The implosion of a powerful political alliance: Trump and Musk in their own words.

Last Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump heaped praise on Elon Musk as the tech billionaire prepared to leave his unorthodox White House job.

Less than a week later, their potent political alliance met a dramatic end Thursday when the men attacked each other with blistering epithets. Trump threatened to go after Musk’s business interests. Musk called for Trump’s impeachment.

Here’s a look at the implosion of their relationship in their own words.
The goodbye

“Today it’s about a man named Elon. And he’s one of the greatest business leaders and innovators the world has ever produced. He stepped forward to put his very great talents into the service of our nation and we appreciate it. Just want to say that Elon has worked tirelessly helping lead the most sweeping and consequential government reform program in generations.” — Trump, May 30, Oval Office remarks

___

Trump invited cameras into the Oval Office last week to bid farewell to Musk, who said he was stepping away from his government work to focus on his businesses.

Trump spoke effusively of Musk and his work with the Department of Government Efficiency for nearly 15 minutes straight.

“I’ll continue to be visiting here and be a friend and adviser to the president,” Musk said. He marvelled at the gold-tinged decorations Trump placed around the Oval Office.

“The oval office finally has the majesty that it deserves thanks to the president,” he said.

The budget dispute

“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, Tuesday, post on X.

___

Days after their Oval Office meeting, Musk escalated his previously restrained criticism of Trump’s “big, beautiful” budget bill, the president’s top congressional priority.

Still, he kept his critique focused on their policy disagreement. He did not go after Trump by name, even as he called on Republican lawmakers to vote down the bill and threatened political retribution against those who took Trump’s side.

“In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people,” Musk wrote on X.

Uncharacteristically for a man who rarely lets a snub go unanswered, Trump did not respond. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Musk’s views on the bill were not a surprise to Trump, and his social media posting “doesn’t change the president’s opinion.”

Musk continued Wednesday, approvingly sharing social media posts and memes that criticized the budget’s price tag and deficit impacts, though still directing his ire at Congress.

The bitter breakup

“Elon and I had a great relationship. I don’t know if we will anymore.” -- Trump, Thursday, Oval Office meeting with the German chancellor.

___

Trump said he was “very disappointed in Elon” and was surprised by his benefactor’s criticism.

The war of words escalated rapidly from there. It all played out on their respective social media platforms, with Musk posting on X and Trump on Truth Social.

Musk dismissed Trump’s criticism. “Whatever,” he wrote. He shared old Trump social media posts urging lawmakers to oppose deficit spending and increasing the debt ceiling.

“Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate,” Musk posted, a reference to Musk’s record political spending last year, which topped $250 million.

“Such ingratitude,” he added.

Trump said Musk had worn out his welcome at the White House and was mad that Trump was changing electric vehicle policies in ways that would financially harm Musk-led Tesla.

“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.

He 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 goes nuclear

“Time to drop the really big bomb: Trump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!” — Musk, Thursday, X post.

___

In a series of posts, he shined a spotlight on ties between Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, the financier who killed himself while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. Some loud voices in Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement claim Epstein’s suicide was staged by powerful figures, including prominent Democrats, who feared Epstein would expose their involvement in trafficking. Trump’s own FBI leaders have dismissed such speculation and there’s no evidence supporting it.

Later, when an X user suggested Trump be impeached and replaced by Vice-President JD Vance, Musk agreed.

“Yes,” he wrote.

“I don’t mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago,” Trump wrote. He went on to promote his budget bill.

#Iranians react to new Trump travel ban as tensions are high between nations. Iran — Iranians again face a U.S. travel ban imposed by President Donald Trump, with the decision drawing anger, frustration and some shrugs given the decades of tensions between the countries.

#Trump imposed a similar ban during his first term before withdrawing America unilaterally from Tehran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, under which Iran drastically limited its program in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions.

When he returned to the White House and began seeking a new deal with Iran, it saw the country’s rial currency improve and stocks rise. But worries have grown as its government appears poised to reject an initial American proposal. The travel ban has further darkened that mood and led Iranians to fear Trump will lump the nation’s 80 million people with its theocratic government even after he repeatedly praised them while seeking a deal.

“Now I understand that Trump is against all Iranians, and his attitude is not limited to the government,” said Asghar Nejati, a 31-year-old man working in a Tehran pharmacy.

