Elon Musk takes Trump feud to next level with more Epstein files claims as aides try to broker peace: Live updates
Donald Trump branded Elon Musk 'the man who has lost his mind' as the world's richest man escalated his feud with the president.
Musk continued firing insults at Trump on Thursday evening on his X platform, with insiders said to be losing hope that a truce between the men can be brokered.
Trump says he's 'not particularly' interested in peace talks with Musk
Donald Trump was reportedly 'not angry or even concerned' about his escalating feud with Elon Musk in a phone call with reporter Jonathan Karl.
Karl wrote on X that Trump branded Musk 'the man who has lost his mind', but was not concerned with speaking with the former 'First Buddy.'
'As for reports that there is going to be a Trump/Musk call scheduled for today, Trump told me he is 'not particularly' interested in talking to Musk although he says Musk wants to talk to him,' the ABC News correspondent said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
36 minutes ago
- Telegraph
A surge in oil prices risks havoc for the global economy
It always seems inappropriate for writers to be focusing on the economic and financial impact of conflicts such as the current one between Israel and Iran while there are people losing life and limb. Nevertheless, such assessments have to be made. So should we be seriously worried? In general, non-economic factors, including those which damage life and limb, do not have much economic and financial impact on the world. There are exceptions, of course. A really big non-economic event, such as a shooting war between the superpowers, undoubtedly would have an enormous economic impact. And when an apparently localised conflict starts, we don't know how serious it might ultimately become. This alludes to a second reason for being coy about making an assessment. There are two interlocking types of uncertainty here. There is the usual uncertainty concerning economic relationships, but there is also the fundamental uncertainty about things completely outside the economist's conceptual toolkit, namely how serious the conflict will be, how long it will drag on for and what the ultimate outcome will be. The only viable approach is to think through various scenarios. So here goes. First, even after America's attack on Iran over the weekend, it is possible that the conflict dies down very quickly in which case no major economic damage will have been done globally. Alternatively, it may carry on for some weeks, but in a relatively contained way, not impinging on countries outside the area and not having a dramatic impact on oil prices. A third scenario involves Iran trying to strike back at the West by closing the Strait of Hormuz, which has just recently been approved by Iran. This is the narrow point of the Persian Gulf and some 20pc of the world's oil consumption must pass through it.
Daily Mail
42 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Bombs over Iran, but no heads-up for Dems: Irritated lawmakers gripe they were left in the dark on secret strikes
Congressional Democrats are blaring they were kept in the dark about President Donald Trump 's Saturday night strikes on Iran 's nuclear sites. Representative Jim Himes (D-Conn.) and Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.) the top ranking Democrats on the House and Senate Intelligence committees, respectively, did not know about the attacks until after they took place, sources told CNN. Himes, part of the intelligence-heavy Gang of Eight, voiced outrage: 'According to the Constitution… my attention to this matter comes BEFORE bombs fall.' CNN also reported that other Democrat members of the Gang of Eight did not get a heads up on the operation. Warner indicated he was 'frustrated' by the delay in being briefed. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations committee complained that the president bucked a bipartisan tradition of 'regularly briefing Congress on major national security events.' Meanwhile, other Democrats, including Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), are contending the Iran strikes were ill-advised because the country 'posed no imminent threat' to the U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer responded to the attack with a call for a vote of the War Powers Act on the Senate floor. 'No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,' Schumer said in a statement following the American strike on Iran's nuclear sites Saturday evening. 'Confronting Iran's ruthless campaign of terror, nuclear ambitions, and regional aggression demands strength, resolve, and strategic clarity. The danger of wider, longer, and more devastating war has now dramatically increased.' I was briefed on the intelligence last week. Iran posed no imminent threat of attack to the United States. Iran was not close to building a deliverable nuclear weapon. The negotiations Israel scuttled with their strikes held the potential for success. — Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) June 22, 2025 NEWS — Chuck Schumer says Congress must enforce the War Powers Act. 'I'm urging Leader Thune to put it on the Senate floor immediately. I am voting for it and implore all Senators on both sides of the aisle to vote for it.' — Stephen Neukam (@stephen_neukam) June 22, 2025 Ranking Member Jim Himes on Military Action in the Middle East — House Intelligence Committee (@HouseIntelDems) June 22, 2025 In post on X, Himes critiqued Trump's decision as unconstitutional, without approval from Congress, a position endorsed by anti-interventionist Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky. Massie, the first member of the president's party to condemn the strikes, joined forces with California Democrat Ro Khanna last week to introduce the Iran War Powers Resolution in the House of Representatives 'to prohibit U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran war.' At least two Democrats called on Saturday night for Trump to be impeached over ordering the strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. New York Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez went scorched earth with her statement posted on X. She said: 'The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers. 'He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.' The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers. He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment. — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 22, 2025 US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, speaks to the press in Newark, New Jersey, on June 21, 2025 U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) walk to attend a press conference following the U.S. Senate Democrats' weekly policy luncheon on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 10, 2025 Illinois Democrat Sean Casten was another member of the House to call for the President to be ousted. 