Musk’s New Video Sure Looks Like a Confession He’s Breaking the Law

Elon Musk’s own PAC may have just posted a filmed confession about buying votes in the Wisconsin Supreme Court election this Tuesday.

The world’s richest man has poured nearly $20 million into the state-level race between Trump-endorsed County Judge Brad Schimmel and Barack Obama–endorsed County Judge Susan Crawford.

Musk’s America PAC on Monday posted a video featuring Ekaterina Diestler, a Wisconsin woman who won the PAC’s $1 million giveaway on Sunday. Diestler stated that her vote—and not just her petition signature—was how she received the money.

“My name’s Ekaterina Diestler, I’m from Green Bay, Wisconsin,” the woman said in the video. “I did exactly what Elon Musk told everyone to do: Sign the petition, refer friends and family, vote, and now I have a million dollars.” Diestler’s statement clearly says that Elon Musk told her to vote—among other things—for her chance to become a millionaire.

In an effort to drum up support and attention, Musk announced last week that he’d offer up two $1 million checks on X in a lottery-style system to Wisconsin residents, “in appreciation for you taking the time to vote.” Offering people money in exchange for voting is extremely illegal in the United States.

Musk deleted this post 12 hours later, after legal experts pointed out the massive bribe he was orchestrating. He instead changed the language to circumvent that illegality, writing that “entrance is limited to those who have signed the petition in opposition to activist judges.”

“Conditioning entrance to this event and eligibility for the $1 million payout on having voted arguably violates Wisconsin law, which prohibits offering or giving anything of value to induce a person to vote,” campaign finance lawyer Brendan Fischer told The New York Times.

Forget DEI buzzwords—the Trump administration’s government censorship ordinance is now infringing on language that will make it nearly impossible for agencies to do their job.

A leaked memo from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Research Service division revealed Sunday that the agency has banned some key language from its vocabulary, including the words “climate” and “vulnerable,” as well as the phrase “safe drinking water.”

Other baffling entries on the memo’s banned language list are “greenhouse gas emissions,” “methane emissions,” “sustainable construction,” “solar energy,” and “geothermal,” as well as “nuclear energy,” “diesel,” “affordable housing,” “prefabricated housing,” “runoff,” “microplastics,” “water pollution,” “soil pollution,” “groundwater pollution,” “sediment remediation,” “water collection,” “water treatment,” “rural water,” and “clean water,” among dozens of others.

“When evaluating agreements, those entries that include these terms or similar terms cannot be submitted,” wrote Sharon Strickland, the USDA’s Northeast area financial management, travel and agreements section head, in an internal March 20 email. The review will “ensure that we maintain compliance with the Administration’s EOS.”

It’s unclear how the guidance would do anything other than completely hinder the department’s ability to monitor the health and edibility of crops, or aid America’s rural development—some of its primary functions. What is clear, however, is that purging such basic speech will stifle scientific research and discourse.

Donald Trump began censoring the government as soon as he returned to office. In January, the Office of Management and Budget held tens of billions in federal funding hostage, requiring executive branch agencies to purge language related to “environmental justice,” abortion, DEI initiatives, “woke gender ideology,” and “illegal aliens” in their reports and missions. Otherwise, they would forgo their congressionally appropriated funds, per an OMB memo.

That threat has since rolled its way through the American legal system. Last week, an appeals court upheld a block on the sweeping freeze, agreeing with a previous court’s ruling that the 22-state coalition that brought the lawsuit would “irreparably suffer” under Trump’s ordinance.

“These harms included the obligation of new debt; the inability to pay existing debt; impediments to planning, hiring, and operations; and disruptions to research projects by state universities,” wrote Chief Judge David Barron.

Barron’s ruling echoed a similar decision issued by Judge Loren AliKhan in February, in which the federal judge indefinitely blocked Trump’s effort.

“In the simplest terms, the freeze was ill-conceived from the beginning,” AliKhan wrote in her ruling. “Defendants either wanted to pause up to $3 trillion in federal spending practically overnight, or they expected each federal agency to review every single one of its grants, loans, and funds for compliance in less than twenty-four hours. The breadth of that command is almost unfathomable.”

