Musk Refused To Meet Zelensky, Who Asked Trump for Help Getting Starlink Tech To Guide Deep Strikes Inside Russian Territory

Musk would not even meet him, and Trump would not commit to the idea.

During his US visit for the burial of Senator Lindsay Graham, Kiev regime leader Volodymyr Zelensky attempted to meet billionaire Starlink owner Elon Musk, without success.

Voennoe Delo reported:

“SpaceX chief Elon Musk refused to meet Vladimir Zelensky during the Ukrainian leader’s visit to the United States, The Atlantic reported.

According to the publication, Zelensky had sought talks with the billionaire, but Musk declined the proposed meeting.”

Zelensky’s objective has become clear: he wants access to Starlink technology for missile guidance in strikes deep into Russian territory.

Unable to meet Musk, Zelensky reportedly asked Donald J. Trump to help secure Elon Musk’s permission to use Starlink technology.

Keep reading

Musk’s America PAC Reportedly Plans $120 Million Midterm Blitz, Setting Stage For Renewed Left-Wing War On Elon

The New York Times reports that Elon Musk’s America PAC plans to spend as much as $120 million to help Republicans in November’s midterm elections, signaling that the world’s richest man is preparing to reenter the political game with fewer than 100 days until voters head to the polls.

America PAC’s spending surge will likely spark a coordinated opposition campaign from Democratic groups and left-wing NGOs, ranging from protests and activist pressure to sustained negative press coverage of Musk, as well as attempts to damage his brands, including Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI.

The Democrats’ playbook could resemble their coordinated pressure campaign against Musk when he was involved with DOGE and the dismantling of most of USAID. This sparked street demonstrations by left-wing and far-left activist networks supported by left-wing NGOs, along with an aggressive left-leaning media campaign that sought to make him the public face of the administration’s agenda.

The NYT report is based on “two people briefed on the plans,” and like many stories run by left-leaning corporate media. Musk usually denies the reports on X, but if this report is correct, it says Musk authorized America PAC to build a field operation across at least eight states, targeting Senate races in Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, and Ohio, while considering contests in North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas.

Keep reading

Elon Musk Just Exploded One of the Left’s Favorite Smear Tactics With Some Common Sense

Elon Musk has just dared to shine the light of truth and accuracy upon one of the left’s favorite weapons of propaganda and manipulation.

Whenever mainstream media “journalists” want to make people dislike someone and reject whatever their victim may stand for, they start calling the person they want to destroy “far right.” The idea is to associate the victim with Hitler and fascism without saying anything that could end up being legally actionable, and the leftists have not hesitated to use the label for anyone and anything they don’t like, no matter how far from anything genuinely “far right” their target may be.

One notorious example is the media’s use of “far right” to try to defame everyone who dares to oppose its favorite religion, Islam, and to speak out against jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women. And so the late Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn, who was a gay activist with leftist positions on everything except his refusal to accept the Islamization of the Netherlands and Europe, was “far right.” So is his political heir in the Netherlands, Geert Wilders, whose party’s program aligns with the left on almost everything except its opposition to mass Muslim migration into Europe, and so he, too, is “far right.”

I myself believe in free speech, free enterprise, and free society, and reject racism, fascism, and the like, but when I started writing books about how Islamic jihad is a historic and present-day threat, I, too, became “far right,” and was placed on the blacklists of the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti-Defamation League, and defamed and deplatformed accordingly.

The whole thing has gotten so absurd that in a December 2024 article published in the aftermath of an Islamic jihad attack upon a Christmas market in Germany, the Daily Mail warned: “This Christmas market carnage will make a dangerous situation even uglier – and the Far Right will grow even stronger.” Yeah, that’s the biggest takeaway from a jihad attack that killed six people and injured over 300 others: the “far right” may take advantage.

