News
Elon Musk says some of his social media posts about Trump 'went too far'
Elon Musk listens as President Trump speaks to reporters in the Oval Office on May 30. A week after the two traded social media disses and threats, Musk said Wednesday some of his posts “went too far.”
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
Days after the very public breakup of President Trump and his former adviser Elon Musk, the latter appears to be doing damage control.
“I regret some of my posts about President [Trump] last week,” Musk posted on X, his social media platform, just after 3 a.m. ET on Wednesday. “They went too far.”

Trump has been active on social media early Wednesday, but has not responded publicly to Musk’s apology.
However, in a previously recorded podcast interview with the New York Post that aired on Wednesday morning, Trump said he had “no hard feelings” towards Musk.
“I don’t blame him for anything but I was a little disappointed,” Trump said, adding that he had not “thought too much about him in the last little while.”
When asked if he could forgive Musk, Trump said “I guess I could,” but that “my sole function now is getting this country back to a level higher than it’s ever been.”
The president told NBC News on Saturday that he has no desire to repair his relationship with Musk, saying he assumed it was over.
“I’m too busy doing other things,” Trump said, adding, “I have no intention of speaking to him.”
Trump was critical of Musk in that interview, saying the tech billionaire had been “disrespectful to the office of the president.”
But Trump also appeared to soften some of his stances. He said he hadn’t given any more thought to his earlier threat of canceling Musk’s companies’ federal contracts or investigating Musk’s immigration status, as Trump ally Steve Bannon had publicly suggested.

Meanwhile, Musk quietly deleted some of his more inflammatory tweets from the previous week, including posts endorsing a call for Trump’s impeachment, linking Trump to the files of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and saying Trump’s tariffs would cause a recession this year.
Trump said on Monday that he had no plans to discontinue Musk’s Starlink satellite internet system that was installed at the White House despite security concerns — though may move his Tesla, which he bought in March, off-site. And he told reporters he would not have a problem if Musk called.
“We had a good relationship, and I just wish him well — very well, actually,” Trump said. A clip of the exchange was posted to X, where Musk responded with a heart emoji.
The alliance that was
The two had enjoyed a close relationship since 2024, when the tech billionaire poured almost $300 million into backing Trump’s reelection campaign.
Musk went on to join the new administration as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), becoming the public face of its controversial efforts to reshape the federal government even as government lawyers downplayed his role in court filings.

Musk’s whirlwind 130 days as a special government employee were marked by legal setbacks, clashes with Cabinet members and scant evidence to support DOGE’s claims of significant savings. His own business empire took a financial hit, with Tesla’s first-quarter profits plunging 71% compared to the same period in 2024.
Musk announced his departure from the government in late May, citing the end of his “scheduled time” in the position. At a final Oval Office press conference on May 30, Musk stood next to Trump as the president praised him as “one of the greatest business leaders and innovators the world has ever produced.”
But things soured quickly in the days that followed, fueled by Musk’s public criticisms of the president’s sweeping domestic policy bill, known as the “big, beautiful bill.” Musk wasted no time railing against what he called the “disgusting abomination,” saying it would increase the federal budget deficit and undermine DOGE’s cost-cutting efforts.
Trump and Musk’s war of words
Social media sniping ensued.
Musk said Trump would have lost the election without his support, while Trump wrote that the “easiest way to save money” in the budget would be to terminate Musk’s federal subsidies and contracts, referring to Musk’s companies including Tesla and SpaceX.

Then Musk claimed without evidence that Trump’s Justice Department has not released the full Jeffrey Epstein files because Trump is in them — an allegation that Trump denied and called “old news” in a Saturday interview with NBC News.
While the White House did not directly comment on those allegations, press secretary Karoline Leavitt issued a statement denouncing the “unfortunate episode from Elon” and accusing him of opposing Trump’s bill because “it does not include the policies he wanted.” Trump has suggested Musk was disappointed because the bill proposes cutting subsidies for electric vehicles.
In his NBC News interview on Saturday, Trump suggested the feud with Musk had helped unite the Republican Party and made lawmakers see the benefits of his bill. It narrowly passed the House in May and remains under scrutiny in the Senate, where GOP leaders hope to pass it by July 4.
News
Here’s What the New Virginia House Map Looks Like
Virginians approved a new congressional map on Tuesday that would aggressively gerrymander the state in the Democrats’ favor, giving the party as many as four more U.S. House seats.
The new map draws eight safely Democratic districts and two competitive districts that lean Democratic, according to a New York Times analysis of 2024 presidential results. It leaves just one safe Republican seat, compared with the five seats the G.O.P. holds on the current map.
The proposed map was drawn by Democratic state legislators and approved by Gov. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat. It eliminates three Republican-held seats in part by slicing the densely populated suburbs in Arlington and Fairfax Counties and reallocating their overwhelmingly Democratic voters into five congressional districts, some stretching more than a hundred miles into Republican areas.
Perhaps the most extreme new district is the Seventh, which begins at the Potomac River and stretches to the west and south in a manner that resembles a pair of lobster claws. Several well-known Virginia Democrats have already announced their candidacies and begun campaigning in the district.
Reid J. Epstein contributed reporting.
News
Southern Poverty Law Center indicted on federal fraud charges
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche speaks as FBI Director Kash Patel listens during a news conference at the Justice Department on Tuesday in Washington.
Jacquelyn Martin/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Jacquelyn Martin/AP
WASHINGTON — The Southern Poverty Law Center was indicted Tuesday on federal fraud charges alleging it improperly raised millions of dollars to pay informants to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan and other extremist groups, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said.
The Justice Department alleges the civil rights group defrauded donors by using their money to fund the very extremism it claimed to be fighting, with payments of at least $3 million between 2014 and 2023 to people affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan, the United Klans of America, the National Socialist Party of America and other extremist groups.
“The SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred,” Blanche said.
The civil rights group faces charges including wire fraud, bank fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering in the case brought by the Justice Department in Alabama, where the organization is based.
The indictment came shortly after SPLC revealed the existence of a criminal investigation into its program to pay informants to infiltrate extremist groups and gather information on their activities. The group said the program was used to monitor threats of violence and the information was often shared with local and federal law enforcement.