'This is not about the merits of Iran's nuclear program. No president has the authority to bomb another country that does not pose an imminent threat to the US without the approval of Congress. This is an unambiguous impeachable offense,' Casten wrote, within an hour of Trump announcing the successful attack. This is not about the merits of Iran's nuclear program. No president has the authority to bomb another country that does not pose an imminent threat to the US without the approval of Congress. This is an unambiguous impeachable offense. — Sean Casten (@SeanCasten) June 22, 2025 Yet, a few Democrats split from the bulk of their party and took Trump's side, defending the Commander in Chief's decision to strike Iran. Richie Torres, another New York Democrat, praised the success of the attack without mentioning Trump directly. 'The decisive destruction of the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant prevents the dangerous spread of nuclear weapons in the world's most combustible region. No one truly committed to nuclear nonproliferation should mourn the fall of Fordow' Torres wrote. The world can achieve peace in the Middle East, or it can accept a rogue nuclear weapons program—but it cannot have both. The decisive destruction of the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant prevents the dangerous spread of nuclear weapons in the world's most combustible region. No one… — Ritchie Torres (@RitchieTorres) June 22, 2025 Pennsylvania's Democrat Senator John Fetterman reposted Trump's announcement of the successful attack, adding 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS. Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.' As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS. Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world. 🇺🇸 — U.S. Senator John Fetterman (@SenFettermanPA) June 22, 2025 Last week, Fetterman passionately articulated his support for Israel amid its conflict with Iran on Tuesday, encouraging the United States to do all they can to assist its ally in the Middle East. Fetterman also explicitly called for America to use the '30,000 pound bunker busters' on Iran's nuclear sites. I just introduced an Iran War Powers Resolution with @RepRoKhanna to prohibit U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran war. This is not our war. Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution. — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) June 17, 2025 This is insane. Trump just bombed Iran without Congressional approval, illegally dragging us into war in the Middle East. Have we not learned our lesson!?!? Congress must return to Washington at once to vote on @RepThomasMassie 's War Powers Resolution to stop this madness. — Rep. Jim McGovern (@RepMcGovern) June 22, 2025 Tonight, the President ignored the Constitution by unilaterally engaging our military without Congressional authorization. I join my colleagues in demanding answers from the Administration on this operation which endangers American lives and risks further escalation and… — Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) June 22, 2025 Congressman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) Ranking Member on the House Rules Committee called for his colleagues to immediately 'return to Washington' to vote on Massie and Khanna's War Powers Resolution to 'stop this madness', also calling Trump's action 'insane.'
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Trump prepares to jet to NATO as poll reveals Americans think White House backs Russia over Ukraine
President Donald Trump will head to a NATO summit this week - as a poll found that more Americans think his administration is siding with Russia over Ukraine. A Ronald Reagan Institute survey of U.S. adults, conducted from late May to early June, showed 37 percent of respondents believe the Trump administration is favoring Russia when it comes to negotiating an end to the conflict. Just 14 percent said the Trump White House was favoring Ukraine. Another 36 percent said the Trump administration was taking a neutral approach - despite Ukraine being a longtime U.S. ally and Russian President Vladimir Putin launching the invasion in February 2022. The numbers, which were released Sunday, come after Newsweek reported that the U.S. was pressuring European allies to limit references to Ukraine in the final communique of the NATO summit, which will take place Tuesday and Wednesday in The Hague, Netherlands. A White House spokesperson wouldn't confirm Newsweek's reporting to the Daily Mail. If the U.S. is successful at containing a focus on Ukraine, it would be a departure from previous NATO summits during the tenure of former President Joe Biden that showed strong support for the besieged country, which is not a NATO member. Ahead of the summit, a senior U.S. official's statement didn't mention the Ukraine war - instead focusing on one of Trump's longtime goals for NATO. 'The president intends to secure a historic 5 percent defense spending pledge from NATO allies, which will strengthen the Alliance's combined military capabilities and ensure greater stability in Europe and the world,' the senior official said. 'This effort builds on the hundreds of billions of dollars in spending increases already achieved across the Alliance since 2017 thanks to President Trump's diplomacy in his first term,' the source added. The Reagan Institute Survey found that a majority of Americans still support defending a NATO ally even if they weren't spending enough on defense. Fifty-three percent expressed this view, while 30 percent said the U.S. should not come to that country's defense. A majority of Americans also opposed the U.S. pulling out of NATO - 55 percent to 33 percent - with respondents feeling more strongly about the U.S. staying in. Breaking down the numbers, 38 percent strongly opposed the U.S. pulling out of NATO - which was formed to deter the former Soviet Union - while just 15 percent supported the U.S. withdrawing from the compact. On several occasions, Trump has mulled pulling the U.S. out of NATO or threatened not to come to a country's aid if they don't pay up. During the 2024 campaign, Trump sparked controversy by recounting a conversation with a world leader in which he suggested he might not defend a NATO country that was 'delinquent' in its payments. 'I would encourage them [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills,' the then-candidate said. Seventy-one percent of U.S. adults said they supported the U.S. defending a NATO country if there was an attack. Just 17 percent weren't in favor of helping a NATO ally. A majority of Americans, 59 percent, also said they were in favor of increasing the U.S.'s military presence in Europe to counter Russian aggression. Trump said last Saturday that Putin called him on his birthday - but their discussion mainly focused on the war between Israel and Iran, rather than Russia's own conflict. 'Much less time was spent talking about Russia/Ukraine, but that will be for next week,' the president said in a Truth Social post. That was ahead of Trump's trip to Canada for the G7 - which he cut a day short - saying he needed to be back in Washington to tend to the war in the Middle East. He was supposed to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on the day of the G7 that he missed. 'Finally, President Trump intends to hold bilateral meetings with several world leaders, which will focus on issues of shared concern and reaffirm the United States strong ties with our allies and partners,' the senior official said Friday, not articulating who the president was sitting down with yet. It was unclear as of Friday if Zelensky still planned to travel to the Hague for the NATO Summit after Trump skipped their G7 meeting.