The idea that anyone at all would have been worrying about the “far right” at that moment demonstrated how avid the establishment media is to divert attention away from Islamic jihad violence. If that required warning about a nonexistent threat and once again smearing people who were simply trying to stand against the prevailing madness, so be it.

Now, however, Elon Musk has had enough. The Hill reported Friday that in a recent interview, The Economist’s Editor-in-Chief Zanny Minton Beddoes claimed that Musk “supports not just the populist right, but the far right — in fact, very fringe parties in some countries.”

Musk took issue with this characterization, saying: “No, I support the normal people. What you call the far right, falsely. Literally, you could go back 10 or 15 years and these policies were completely normal.”

That was perfectly true, but Beddoes is a leftist, and so she took issue with it. She granted that “the center of gravity in this country has shifted, certainly the Democratic Party shifted to the left,” but then continued, “but that’s not what I’m talking about.” Then, says The Hill, “she said she was discussing figures such as Rupert Lowe, a member of the United Kingdom Parliament who leads the far right political party Restore Britain.”

Lowe wants to stop the mass migration into Britain that threatens to make the native people of the island into a minority in their own homeland before the end of this century. And so Musk responded: “It’s just normal people. Here are the principles, and tell me, which of these sound terrible. That we should have secure borders? That we should have safe cities? That we should have sensible spending? Which of those three are far right fringe?”

Keep reading

Meltdown? The Real Reason Why The Media Hates Elon Musk

Some would say that Elon Musk is an enigma; a billionaire entrepreneur with a focus on green tech and environmental impact who used to support Democrat fixtures like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, only to become one of the progressive establishment’s biggest opponents.  What happened?

As Musk readily admits, the progressive movement changed and he did not.  One could argue that the progressive movement didn’t change, it just pulled the mask off and revealed the monstrous face underneath.  Either way, anyone who saw that ugly face during the despotic insanity of the pandemic era and refused to adapt and embrace it was deemed an “enemy of democracy”. 

Musk got a real good look and was clearly repulsed. 

After 2022 when Musk declared his total separation from the Democrats as the “party of division and hate”, the leftist media descended like so many flying monkey’s from a wicked witch’s castle.  The attacks have been relentless.  When Musk made a move to purchase Twitter and fundamentally disrupt the political left’s dominance of the social media landscape, they shrieked with rage and spit venom.  It was glorious.  

In a recent interview with The Economist the venom was on full display, but the tactics of media disinformation agents and provocateurs have become tired, repetitious, tedious.  You could see Musk’s exasperation with the exercise.  He’s heard all these leading questions and biased insinuations a thousand times before. 

Online and Swiss-owned far-left outlet Gizmodo published a hatchet job article covering the interview and described Musk as “melting down” over “normal questions”.  This kind of gaslighting from the left is standard, and the projection is palpable.  Gizmodo’s reaction is the true meltdown; they simply can’t handle the idea of the media being exposed for their dishonesty.   

The most dishonest of people with the most nefarious of intentions often make accusations by disguising them as “questions”.  The front page headline for this very Economist interview was:  “Should You Be Afraid Of Elon Musk?”  

Musk has been directly and indirectly accused of promoting racism, fascism, sexism, and even genocide.  Through DOGE and the much needed shutdown of the corrupt USAID institution, he is now accused of “killing millions” by withholding humanitarian funding. 

Keep reading

Bill Gates IGNORED Repeated Warnings And Met Epstein THIRTY Times

An independent review has confirmed what many long suspected: Bill Gates and senior figures at his foundation met with Jeffrey Epstein roughly 30 times between 2011 and 2014, brushing aside repeated internal warnings about the reputational and ethical risks of associating with a man already convicted of sex crimes involving a minor.

The findings, released by the Gates Foundation after a months-long external examination by the law firm WilmerHale, show that foundation staff “raised on multiple occasions the risks of associating with Epstein because of his prior conviction,” and that those concerns reached senior leadership, including Gates himself. 

