Ozzy Osbourne said:

---

"Some of" my posts.

---

he shouldn't regret them all. Contrary to the Maga die-hards, it's OK to disagree with Trump on things.

Dude should have just apologized in clear terms straight up with "I am sorry, President Trump" or "I apologize to Trump". Why use sideways language like "I regret some posts"? It is not the same. He is trying to save face.

Trump never forgets. He may not attack Elon but he is out of his circle and the trust is gone. Elon is done.

GreasenUSA said:

---

TyHolden said:

---

Deleted tweet from earlier

---

It's not been deleted. Good for him. He did go too far.

---

Yes. It's there.

I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2025

infinity ag said:

---

Dude should have just apologized in clear terms straight up with "I am sorry, President Trump" or "I apologize to Trump". Why use sideways language like "I regret some posts"? It is not the same. He is trying to save face.

Trump never forgets. He may not attack Elon but he is out of his circle and the trust is gone. Elon is done.

---

Well, he may not regret his posts that said the BBB was a budget buster. I saw nothing wrong with it. It's a legit sentiment. I don't agree with killing it now; but I get why someone would call out all the bull**** in the bill. The other stuff, sure, he should regret it.

japantiger said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Dude should have just apologized in clear terms straight up with "I am sorry, President Trump" or "I apologize to Trump". Why use sideways language like "I regret some posts"? It is not the same. He is trying to save face.

Trump never forgets. He may not attack Elon but he is out of his circle and the trust is gone. Elon is done.

---

Well, he may not regret his posts that said the BBB was a budget buster. I saw nothing wrong with it. It's a legit sentiment. I don't agree with killing it now; but I get why someone would call out all the bull**** in the bill. The other stuff, sure, he should regret it.

---

In that case he needs to be clear about what he regrets and what he does not. And apologize for the stuff he said like the Epstein stuff.

jt16 said:

---

Ozzy Osbourne said:

---

"Some of" my posts.

---

he shouldn't regret them all. Contrary to the Maga die-hards, it's OK to disagree with Trump on things.

---

Sounds like you aren't aware of what was posted. It wasn't just disagreements.

infinity ag said:

---

Dude should have just apologized in clear terms straight up with "I am sorry, President Trump" or "I apologize to Trump". Why use sideways language like "I regret some posts"? It is not the same. He is trying to save face.

Trump never forgets. He may not attack Elon but he is out of his circle and the trust is gone. Elon is done.

---

A week ago you said Trump was going to destroy Elon for his comments, now it's just he's out of the circle. Do some analysis for us, what benefit exactly did Elon get from being "in the circle?" So far it has been heavily weighted to the negative.

infinity ag said:

---

GreasenUSA said:

---

TyHolden said:

---

Deleted tweet from earlier

---

It's not been deleted. Good for him. He did go too far.

---

Yes. It's there.

I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2025

---

Yes it's been said several times now. It didn't pop up for me after posting it here. No idea /tommyboy

TyHolden said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

GreasenUSA said:

---

TyHolden said:

---

Deleted tweet from earlier

---

It's not been deleted. Good for him. He did go too far.

---

Yes. It's there.

I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2025

---

Yes it's been said several times now. It didn't pop up for me after posting it here. No idea /tommyboy

---

Dude has a child-like tantrum and then apologizes on social media. What a hero!

Ags2013 said:

---

TyHolden said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

GreasenUSA said:

---

TyHolden said:

---

Deleted tweet from earlier

---

It's not been deleted. Good for him. He did go too far.

---

Yes. It's there.

I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2025

---

Yes it's been said several times now. It didn't pop up for me after posting it here. No idea /tommyboy

---

Dude has a child-like tantrum and then apologizes on social media. What a hero!

---

Back in the day Elon would have been called a duck with a capital c. Good thing he's loved now by those same people.

I am shocked that the first public exchange between President Trump and Elon Musk was not "I know you are but what am I?"

Trump says he's open to reconciling with Elon Musk over 'big, beautiful bill' feud

Quote:

---

President Donald Trump says in a new podcast interview that he is open to reconciling with Elon Musk over their falling out due to Trump's "big, beautiful bill."

"Look, I have no hard feelings," Trump said during an interview on "Pod Force One with Miranda Devine" that was published Wednesday. "I was really surprised that that happened. He went after a bill that's phenomenal. He just I think he feels very badly that he said that, actually."

---

Trump seems to have some compassion for those suffering from mental illnesses.

Don't forget, he used to be a Democrat so he is certainly familiar with the deranged.