SPLC CEO Bryan Fair said the organization “will vigorously defend ourselves, our staff, and our work.”
Blanche said the money was passed from the center through two different bank accounts before being loaded onto prepaid cards to give to the members of the extremist groups, which also included the National Socialist Movement and the Aryan Nations-affiliated Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club. The group never disclosed to donors details of the informant program, he said.
“They’re required to under the laws associated with a nonprofit to have certain transparency and honesty in what they’re telling donors they’re going to spend money on and what their mission statement is and what they’re raising money doing,” he said.
The indictment includes details on at least nine unnamed informants were paid by the SPLC through a secret program that prosecutors say began in the 1980s. Within the SPLC, they were known as field sources or “the Fs,” according to the indictment. One informant was paid more than $1 million between 2014 and 2023 while affiliated with the neo-Nazi National Alliance, the indictment said. Another was the Imperial Wizard of the United Klans of America.
The SPLC said the program was kept quiet to protect the safety of informants.
“When we began working with informants, we were living in the shadow of the height of the Civil Rights Movement, which had seen bombings at churches, state-sponsored violence against demonstrators, and the murders of activists that went unanswered by the justice system,” Fair said. “There is no question that what we learned from informants saved lives.”
The center has been targeted by Republicans
The SPLC, which is based in Montgomery, Alabama, was founded in 1971 and used civil litigation to fight white supremacist groups. The nonprofit has become a popular target among Republicans who see it as overly leftist and partisan.
The investigation could add to concerns that Trump’s Republican administration is using the Justice Department to go after conservative opponents and his critics. It follows a number of other investigations into Trump foes that have raised questions about whether the law enforcement agency has been turned into a political weapon.
The SPLC has faced intense criticism from conservatives, who have accused it of unfairly maligning right-wing organizations as extremist groups because of their viewpoints. The center regularly condemns Trump’s rhetoric and policies around voting rights, immigration and other issues.
The center came under fresh scrutiny after the assassination last year of conservative activist Charlie Kirk brought renewed attention to its characterization of the group that Kirk founded and led. The center included a section on that group, Turning Point USA, in a report titled “The Year in Hate and Extremism 2024” that described the group as “A Case Study of the Hard Right in 2024.”
FBI Director Kash Patel said last year that the agency was severing its relationship with the center, which had long provided law enforcement with research on hate crime and domestic extremism. Patel said the center had been turned into a “partisan smear machine,” and he accused it of defaming “mainstream Americans” with its “hate map” that documents alleged anti-government and hate groups inside the United States.
House Republicans hosted a hearing centered on the SPLC in December, saying it coordinated efforts with President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration “to target Christian and conservative Americans and deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech and free association.”
News
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger Stressed Pragmatism, But Politics Hound Her
On the night of her resounding win in last fall’s election for Virginia governor, Abigail Spanberger told her supporters that they had sent a message to the world. “Virginia,” she said in the opening lines of her victory speech, “chose pragmatism over partisanship.”
But even then it was clear that the first big issue of her term would be as partisan as it gets: a proposed amendment by her fellow Democrats to allow them to gerrymander the state’s 11 congressional districts.
The push to redraw the Virginia map was another salvo in a barrage of redistricting spurred by President Trump in a bid to keep Republicans in control of the House in this year’s midterm elections.
Virginians vote on Tuesday on whether to adopt the proposed map, and if the “Yes” vote wins, Democrats could end up with as many as 10 seats, up from the six they hold now. The redistricting battles of the last year would end up in something of a draw, with gains for Democrats in California and Virginia offsetting gains for Republicans in Texas, Missouri and North Carolina — unless Florida lawmakers decide in the coming weeks to draw a new, more Republican-friendly map.
Historically, redrawing of congressional maps has been done each decade after the U.S. census. But with Republicans holding such a slim majority in the House, Mr. Trump began by pressing Texas to redraw its maps, touching off the wave of gerrymandering
Virginia Democratic legislators rolled out their redistricting plan last October, setting in motion the state’s lengthy amendment process just as the campaign for governor was entering its final weeks. At the time, Ms. Spanberger expressed support for the plan, though she emphasized that its passage was up to the legislature and then to the voters.
But even if her formal role in the process was relatively minor — Ms. Spanberger signed the bill setting the date for the referendum — the politics of the effort has loomed over the first few months of her term. Her support for the amendment has drawn accusations of hypocrisy from the right and complaints from some on the left that she has not been outspoken enough in her advocacy.