Gates was aware of the reputational issues tied to Epstein’s 2008 conviction and sentencing when the conversations began in 2011. Meetings took place on the foundation’s campus and at Epstein’s Manhattan residence. Interactions centered on potential philanthropy ideas that never materialized and ended by December 2014.

The review found no evidence that the foundation paid Epstein, no evidence of knowledge or participation in his sex-trafficking operations, and no evidence the meetings involved illegal conduct. 

Yet the sheer volume of contact, combined with documented staff alarms that went unheeded, underscores a pattern of elite indifference that has defined the Epstein saga from the start.

Keep reading

Wisconsin Board Targets Elon Musk, Says He May Have Violated Election Law by Offering $1 Million Checks to Americans Who Oppose Radical Judges

A Wisconsin board said Elon Musk may have violated an election law by offering $1 million to American who oppose radical judges during the state’s Supreme Court election.

As previously reported, Elon Musk promised to give away $1 million each day until the November 2024 election to those who sign his petition supporting the U.S. Constitution.

At a packed 2024 rally in Pennsylvania, Elon Musk wasted no time in following through on that promise, awarding a $1 million check to John Dreher, one of the attendees.

Elon Musk continued his giveaway in 2025 during Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election.

Musk’s America PAC awarded $1 million checks to three voters who signed a petition to protest the far-left “activist judges” in Wisconsin’s judicial race.

CBS News reported:

The Wisconsin Elections Commission found that billionaire Elon Musk may have violated the state’s election bribery law by offering $1 million checks to voters during a Wisconsin Supreme Court election that Musk’s political action committee spent heavily in.

The commission — which is made up of three Republicans and three Democrats — voted 5-1 last Thursday to refer two complaints filed by voters against Musk to the Brown County District Attorney’s office, commission Communications Director Emilee Miklas told CBS News.

A motion approved by the committee found “probable cause” that Musk violated a state law that makes it a crime to offer a person “anything of value” to induce them to vote.

It is unclear whether Brown County District Attorney David Lasee — the top prosecutor in the county that covers Green Bay — plans to pursue charges.

A Pennsylvania judge previously refused to block Elon Musk’s $1 million daily giveaway with no explanation.

Keep reading

Pollution from Musk’s unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities

Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI has installed 59 natural gas turbines for its Colossus 2 data center project in Tennessee without securing federal clean air permits, according to communications between regulators and xAI representatives.

Potential emissions from the turbines are far beyond the threshold that would require a federal permit, and would be released near predominantly Black communities already estimated to be suffering disproportionately high rates of lung disease, according to a Reuters analysis based on government data and information in the correspondence with regulators.

The findings, which have not been previously reported, reflect how exploding electricity demand from AI data centers is driving companies to build off-grid power plants at a pace outstripping environmental oversight, with potentially big risks to public health.

The number of unpermitted turbines identified by Reuters is about double what xAI has publicly acknowledged. The company previously said it was running 27 unpermitted turbines for Colossus 2 as of January and has argued the permits are not required. At least 57 of the 59 turbines are located in Mississippi, just over the state line from Tennessee where the data center is located.

The xAI turbines are among scores of off-grid power plants for data centers proposed or under construction around the country. Local authorities often fast-track approvals in just weeks or months, without the years of environmental studies and public hearings typically required for such power generation projects that connect to the grid, Reuters has reported.

Keep reading

Zuckerberg to spend over $10B on “historic” Alberta AI data centre investment, sources say

Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, is behind a massive artificial intelligence data centre planned for Sturgeon County, Alberta, Juno News has confirmed.

This is according to several well-placed sources with direct knowledge of the investment, one that all sources agree will be “historic” in magnitude.

The project is expected to involve roughly $13 billion in total investment, though the final figure could still change as it is unclear if the final proposal has been approved and signed off by Mark Zuckerberg and Meta’s board.

