What is Elon Musk trying to do?  

As the founder of Tesla and SpaceX pursues his quixotic effort to launch a new political party – the America Party – you have to wonder – does Musk really care about our government debt or is he very, very angry that President Donald Trump’s big, beautiful bill eliminated tax credits for Teslas and other electric vehicles? After all, ditching the tax breaks for EV helps cut spending. Musk can’t have it both ways. 

After donating hundreds of millions of dollars to help elect Trump, being celebrated as the president’s right-hand man and spearheading the controversial effort to help cut government fraud and waste, Musk is likely irate – understandably– that he is not getting preferential treatment from the White House. Trump’s cavalier disregard of Musk’s concerns must have come as a hurtful shock. 

As a result, Musk is lashing out – as he has done before – by insinuating that Trump had dealings with Jeffrey Epstein, for instance – determined to undermine the president and his agenda. Musk has given a lot to this administration. Tesla came under ruthless attack because Musk volunteered to guide DOGE; dealerships were firebombed and cars vandalized. Worse, customers walked away. 

But launching a new political party is an especially risky way to go. Tesla’s stock sold off sharply on the news, ending up 40% off its 52-week high. The car company’s shareholders have already signaled they want CEO Musk to spend less time on politics and more on reviving Tesla’s mojo. While Musk has indicated that Tesla’s robotaxis are the wave of the future, and they may well be, the company today is not thriving. 

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Tesla is struggling in China, its second-largest market, losing market share to more advanced and cheaper EVs. In May, sales were down 30% from the year earlier, even as the sector overall grew 28%. In Europe, Tesla is suffering the same Trump-related reputational issues as here in the U.S. It is not a good time for Musk to become distracted.  

It is also not a good idea for Trump to further inflame his former sidekick, as he recently did by calling Musk’s venture ‘ridiculous.’ Musk’s strategy for how he can gain significant political power (and sabotage Republicans) is clever and could damage Republicans. As he posted on X: ‘One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts. Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people.’  

The SpaceX owner explained in yet another post, ‘The way we’re going to crack the uniparty system is by using a variant of how Epaminondas shattered the myth of Spartan invincibility at Leuctra: Extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield.’   

Musk has the money to influence a few races and, on today’s closely contested political battlefield, a few seats could give the America Party considerable influence. It could also eliminate the slim GOP majority in the House and Senate. 

But … to what end? If edging out some Republicans hands control of Congress over to Democrats, Musk will have enabled even greater deficits. Has he forgotten the spending spree undertaken by Democrats while President Joe Biden was in the Oval Office? Does he remember how they treated him? Because Musk does not employ union labor, the Biden White House shunned him, and launched investigations into his businesses. Surely, he cannot pine for those days. 

Musk’s party may be new, but the idea is not.  Throughout history candidates and policymakers have railed at the inadequacies of our two main political parties, but few third-party ventures have made it out of the starting gate.  

The most successful such effort in modern times was billionaire H. Ross Perot’s 1995 creation of the Reform Party of the United States. Three years earlier, Perot had run for president as an Independent, outspending both major party candidates and winning 19% of the vote. His participation in the race drained votes from the GOP candidate and gave the win to President Bill Clinton, who captured 43% of the vote and defeated incumbent President George H. W. Bush. 

But when Perot ran again in 1996, representing his Reform Party, he attracted only 6% of the vote. The Reform Party’s biggest victory was the election of Jesse Ventura, who became governor of Minnesota in 1998. Its most important legacy was helping to inspire Republican Rep. Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America, which reset the GOP agenda and focused on many of the issues raised by Perot, including excess government spending.  

U.S. debt, as a percentage of GDP, peaked just after World War II at 106%, declined steadily until 1974, when it stood at 23%; between 1974 and 1992, it more than doubled to 47%, a trend that energized Perot’s battle against government deficits and also delivered Gingrich’s call for a balanced budget amendment.  

Today, rising deficits and debt are again driving discontent with our political establishment.  Under President Barack Obama, our debt to GDP rose from 77% to 103%, Under Donald Trump, debt stabilized but then jumped to 133% of GDP when Congress adopted bipartisan bills designed to keep COVID-19 shutdowns from destroying the economy. Unhappily, emergency spending measures that were meant to be temporary were kept in place and even expanded under Joe Biden. Debt as a percentage of GDP has since declined only modestly, and at the end of last year totaled 121%. Musk and Republican deficit hawks are correct that spending must come down. 

President Trump needs to reach out to Musk and settle their differences. Musk has caved before when Trump offered an olive branch; he will do so again. Both men can help each other, but both can also do significant damage – to each other and to the country. 

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis suggested that business magnate Elon Musk push for balanced budget and congressional term limit amendments to the U.S. Constitution, rather than build a new political party.