Mike Waltz has multiple Signal group chats in addition to the now infamous “Houthi PC small group” that he added a reporter to earlier this month, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal.

Two officials close to the situation told the Journal that Waltz has started Signal chats with Cabinet members regarding a peace treaty between Russia and Ukraine as well as various other military activities.

While Trump has publicly stood behind Waltz, the president—and the rest of his inner circle—has castigated the national security adviser for the biggest blunder of Trump’s second term (so far). The Journal reports that Trump went on a few different expletive-filled rants about Waltz over the phone last week, and multiple staffers have made their discontent clear. Some noted that if a conservative outlet like Breitbart had broken the Signalgate story rather than The Atlantic, Waltz would be long gone. Others went so far as to spread past clips of Waltz being critical of Trump, alleging he is a neocon unfit to serve the MAGA agenda.

The administration has rejected reports of internal frustrations with Waltz. “The chattering of unnamed sources should be treated with the skepticism of gossip from people lacking the integrity to attach their names,” said National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes.

Vice President JD Vance may have stepped in it with his fellow Republicans by questioning Donald Trump’s plan to strike the Houthis, NBC News reported Sunday.

Earlier this month, Vance, and other senior Trump officials discussed sensitive plans to strike the Houthis in Yemen in a Signal group chat that was widely publicized after Trump’s national security adviser Mike Waltz accidentally added a high-profile reporter. In the chat, Vance alone aired doubts about the plan, warning that the strike was not in alignment with Trump’s America First policies, because it would help Europe more than it would help the U.S.

“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now,” Vance wrote. “There’s a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil prices. I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc.”

When Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth insisted that the strike wasn’t about the Houthis at all but about safeguarding trade and reestablishing deterrence, Vance relented. “If you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again,” he wrote.

Hegseth agreed, and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller responded, “As I heard it, the president was clear: green light, but we soon make clear to Egypt and Europe what we expect in return.”

Vance distinguished himself as the most ideological member of the Signal chat, freely expressing his contempt for Europe and a profound lack of interest in preventing the disruption of trade routes. Vance’s reluctance to help another country was arguably the most MAGA position to take—but some of the more hawkish senior Republicans didn’t like that he didn’t mindlessly submit to Trump’s directive, NBC News reported.

“Capitol Hill Republicans still have their jaws on their floor with how actively the VP worked to try and undo a Trump decision,” one senior Republican official in Washington wrote in a text. “Thank goodness Miller stepped in and put him in his place.”

“It’s one thing to have a healthy interagency debate before a decision is made. It’s another to try and undo a Commander-in-Chief decision once Trump gives the execute order. This is the latter, and it’s very Bolton-esque,” the senior Republican official added, referring to John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser who has become an outspoken critic of the president.

Some Republicans even believed that Vance’s question was tantamount to obstruction.

“These are the president’s policies, and for JD Vance to question them like that is ridiculous. He is the commander in chief,” another Republican on Capitol Hill told NBC News. It seems that to many Republicans, the most MAGA thing a person can do is agree with Trump about anything.

On the flip side, others in the Trump administration are reportedly concerned that the strike against the Houthis could lead to messy, drawn-out conflict.

“It’s 2002 all over again,” said one current administration official who spoke with NBC News anonymously because he wasn’t permitted to speak to the press. Already, the Pentagon has begun directing aircraft carriers and resources to the region, indicating that the fight with the Houthis is far from over.

During a trip to Greenland last week, Vance was asked whether he had raised his concerns with Trump and what he meant when he wrote that the president “wasn’t aware that his directions for Yemen were inconsistent with his message for Europe.”

“Well I didn’t quite say that. I think that’s a slight misunderstanding of what I said,” Vance replied, though of course, that was exactly what he had said.

In the end, Vance didn’t answer either question but instead launched into a rant about what he’d learned from “Signalgate.”

“Sometimes we all agree, and sometimes we all disagree. But it’s important that we all have an honest conversation amongst ourselves, and with the president of the United States about what we think is in the best interest of the national security of the United States of America,” said Vance, who had readily shut down his own dissenting opinion.