Keep reading

Uncovering The ‘Billionaire Coup Against Democracy’

For more than a decade, the International Trade Union Confederation’s (ITUC) Global Rights Index has documented the deterioration of workers’ rights around the world. Each year brings new records for attacks on unions, restrictions on collective bargaining and governments willing to intervene on behalf of employers. 

The ITUC’s 2026 report shows those trends are not slowing: they are accelerating. The report describes what it calls a “billionaire coup against democracy,” arguing that governments are increasingly reshaping labour law to favour corporate power while restricting the ability of workers to organize and strike. 

For Canadian workers, the report arrives at an especially important moment. Just weeks after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered a landmark opinion affirming that the right to strike is protected under international law, the federal government is exploring new ways to limit that same right at home. 

The contradiction is stark. As international institutions reaffirm that striking is a fundamental democratic freedom, governments around the world — including Canada’s — are searching for ways to undermine it. 

Workers’ Rights Are Under Attacks

The ITUC’s report paints a bleak picture. In no part of the world are workers’ rights being adequately protected. 

Violations of the right to strike were documented in 87 per cent of countries surveyed. Eighty per cent of countries restricted collective bargaining. Three-quarters denied or impeded workers’ ability to form or join unions. Half of all countries arrested or detained workers for exercising their rights — a record high. Attacks on freedom of speech and assembly also reached their highest level since the index began. 

These are not isolated abuses occurring only under authoritarian governments. The report argues that democratic governments are increasingly adopting legal restrictions that weaken organized labour while expanding employer power. North America is not immune. 

The United States continues to receive one of the poorest ratings among advanced industrial economies. The Donald Trump administration has accelerated this trend. While union organizing has increased in recent years, and the National Labor Relations Board was more worker-friendly during the Biden era, workers continue to face aggressive anti-union campaigns, widespread employer retaliation, permanent replacement of strikers in many jurisdictions, and weak labour law enforcement.  

Although Canada performs considerably better than the U.S., the report still assigns the country a rating indicating “regular violations of rights.” The ITUC index points to continued government intervention in collective bargaining, restrictions on strikes in federally regulated sectors and recurring use of back-to-work legislation and other interference as evidence that fundamental labour rights remain vulnerable in Canada. 

The pattern extends across Europe as well. 

Although Northern Europe continues to rank among the strongest performers globally when it comes to the protection of workers’ rights, the report notes growing attacks elsewhere on the continent. Governments have imposed emergency restrictions on strikes, weakened collective bargaining institutions and introduced legislation limiting industrial action in sectors deemed economically or politically sensitive. Even countries with long traditions of “social dialogue” have experienced growing pressure to curb workers’ bargaining power. 

The overall picture is one of gradual democratic backsliding. Rather than openly banning unions, many governments are narrowing the circumstances under which workers can effectively exercise their rights. Collective bargaining formally remains legal, and even encouraged, but employers are given far more opportunities to avoid or circumvent it. The right to strike in most cases exists on paper, but governments disregard it whenever workers wield sufficient leverage to disrupt business as usual. 

Keep reading

Billionaire Tech Mogul Peter Thiel Warns Woke AI Company Anthropic Could Rig 2028 Election for Democrats

Billionaire technology Peter Thiel warned that AI company Anthropic could use its technological advantage to influence the 2028 presidential election in favor of Democrats.

Speaking at the Aspen Ideas Festival, Thiel suggested that Anthropic, which he described as a “woke liberal company,” was “winning the AI race” and could use its advanced AI models to “rig the elections in 2028.”

Thiel, who co-founded both PayPal and Palantir, argued he company would be able to “completely outwit” any efforts by Elon Musk to counter it through X because of the power of its technology.

Anthropic has declined to comment, referring reporters to a previous blog post on election integrity and political bias.

The company has clashed with the Trump administration, which has even designated it a “supply chain risk” because of the restrictions it wants to place on military programs.

CEO Dario Amodei is known for his left-wing views and has likened President Trump to a “feudal warlord.”

Keep reading