Even in the years after the 1979 Islamic Revolution and subsequent U.S. Embassy hostage crisis, Iranian students traveled to the U.S. to attend universities. Between 2018 and 2024, an average of around 10,000 Iranian students went to the U.S. annually.

Estimates suggest some 1 million Iranian-origin people live in the U.S. today.

Mehrnoush Alipour, a 37-year-old graphic designer, said the nations could have better relations if they could spoke to each other in softer tones.

“This is another foolish decision. Trump cannot reach his goals by imposing pressures on ordinary Iranians,” she said. ”The two nations can have better relations through openings, not restrictions.”

Bank teller Mahdieh Naderi said Trump was lashing out over his frustrated efforts to reach ceasefires in the Israel-Hamas war and the Russia-Ukraine war.

“Trump just expressed his anger about his failed plans,” Naderi said. “He is complaining about the Chinese and others who are living in the U.S., too

Some said interest in the U.S. was already waning before the latest ban.

“Over the past years, two of my grandchildren went to Canada to continue their education there,” said Mohammad Ali Niaraki, 75. ”Iranians are not limited in immigration and they are not as interested to go to the U.S. as they were decades ago. Iranians prefer Canada, as well as neighboring countries with flourishing economies like the (United Arab) Emirates.”

Others pointed out that high-ranking government officials have children living or working in the U.S., despite the tensions, and suggested that it would be fair to remove those as well.

Tehran resident Mehri Soltani offered rare support for Trump’s decision.

“Those who have family members in the U.S, it’s their right to go, but a bunch of bad people and terrorists and murderers want to go there as well,” he said. “So his policy is correct. He’s doing the right thing.”

UN comments on Trump’s threats to sanction #Russia, #Ukraine

The United Nations believes that negotiations are the best way to solve any conflicts, official spokesperson of the UN Secretary-General Stephane Dujarric said.

The UN always feels the best way to resolve any conflict "is through negotiations," he said in a comment on the recent statement of the US leader.

US President Donald Trump earlier stated readiness to introduce tough sanctions against Russia and Ukraine if the countries fail to reach an agreement for settlement of the conflict.

Afghans who helped America during the war plead for an exemption from Trump travel ban.

ISLAMABAD — Afghans who worked for the U.S. during its war against the Taliban urged U.S. President Donald Trump Thursday to exempt them from a travel ban that could lead to them being deported to Afghanistan, where they say they will face persecution.

Their appeal came hours after Trump announced a U.S. entry ban on citizens from 12 countries, including Afghanistan.

It affects thousands of Afghans who fled Taliban rule and had been approved for resettlement through a U.S. program assisting people at risk due to their work with the American government, media organizations, and humanitarian groups. But Trump suspended that program in January, leaving Afghans stranded in several locations, including Pakistan and Qatar.

Pakistan, meanwhile, has been deporting foreigners it says are living in the country illegally, mostly Afghan, adding to the refugees’ sense of peril.

“This is heartbreaking and sad news,” said one Afghan, who worked closely with U.S. agencies before the Taliban returned to power in 2021. He spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the issue, fearing Taliban reprisals and potential arrest by Pakistani authorities.

He said the travel ban on an estimated 20,000 Afghans in Pakistan could encourage the government to begin deporting Afghans awaiting resettlement in the U.S. “President Trump has shattered hopes,” he told The Associated Press.

He said his life would be at risk if he returned to Afghanistan with his family because he previously worked for the U.S. Embassy in Kabul on public awareness campaigns promoting education.

“You know the Taliban are against the education of girls. America has the right to shape its immigration policy, but it should not abandon those who stood with it, risked their life, and who were promised a good future.”

Another Afghan, Khalid Khan, said the new restrictions could expose him and thousands of others to arrest in Pakistan.

He said police had previously left him and his family alone at the request of the U.S. Embassy. “I worked for the U.S. military for eight years, and I feel abandoned,. Every month, Trump is making a new rule,” said Khan. He fled to Pakistan three years ago.

“I don’t know what to say. Returning to Afghanistan will jeopardize my daughter’s education. You know the Taliban have banned girls from attending school beyond sixth grade. My daughter will remain uneducated if we return.”

He said it no longer mattered whether people spoke out against Trump’s policies.