Vance claimed that he had “always supported the president’s decision to strike the Houthis.”

Banks are predicting a downturn for the American economy.

Goldman Sachs raised its 12-month recession probability from 20 percent to 30 percent on Monday, reported Reuters. The banking giant also downgraded American gross domestic product growth forecast from 2 percent to 1.5 percent, and projected three interest rate cuts by the Federal Reserve.

In a Sunday note to its investors, Goldman speculated that the average U.S. tariff rate will rise 15 percent points over the next year, 5 percent higher than it previously predicted. That’s thanks to Donald Trump’s decision to spark a global trade war.

“Almost the entire [tariff rate] revision reflects a more aggressive assumption for ‘reciprocal’ tariffs,” the brokerage firm wrote in a memo obtained by Reuters.

Trump has driven a wedge in America’s trade and military alliances by suddenly imposing large tariffs on the nation’s longtime partners. On Thursday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that his country’s cozy relationship with the U.S. had come to an end and that they would wean themselves off American products and services “at speeds we haven’t seen in generations.”

The seismic diplomatic shift followed another tariff announcement by the Trump administration, this time imposing a 25 percent hike on auto imports. Carney called the levy—which will take effect on vehicle imports April 3 and vehicle parts in May—a “direct attack” on Canada, but the news also immediately hit America’s Big Three automakers, whose stock dropped multiple percentage points in reaction to the news.

Trump’s tariffs will have an even more significant effect on Europe, which Goldman warned could enter a “technical” recession by the end of the year, with “little” growth—as in, 0.0 percent growth in the third quarter.

“We estimate that our new tariff assumptions will lower euro area real GDP by an additional 0.25 percent compared to our previous baseline, for a total hit to the level of GDP of 0.7 percent compared to a no-tariff counterfactual by end-2026,” Goldman wrote in another note issued Sunday.

Trump, however, seemed completely unconcerned by the looming economic peril. Speaking with reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday, Trump brushed off concerns about high unemployment and “stagflation,” which is when economic growth stagnates but inflation remains high. Instead, he insisted that “this country is going to be more successful than it ever was.”

“It’s going to boom,” the president said. “We’re gonna have boomtown USA. We’re gonna boom.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio may have just violated a court order stopping the Trump administration’s fast-tracked deportations.

Rubio announced that a group of alleged gang members had been deported Sunday night.

“Last night, in a successful counter-terrorism operation with our allies in El Salvador, the United States military transferred a group of 17 violent criminals from the Tren de Aragua and MS-13 organizations, including murderers and rapists,” Rubio wrote on X Monday morning. He noted that both TdA and MS-13 were considered foreign terrorist organizations, which implies that they could be subject to removal under the Alien Enemies Act, or AEA.

Rubio thanked the Salvadoran government and President Nayib Bukele for “their unparalleled partnership in making our countries safe against transnational crime and terrorism.”

Multiple judges have rebuked Donald Trump’s use of the AEA and filed injunctions against his administration—and Rubio’s latest deportations may have just violated one.

Last week, U.S. District Court Judge Brian Murphy issued a temporary restraining order requiring the government to provide written notice and an opportunity for detainees to apply for protection before deporting them to a third country.

It seems that with this latest round of deportations, the Trump administration has violated that court order, and continued to fast-track its removal of alleged gang members.

Earlier this month, Trump invoked the AEA, a wartime law that suspends due process. Under the act, the Trump administration swiftly deported 261 Venezuelan nationals to Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, the prison in El Salvador that is notorious for human rights abuses. The U.S. government claimed that everyone deported was a terrorist.

The deportees were removed without notifying their family members or lawyers, and they were not provided with the opportunity to challenge their deportation or their designation as gang members. In many cases, the government seems to have rounded up immigrants for supposedly suspicious tattoos that ended up having nothing to do with TdA at all.

In another filing last week, Judge James Boasberg wrote that by sending the prisoners to CECOT, the Trump administration had likely violated the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, which states that “it shall be the policy of the United States not to expel … any person to a country in which there are substantial grounds for believing the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture.” Boasberg wrote that at CECOT, prisoners are reportedly abused, humiliated, and left to rot without their families knowing anything about their whereabouts or well-being.