Musk, who has been beating the drum about the need to rein in government spending, announced that he is launching a new political party called the America Party. 

‘Backing a candidate for president is not out of the question, but the focus for the next 12 months is on the House and the Senate,’ he noted in a post on X.

DeSantis is not on board with the idea. 

The governor suggested that if Musk funds candidates in competitive Senate and House contests, Democrats will likely win.

But DeSantis acknowledged that the GOP has an issue with people running on spending less, but then failing to do so. ‘There’s a gap between the campaign rhetoric, and then the performance,’ he said.

He explained that he does not believe ‘electing a few better people’ will alter the ‘trajectory’ on the debt issue.

DeSantis said that the ‘incentives’ in D.C. will ‘lead to these outcomes, really, regardless of the outcome of elections at this point,’ asserting that a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution is needed.

Musk ‘would have a monumental impact’ if he got involved, DeSantis said, adding that the U.S. also needs term limits for lawmakers.

President Donald Trump on Monday said that his administration would be sending defensive weapons to Ukraine so the war-torn country could defend itself from Russia’s ongoing invasion, an apparent turnaround after the Pentagon said last week it was pausing such deliveries.

His comments came as Russian attacks on Ukraine killed at least 11 civilians and injured more than 80 others, including seven children, officials said Monday.

‘We have to,’ Trump said when questioned at the start of a dinner he was hosting at the White House for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. ‘They have to be able to defend themselves. They’re getting hit very hard now. We’re going to send some more weapons — defensive weapons primarily.’

Russia continues to advance and now currently controls just under a fifth of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, all of Luhansk, the lion’s share of three other regions and slivers of three additional regions.

Trump’s repeated efforts to broker a ceasefire have not been successful, and the president continued to vent his frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who continues to escalate military actions.

‘I’m not happy with President Putin at all,’ Trump said.

The Defense Department later said it would send additional defensive weapons to Ukraine at Trump’s direction, to ensure the Ukrainians can defend themselves while efforts continue to secure a lasting peace. 

‘Our framework for POTUS to evaluate military shipments across the globe remains in effect and is integral to our America First defense priorities,’ Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said.

Ukraine has been asking Washington to sell it more Patriot missiles and systems that it sees as key to defending its cities from intensifying Russian air strikes.

Last week the Pentagon froze some shipments of critical weapons to Ukraine, including Patriot missile interceptors and 155 mm artillery shells, at a pivotal moment in Kyiv’s war with Russia, Fox News confirmed. According to U.S. military officials tracking the shipments, the weapons were already staged in Poland before the order came down. 

It came as Russia launched its largest aerial attack of the war, nearly 500 drones and 60 missiles.

In response to Trump’s comments, the Kremlin said it would need time to clarify the specifics of U.S. weapons aid to Ukraine with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said there were many contradictory statements about U.S. weapons supplies to Ukraine, though it was clear that European weapons deliveries were continuing.

‘Obviously, supplies are continuing, that’s clear. Obviously, the Europeans are actively involved in pumping Ukraine full of weapons,’ Peskov said, according to Reuters. ‘As for what kind of supplies and in what quantity Ukraine continues to receive from the United States, it will still take time to clarify this definitively,’ he added.

Peskov said that Moscow appreciated Trump’s efforts to initiate direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, and that there was significant potential for restarting Russian-U.S. trade and economic relations.

Separately, Russia’s transport minister Roman Starovoit was found dead in what authorities said was an apparent suicide — news that broke hours after the Kremlin announced he had been dismissed by Putin, per The Associated Press. Russian media have reported that his dismissal could have been linked to an investigation into the embezzlement of state funds allocated for building fortifications in the Kursk region, where he served as governor before being appointed transportation minister.

The firing of Starovoit followed a weekend of travel chaos — airports grounded hundreds of flights due to the threat of drone attacks from Ukraine. Russian officials did not give a reason for his dismissal.

Fox News’ Jasmine Baehr and Jennifer Griffin as well as The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

A top advisor to former President Joe Biden reportedly labeled Hunter Biden’s presence on a call about the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling that former presidents have some immunity from prosecution ‘inappropriate,’ according to a new book. 

The book, ‘2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America,’ was published Tuesday and chronicles how Biden’s team dismissed concerns about his age during the 2024 election cycle, along with how President Donald Trump secured his victory. 

The book said Biden’s White House chief of staff, Jeff Zients, coordinated a video call with key Biden staffers, including White House Counsel Ed Siskel, communications director Ben LaBolt, senior advisor Mike Donilon and others to discuss whether Biden should provide an on-camera statement to the Supreme Court’s July 2024 decision. 