“So long as Trump is there, we are nowhere. I have left all of my matters to Allah.”

There was no immediate comment on the travel ban from the Taliban-run government.

Pakistan previously said it was working with host countries to resettle Afghans. Nobody was available to comment on Trump’s latest executive order.

#Ottawa’s sweeping border bill ‘an attack’ on asylum seekers’ #rights, says Amnesty International #Canada.

While the Canadian #government says its proposed Bill C-2 will improve the immigration and #asylum system, a human rights group is calling some of the measures “an attack” on refugees’ right to seek asylum.

Amnesty International Canada said in a press release Thursday that the bill, if passed, would make it “virtually impossible” for the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) to review refugee claims from most people entering Canada via the United States.

Moreover, Amnesty International Canada says the bill would prevent people who have been in Canada for more than a year from seeking refugee status. People facing harm, including persecution and torture, in their countries could be “unfairly denied” refugee protection by Canada, it added.

Ketty Nivyabandi, secretary general of Amnesty International Canada’s English-speaking section, said seeking asylum is a human right.

“With Bill C-2, the Canadian government threatens to chip away at that right, making it harder for people seeking safety and freedom to file an asylum claim and have it assessed fairly,” Nivyabandi said in a statement Thursday. ”This attack on the right to seek asylum will severely diminish Canada’s international standing when it comes to protecting human rights.”

Referring to the measures affecting immigrants and asylum seekers, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada said in a press release Tuesday that Bill C-2, or the Strong Borders Act, would address what it called growing migration pressures by making the immigration and asylum systems stronger, efficient and more flexible.

A separate news release Tuesday from Public Safety Canada said the changes will improve the “integrity and fairness of our immigration system while protecting Canadians’ privacy and Charter rights.” The federal government says it will also work with American border and law enforcement agencies to strengthen the border and combat organized crime.

In response to concerns from critics and advocacy groups about some of the rules, Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab said the border bill has safeguards upholding civil rights and due process, The Canadian Press reported Wednesday.

Affected asylum seekers would still have a chance to make their case through pre-removal risk assessments, she added.
Proposed measures ‘a step backwards’

Still, migration expert Anna Triandafyllidou says the bill’s proposed asylum measures would be “a step backwards.”

She’s concerned about a proposed ineligibility rule affecting people who first landed in Canada after June 24, 2020. If these people make asylum claims more than one year since their arrival, their claims would not be referred to the IRB, according to a background document from the federal government.

Triandafyllidou said the one-year cutoff date is “totally arbitrary” and may be against international law.

“So by creating this one-year rule, we throw out the window all these people that might face persecution,” she said in a video interview with CTVNews.ca on Thursday.

She gave an example of someone who comes from a country where identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning is illegal. If that individual later identifies as 2SLGBTQ+ and decides to file for asylum more than a year after landing in Canada, the person’s claim wouldn’t be heard by the refugee board under the proposed rule.

Asylum claimants who enter Canada from the United States along the land border and make a claim after 14 days would not be referred to the IRB as well, according to the government’s background document.

Canada’s current asylum system already has “good rules” that just need to be stronger and implemented more effectively, Triandafyllidou added.

“There is a concern of citizens and of the government that we have a big backlog of asylum applications and that our system needs to become more efficient and effective, but this will happen by strengthening our current system which is a good one,” she said.

“So instead of undoing our system to do away with the backlog, we need to provide more resources instead of border agents, more resources for our refugee board, so that they can truly distinguish the people who really need protection from the people who are abusing the system.”

With files from The Canadian Press

A US- and Israeli-backed group operating aid sites in Gaza pushed back the reopening of its facilities set for Thursday, as the Israeli army warned that roads leading to distribution centres were “considered combat zones”.

The White House said on Tuesday that South Korea’s election, which saw liberal party candidate Lee Jae-myung win the presidency, was fair, but it expressed concern about Chinese interference.

Zelenskyy calls Russia’s peace proposal an ‘ultimatum’ and he wants face-to-face talks with Putin

#Israel says rockets fired from Syria for the first time since Bashar Assad’s fall. #DAMASCUS, Syria — The Israeli army said two rockets were fired from Syria into open areas in the Israel-controlled Golan Heights on Tuesday, marking the first time a strike has been launched toward Israel from Syrian territory since the fall of former Syrian President Bashar Assad in December.