National security adviser Mike Waltz is grasping at straws to defend the fact that he invited The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal group chat about bombing Yemen.

During an interview on Fox News last week, Waltz attempted to explain away the enormous bluster by claiming that the editor’s number had simply been “sucked in” to his phone.

“I’m sure everybody out there has had a contact where you, it was, it said one person, and then a different phone number,” Waltz told the network.

“But you never talked to him before, so how is the number on your phone?” pressed Fox’s Laura Ingraham.

“Well, if you have somebody else’s contact, and then somehow it gets sucked in. It gets sucked in,” Waltz said.

That response—which comes from an individual who is supposed to be the pinnacle of American expertise on national security matters—completely misunderstands how cell phones work. Lest it need explanation, cell phones do not “suck in” phone numbers; instead, numbers are inserted by the people who use the device.

“This isn’t The Matrix,” Goldberg told NBC News Sunday, responding to Waltz’s comments. “Phone numbers don’t just get sucked into other phones. I don’t know what he’s talking about there.

“My phone number was in his phone because my phone number is in his phone,” Goldberg continued. “He’s telling everyone that he’s never met me or spoken to me. That’s simply not true.”

Democratic Representative Sean Casten was a little more blunt, branding Waltz as “full of shit.”

“If what he says is true, then he is choosing to discuss classified information on a platform where—in his own telling—he has no control over who is listening in,” Casten tweeted Sunday afternoon, reposting a clip of Goldberg’s interview. “Either he’s a liar or a traitor. Pick one.”

Waltz was the singular admin for a group chat created earlier this month on the retail app Signal in which over a dozen senior Trump administration officials discussed seemingly classified information regarding an imminent attack on Yemen. To make matters worse, Waltz blindly added Goldberg, who reported on the exchange last week. Donald Trump has continued to back Waltz publicly, but in private, the president was reportedly “mad” and “suspicious” that Waltz had Greenberg’s contact in his phone to begin with.

Former intelligence officials have warned that America’s adversaries “undoubtedly” already have the chat records, largely thanks to the Trump administration’s special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff’s physical presence in Russia when he was added to the chat.

In an interview with MeidasTouch Tuesday, former national security adviser Susan Rice said that Witkoff’s use of Signal while in Russia basically hand-delivered news of the attack to the Kremlin hours before it took place.

“Russians have whatever Witkoff was doing or saying on his personal cell phone,” Rice told the podcast.

The Signal fiasco also angered U.S. military pilots, who claimed that such a careless leak had blatantly put the lives of service members at risk. Dozens of interviewed Navy and Air Force pilots told The New York Times that the Trump administration’s operational security blunder had not only upended decades of military doctrine but had also shattered pilots’ trust that the Pentagon would prioritize their safety.

“The whole point about aviation safety is that you have to have the humility to understand that you are imperfect, because everybody screws up. Everybody makes mistakes,” Lieutenant John Gadzinski, a retired Navy F-14 pilot who flew combat missions from aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, told the Times. “But ultimately, if you can’t admit when you’re wrong, you’re going to kill somebody because your ego is too big.”

President Trump continues to pivot endlessly on tariffs, badly destabilizing the very market he claims he’s trying to balance.

“On the tariffs that you’re planning … you’re expected to hit something like 10 to 15 countries, is that right?” a reporter asked Trump on Sunday, referring to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s description of the countries with the largest trade deficits with the U.S. as the “Dirty 15.”

“I don’t know who told you 10 or 15 countries,” Trump replied.

“Well we heard that.”

“But you didn’t hear it from me.”

“How many countries will be in that initial chunk?” the reporter pressed.

“You start with all countries, so let’s see what happens,” Trump said, dramatically expanding his threat.

“There are many countries.… If you look at the history, and you look at what’s happened to us.… Go to Asia, and you take a look at every single country in Asia, what they’ve done to the United States in trade,” Trump continued vaguely. “I wouldn’t say anybody has treated us fair, or nicely.”