While Donilon already had drafted a written statement, Biden wanted to speak about the matter on-camera, the book claims. Staffers on the call started to hash out specifics of such an appearance, when Biden’s son started to chime into the call. 

‘Suddenly an unidentified voice piped up from Biden’s screen and recommended an Oval Office address,’ the book said. ‘At first, some aides had no idea who was speaking. It soon became clear the voice belonged to Hunter Biden, who the White House staff had not known was on the call. Siskel expressed some concern about the appearance of using the Oval Office.’

‘Hunter snapped back: ‘This is one of the most consequential decisions the Supreme Court has ever made.’ He said his father had every right to use the powerful imagery of the Oval Office to deliver that message,’ the book said. ‘They later settled on the Cross Hall, the long hallway on the first floor of the White House. After the call ended, Siskel told colleagues. Hunter’s presence was inappropriate.’

Biden ultimately delivered a brief speech responding to the Supreme Court’s ruling and took no questions from the press, per the suggestion of his son, the book claimed.  

Siskel and a spokesperson for Biden did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Fox News Digital. 

On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a 6–3 ruling in Trump v. United States that former presidents have significant immunity from prosecution for acts they committed in an official capacity. The case made its way to the Supreme Court after Trump faced charges stemming from then-Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into whether Trump was involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot and engaged in any other alleged election interference. 

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges, and claimed a former president could not face a prosecution without a House impeachment and a Senate conviction. 

The book ‘2024’ is one of several that have been released in this year detailing Biden’s mental deterioration while in office and how Trump won the election. It is authored by Josh Dawsey of the Wall Street Journal, Tyler Pager of the New York Times and Isaac Arnsdorf of the Washington Post. 

Another book covering similar material is ‘Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again,’ released May 20.

Fox News Digital has written extensively dating back to the 2020 presidential campaign about Biden’s cognitive decline and his inner circle’s alleged role in covering it up.

According to Dawsey, Hunter Biden’s involvement in his father’s affairs as president was not out of the ordinary during the former president’s time in office. 

‘What we found out over the course of reporting for our book is, Hunter Biden (was) a major figure in the president’s orbit,’ Dawsey said in a Sunday interview with ABC’s ‘This Week.’ ‘He was often on these calls, he would pipe in to calls, he was helping him make campaign decisions, and the president was very concerned about his son. It was one of the things that was an albatross on him as he tried to run for re-election.’

Former White House physician Kevin O’Connor, who served as doctor to former President Joe Biden, requested a delay to his upcoming testimony before the House Oversight Committee this week.

O’Connor was scheduled to testify on Wednesday, but is now in a disagreement with the committee over the scope of the questions he will be expected to answer during his testimony. The committee, led by Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., is interviewing the doctor as part of its investigation into Biden’s mental fitness and his administration’s use of an autopen.

A lawyer for O’Connor requested the testimony be delayed to July 28 or August 4 in a letter to Comer.

‘Dr. O’Connor has legal and ethical obligations that he must satisfy and for which violations carry serious consequences to him professionally and personally,’ the letter says.

‘We are unaware of any prior occasion on which a Congressional Committee has subpoenaed a physician to testify about the treatment of an individual patient.  And the notion that a Congressional Committee would do so without any regard whatsoever for the confidentiality of the physician-patient relationship is alarming.’

A spokesman for the Oversight Committee replied in a statement that O’Connor and his legal team were merely trying to ‘stonewall’ the process. The committee is planning to move forward with Wednesday’s testimony, which O’Connor faces a subpoena to attend.

The committee said O’Connor is welcome to object to individual questions during his testimony. But O’Connor is not allowed, in the committee’s view, to delay or decline a congressional subpoena due to concerns over questions about potentially privileged information.

The debate over O’Connor’s testimony comes weeks after a former top aide to Biden, Neera Tanden, told the Oversight Committee that she was authorized to direct autopen signatures but was unaware of who in the president’s inner circle was giving her final clearance.

During Tanden’s interview before Congress last month, which lasted more than five hours, she told lawmakers that, in her role as staff secretary and senior advisor to the former president between 2021 and 2023, she was authorized to direct autopen signatures on behalf of Biden, an Oversight Committee official told Fox News.

‘Ms. Tanden testified that she had minimal interaction with President Biden, despite wielding tremendous authority,’ Comer said at the time. ‘She explained that to obtain approval for autopen signatures, she would send decision memos to members of the President’s inner circle and had no visibility of what occurred between sending the memo and receiving it back with approval. Her testimony raises serious questions about who was really calling the shots in the Biden White House amid the President’s obvious decline. We will continue to pursue the truth for the American people.’

Fox News’ Kelly Phares and Madeleine Rivera and the Associated Press contributed to this report.