Syrian state media reported that Israel shelled the western countryside of Syria’s Daraa province after the rocket launch. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a U.K.-based war monitor, also reported Israeli airstrikes that caused “violent explosions” around the city of Quneitra and in the Daraa countryside.

A group calling itself the Mohammed Deif Brigades — named after a Hamas military leader killed by an Israeli strike in Gaza last year — claimed the attack in a post on Telegram. The group first surfaced on social media a few days before.

“Until now, it’s just a Telegram channel. It’s not known if it is a real group,” said Ahmed Aba Zeid, a Syrian researcher who has studied armed factions in southern Syria.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said in a statement that Israel considers “the Syrian president directly responsible for every threat and firing toward the State of Israel” and warned of a “full response” to come “as soon as possible.”

Israel has been suspicious of the Islamist former insurgents who formed the new Syrian government, led by President Ahmad al-Sharaa, and has launched hundreds of airstrikes on Syria and seized a U.N.-patrolled buffer zone on Syrian territory since Assad’s fall.

Syria’s foreign ministry said in a statement carried by the state-run TV channel that it has “not yet verified the accuracy” of the reports of strikes launched from Syria toward Israel.

“We affirm that Syria has not and will not pose a threat to any party in the region,” the statement said. It condemned the Israeli shelling, which it said had resulted in “significant human and material losses.”

The U.S., which has warmed to al-Sharaa’s government and recently moved to lift some sanctions previously imposed on Syria, has pushed for Syria to normalize relations with Israel.

In a recent interview with the Jewish Journal, al-Sharaa said he wants to see a return to a 1974 ceasefire agreement between the two countries but stopped short of proposing immediate normalization, saying that “peace must be earned through mutual respect, not fear.”

Iranian official says U.S. nuclear proposal is ‘incoherent and disjointed,’ as sources warn talks momentum is collapsing.

A senior Iranian official told CNN the new nuclear deal proposal presented to Tehran in recent days is “incoherent and disjointed,” as sources familiar with the progress of the talks said the momentum behind negotiations to secure a new deal appears to be collapsing.

The private pessimism contrasts with U.S. President Donald Trump’s public optimism last week that the administration was “very close to a solution.”

CNN has also learned that the US has shifted position on the issue of uranium enrichment in the new proposal, in comparison to what officials had said publicly. It suggests the US could invest in Iran’s civilian nuclear power program and join a consortium that would oversee the enrichment of low-level uranium inside of Iran for an unspecified amount of time. That consortium is expected to include Middle Eastern nations and the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Previously, senior US officials have said no enrichment inside Iran could take place under a new deal, and top US officials demanded that Iran stop enrichment and only import the material – a suggestion Tehran firmly rejected. The prospect of allowing continued low-level enrichment in the country would likely enrage Iran hawks in the US and Israel and hearkens back to the 2015 nuclear deal, from which Trump withdrew.

However later Monday, Trump said that the Iran deal will not allow uranium enrichment.

“Under our potential Agreement — WE WILL NOT ALLOW ANY ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM,” the president wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.

Iranian officials have repeatedly said that they are open to the idea of an enrichment consortium but have insisted Iran must be able to keep control of its own enrichment capabilities.

The senior Iranian official on Monday denounced the new proposal, saying that at “at first glance, is assessed as incoherent and disjointed, very unrealistic, and with excessive demands.”

They argued that the primary barrier to progress was the US’ inconsistency.

“The fact that the Americans constantly change their positions has so far been the main obstacle to the success of the talks and now makes the work more difficult than ever,” the official added.

The official also alleged the latest text directly contradicts prior understandings.

“The text is clearly in conflict with the latest agreement reached during the fifth round of negotiations,” the official stated. They reaffirmed Tehran’s uncompromising stance on a critical issue, saying, “Iran’s position on enrichment is firm and steadfast.”

Iran and the United States concluded a fifth round of high-stakes nuclear talks in Rome on May 23 amid growing skepticism in Tehran about the chances of a deal. After that round of talks, the two sides “agreed to meet again in the near future,” a US senior administration official said at the time.

Now, however, the next round of talks is very uncertain and may not happen at all, the sources familiar said.