“There’s always going to be somebody who wants me to do something differently,” the governor said in an interview on Saturday at a rally in support of the amendment outside a home in Northern Virginia. “I will always make someone unhappy, and I will always make someone happy.”
Ms. Spanberger, a former C.I.A. officer and three-term congresswoman, won a 15-point victory in 2025 after running on a campaign focused on pocketbook issues. Centrism has been her political brand since she was first elected to the House in 2018, flipping a district that had long leaned to the right.
Now Republicans campaigning against the amendment have made Ms. Spanberger a prime target, deriding her as “Governor Bait-and-Switch” and highlighting an interview in August 2025 in which she said she had “no plans to redistrict Virginia.”
“This was the perfect opportunity for her to show that she is the middle-of-the-road suburban mom that she portrayed herself as,” said Glen Sturtevant, a Republican state senator. He dismissed the notion that this was an effort that had been thrust upon her, pointing out that she had signed the bill setting the date for the referendum. “She is certainly an active participant in this whole process,” he said.
Republicans have eagerly highlighted recent polls suggesting that Ms. Spanberger’s honeymoon is over, though because governors in Virginia cannot serve two consecutive terms, public approval is less of a pressure point than it might be elsewhere. Some of her political adversaries have tied the drop in her ratings to her involvement in the campaign for the amendment.
But a number of factors are at play in those sagging poll numbers. Some on the right are irked by her support of standard Democratic priorities like gun control measures and limits to cooperation with federal immigration agents.
But some of the most vociferous criticism of her from Republicans, up to and including the president, has been for a host of proposed taxes and tax hikes in the legislature — on everything from dog grooming to dry cleaning — that she in fact had nothing do with. Most of those taxes, which were floated by various lawmakers, never even came up for a vote.
But Ms. Spanberger did not publicly hit back against these attacks until recent days, a delay that some Democrats say was costly.
“She let other people define her,” said Scott Surovell, the State Senate majority leader.
Mr. Surovell’s frustration echoed a growing discontent among Democrats about the governor’s recent moves. For all the Republican criticism of her, some operatives and lawmakers said, Ms. Spanberger has not been aggressive enough in pushing for Democratic priorities, redistricting among them.
This criticism broke out into the open in recent days, after the governor made scores of amendments to bills that had passed the General Assembly. Some lawmakers and Democratic allies accused her of unexpectedly diluting long-sought goals like expanded public sector unions and a legal retail marketplace for cannabis.
“Our party base is looking for us to stand up and fight and advocate and deliver,” said Mr. Surovell, who represents a solidly Democratic district in Northern Virginia. “It’s hard to deliver when you’re standing in the middle of the road.”
In the interview, Ms. Spanberger insisted that she supported the purpose of many of the bills but had to make amendments to ensure that her administration could implement them.
And she said she had been explicit in her support of the redistricting effort, appearing in statewide TV ads encouraging people to vote “Yes” even as an anti-amendment campaign has sent out mailers suggesting that the governor opposes the effort.
But she said she had never been in a position to barnstorm the state as Gov. Gavin Newsom did in the months leading up to the redistricting referendum that passed in California. Mr. Newsom is a second-term governor in a much bluer state, she said, while she only recently took office and has been “in the crush of their legislative session,” with hundreds of bills to read and examine in a short period.
“Those who may not be focused on the governing and only on the politics, they’re going to want me to do politics 100 percent of the time,” she said. “And for people who care about the governing and not the politics, they’re going to want me to do governing 100 percent of the time.”
Her preference, as she has often made apparent, is for the governing over the politicking. But she acknowledged that it is all part of the job.
Asked if she lamented that the highest-profile issue of her term so far was such a polarizing matter, rather than the cost-of-living policies she emphasized on the campaign trail, she said: “Any person in elected office wants to talk about the thing they want to talk about all the time, and that’s it. So I won’t say ‘No’ to that question.”
-
Georgia5 minutes agoMan accused in fatal Georgia shooting spree dies in jail, officials say
-
Hawaii11 minutes ago
Police Commission narrows Honolulu chief candidates to 6 semifinalists
-
Idaho17 minutes ago11-year-old from Idaho competing for $20K, national spotlight – East Idaho News
-
Illinois23 minutes agoGOP Rep. Ryan Spain opposes Illinois redistricting changes
-
Indiana29 minutes agoSuspects flee robbery at Chase Bank in Plainfield
-
Iowa35 minutes agoIowa State football lands 2027 3-star linebacker commit Keaton Wollan
-
Kansas41 minutes agoPBS Kansas remembers employee killed in Wichita shooting; estranged husband charged
-
Kentucky47 minutes agoKentucky transfer Collin Chandler speaks out on why he returned to BYU basketball