Trump plans to drop these reciprocal tariffs on Wednesday, which he is framing as “Liberation Day.” But this spiteful trade war will only hurt American consumers and manufacturers already dealing with inflation, potentially leading the country into a recession. But Trump has already admitted he doesn’t care.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has revealed that the prerequisites for deporting Venezuelan migrants to Nayib Bukele’s Salvadoran mega-prison are extremely arbitrary. 

Documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union on Sunday showed that the tattoos ICE is using to identify these men as Tren de Aragua gang members are images like the Jordan “Jumpman” logo, a crown, a train, and a clock, among other things. 

“All it takes to be sent to rot in prison in El Salvador is 1) having a tattoo an ICE officer says is a ‘gang tattoo’ and 2) displaying ‘logos,’ ‘symbols,’ or clothes an ICE officer says are gang signs,” American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick wrote on X. “In order for ICE to declare someone an ‘Alien Enemy,’ ICE must first determine they are a Venezuelan over age 14, and then second find 8 points on a scoring guide they made up… This checklist is shocking. A person can be declared an ‘Alien Enemy’ based ONLY on communications with someone ICE says is a member, and nothing more.”

These flimsy requirements have already led to multiple innocent men being detained and deported. Frengel Reyes Mota, who was awaiting an asylum appointment and had no criminal record in Venezuela or the U.S., was snatched up over multiple administrative errors in his file. And last Tuesday Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar, openly bragged that ICE had been picking up multiple innocent migrants in their raids, calling them “collateral arrests.”

These phony deportations have become a defining action of the early days of the second Trump administration, reinforcing the contempt and disregard that they hold for the basic tenets of our legal system, such as due process. 

Elon Musk couldn’t help but complain about the immense personal cost of being the shadow president during a rally Sunday ahead of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election.

“The radical left are saying somehow we’re stealing Social Security—like, first of all, like [stammers] I don’t need the money, OK?” he said.

Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency has recently arrived at the Social Security Administration, where Musk claims they are seeking to root out alleged fraud. But what Musk claims is waste is more often not, and DOGE’s plans to rewrite the agency’s code could take months and risk collapsing the system on which millions of Americans rely. In any case, Musk was far more worried about his own money.

“In fact, it’s costing me a lot to be in this job,” Musk said. “You had Tim Walz dancing onstage showing a chart on Tesla stock, which is a really awful thing for him to do.”

On his tour of Republican districts, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz had trotted out Tesla’s tanking stock, saying that watching Musk’s value plummet gave him “a little boost” during the day.

Musk seems to have taken Walz’s jab as fighting words, and claimed that people were trying to put “massive pressure” on him and Tesla, in an attempt to get him to stop DOGE. The billionaire bureaucrat added that it was a “big deal” that his Tesla stock “went roughly in half.”

“So, not only is it—I’m not getting paid, I’m definitely not stealing money and would never get away with it, but the value of my Tesla stock is in half! So this is a very expensive job, is what I’m saying,” Musk said.

Musk had previously whined about Walz’s Tesla teasing Thursday night, during an exclusive interview on Fox News, calling the vice presidential former candidate “a big jerk.”

“He was overjoyed,” Musk said. “What an evil thing to do. What a creep, what a jerk. Who derives joy from that?”

Walz responded to Musk’s moaning in a post on X Sunday.

“Elon, I’ll make you a deal. I’ll stop making fun of your stock when you take your hands off social security,” Walz said.

Musk seems increasingly concerned with painting his critics as evil and unsympathetic to his plight as DOGE czar—but wasn’t his problem that everyone was too sensitive these days? Does he actually expect sympathy as he runs around waving a chainsaw and laughing about cutting essential services and putting thousands of people out of work? Who derives joy from that?

The rally Sunday was Musk’s latest attempt to interfere with Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election. The billionaire bureaucrat has already poured millions of dollars behind the conservative candidate, hoping to establish a conservative majority on the court set to decide questions about abortion, voting rights, congressional maps, and his own lawsuit about opening Tesla dealerships in the state. Musk did a so-called million-dollar giveaway at the rally to spokespeople for his petition against activist judges.