the fact he’s a weird and creepy breeding fetishist, who desperately pretends to be good at video games, and wasn’t remotely as key to SpaceX or Tesla’s engineering prowess as they’d vaguely thought. Also, with a number of them apparently convinced he had a botched penile implant. Rightly or wrongly convinced – sure. I’m just asking questions.

Catzilla

But look, it’s good news for Tesla investors, who have managed to end Musk’s practice of WFWH (working from White House), and are now demanding he puts in a 40-hour week to save the company whose stock he has spent the past few months tanking. As the world order dramatically seeks to rearrange itself in the new era of US unreliability, no one should ever be able to unsee the president of the United States’s decision to turn the White House lawn into a car sales lot for his sad friend. Did it work? It seems not. Musk spent a lot of this week airing his hurt feelings about his brrm-brrm cars. “People were burning Teslas,” he whined to Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post. “Why would you do that? That’s really uncool.”

Well, one thing we will no longer have to endure is this guy’s decrees on what is or isn’t cool. The timeworn thing about money and power is that they allow nerds to reinvent themselves as cool. You see it on Wall Street, where sea-beast financiers get manscaped by trophy wives who are no longer out of their league. You see it in Hollywood, where weird little guys become alpha movie producers. You see it in Bezos’s transformation from puffy-chinos-wearing, dress-down-Friday dweeb to Bilderberg Vin Diesel impersonator. What you rarely see is the alchemy of that process in reverse, live and in real time. But we got that with Elon, and we have to take our laughs where we can. In some other businesses, Musk could have convinced himself it wasn’t happening, but politics is a place where pollsters literally ask real people what they think of public figures every single week. Elon’s approval ratings are underwater.

More at the link.

For what it’s worth, I don’t believe that Musk is really leaving. Even Trump kept saying that yesterday, and Musk said he’ll continue advising Trump. From Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo (I don’t have a link, because I gots this on my email): Don’t Fall For Elon Inc.’s Press Campaign.

We’re in the midst of a storm of articles — variously encomiums, valedictories, friendly morality tales — about Elon Musk’s purported departure from service in the federal government. I’m going to note a couple quite unflattering pieces in a moment. But for now, I want to focus on the bulk of them, which tend to portray Musk as someone who tried to tame government spending but was simply over-matched by “Washington’s ways” and finally failed. You get the image of a guy who is chastened, heading back to his regular life, no match for Sodom any more than most of us would be.

Let me take this opportunity to say that this all has the look and feel of a well-orchestrated crisis communications job. If reporters out there really want to land a story, get me that story and I will be duly impressed. The point here is to start the project and process of unwinding the brand damage Musk has done to himself and all his companies by his antics over the last six months. After all, if he’s really cut his ties to Trump … well, maybe the whole bad story is just in the rearview mirror? And if he was really “defeated” by Washington, then maybe that’s punishment enough, right? I’m not saying that anyone really pissed at Musk or who now has a super low opinion of him buys that. But good crisis communications work recognizes the limits of the craft. An effort like this is more focused on laying the groundwork for a softening of feelings and impressions over time.

Catzilla, by Catzilla Studios at Deviant Art

You see it in the carefully planted stories and apparently tossed off quotes. Elon won’t be doing any more political giving. Elon doesn’t even like the Big, Beautiful bill. Elon agrees that Elon is chastened. I mean, our boy Elon is practically a Never Trumper now, right? It’s all fairly transparent.

I don’t, for starters, buy that Musk is really leaving government service at all, though the fact that a couple of his top lieutenants are also signing out of DOGE adds a bit more credibility to the claim. (We’ll have to keep on eye on that.) Musk was always the juice behind DOGE. Fear of him was what allowed twenty-something goofs to show up at government departments and be granted the keys to each kingdom. DOGE is probably institutionalized now to some degree. But not that much. And it’s not just the good guys who oppose DOGE. There are lots of factions on Team Bad Guy who want to take a slice out of him too. Remember, he used DOGE to scoop up lots of contracts. I doubt he wants to lose those. But others would like them, too. That means he’ll have to remain involved.

The bigger problem with this storyline is the idea that Musk failed. I so wish that were true. But it’s simply not. To believe that you’d need to buy the idea that the goal was to streamline the government and save a bunch of money as opposed to gut the parts of the government that Trump world and the Silicon Valley right view as enemies and do so in an at best extra-constitutional fashion because it would never be possible through constitutional means. He succeeded at doing quite a lot of that, at least for now. He wrecked whole sections of the government and scooped up a ton of government contracts which not only further feathered his nest but advances the privatization of the government. He also engaged in a still-too-little-understood effort to create a vast store of integrated private information on U.S. citizens. He accomplished a huge amount.

That makes sense to me. I wish Musk would go off into the sunset, but I don’t think we seen or heard the last of him.

That’s my contribution for today. There’s lots of other news, so feel free to post about it in the comments.