Pragmatism not compassion. Musk still represents value to Trump.

hph6203 said:

---

Pragmatism not compassion. Musk still represents value to Trump.

---

Strongly disagree. Trump is a compassionate person and there are volumes of anecdotes confirming this.

Trump can also be a world class *******. But to just default to "he only uses people then discards" is a convenient attack, but it is not accurate.

Let’s gooooo 🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/g0Xcf2Slh6

— Not Jerome Powell (@alifarhat79) June 11, 2025

That's not what I said. I said the reason for Trump not going hard at Elon after Elon's comments is not compassion, it is pragmatism. That does not mean he doesn't have compassion for people broadly, but with respect to Elon it is that it is not beneficial to get into a prolonged spat with someone with as much money/business influence as Elon. That is not "using" people. That is just understanding when and where it's appropriate to be aggressive.

Elon is not a down on his luck drug addict on the street, or a person that had their life devastated by a natural disaster. He's an emotional person that popped off, but is also probabilistically going to be the world's first trillionaire with significant influence over global communications, transportation, and access to space. He doesn't need compassion, but it doesn't serve Trump to make that guy a perpetual enemy either.

It is not a critique. It is a compliment.

hph6203 said:

---

Pragmatism not compassion. Musk still represents value to Trump.

---

This is what it is.
Trump sees no value in kicking out Elon publicly. He may move over to the Dem side. But he will make peace but will never trust him again.

Understand where you are coming from, just disagree. My read of Trump's comments in the days after the spat seemed to recognize the "episode" Musk had and he let it settle down and for Musk to regain his wits.

I also agree Trump is not going to want the bridge to stay burned and was likely sternly advised to not go down the tit for tat hole.

I just do not think overall Trump cooled his jets to be pragmatic. I believe compassion played a meaningful part.

What a circus between these two.

My evolution on this:

Initially when this story broke, I was about 98% on Elon's corner and really upset with Trump.

Then Elon tweeted the Epstein thing, people pointed out this is virtually impossible (Dems would've leaked it long ago), and I started to cool on Elon.

Along with that, I read some articles that contradicted some of the arguments against the BBB, and at this point I have no idea if it's good or bad, and pretty sure I'd need to do my own due diligence.

I still hate Trump's 180 on the debt ceiling, what a horrible idea, but I've gotta think there's enough Republicans in Congress to prevent that from ever happening.

Not to mention, I love most of everything else Trump is doing, so is this debt ceiling thing (which will never happen) the hill I'm going to die on when it comes to Trump?

tldr; I'm glad they're reconciling and still like most of what Trump is doing, and the debt ceiling is a non-issue assuming there's a snowball's chance in hell of it getting removed.

jt16 said:

---

..... it's OK to disagree with Trump on things.

---

Hell fkn yeah it is.

dustin999 said:

---

Then Elon tweeted the Epstein thing, people pointed out this is virtually impossible (Dems would've leaked it long ago), and I started to cool on Elon.

---

Not saying Trump is in the Epstein files doing anything nefarious, but this is flawed logic. Epstein was, with high probability, engaging in an intelligence operation designed to implicated LOTS of power and influential people with illegal activity. Meaning that if you want to take down Trump, then the entirety of the thing is going to unravel. If Trump is implicated as having slept with an of age prostitute 20 years ago, and Nancy Pelosi's husband is implicated as abusing pre-pubescent boys along with dozens of other Dem donors/influential people do you think the juice is worth the squeeze on stopping Trump, or do you think they'd prefer to make up other lies/distort the truth to try to smear him?


Trump without question had a relationship with Epstein. The full nature of it is not definitively known until those files are actually made public. Know who else is implicated to some degree with Epstein? Elon Musk. He and his ex-wife spent time at Epstein's Manhattan apartment when they were still together, and his brother was reportedly introduced to an ex-girlfriend by Epstein.



If Epstein were poo on a hand and every interaction he had with a person of power was a handshake there would be an E-coli outbreak like you wouldn't believe.

For sure, and I considered that likelihood. I think it's certainly possible. But I also think that's less likely. We've already had names leaked, like the member of the English royal family, Bill Gates, etc. They could've easily done the same with Trump.

Also, this is the same thing they said about the apprentice, rumors that he used the N word on the set. Nothing ever came out, which leads me to believe they have nothing.

Who knows, but I don't think Elon necessarily had any real inside knowledge on this either.

I tend to believe Trump didn't go to Pedoph Isle and certainly give him the benefit of the doubt.

Those individuals, with the exception of Prince Andrew, are no more implicated with their connections to Epstein than Trump. They road on his plane. They met socially with him. They get tagged as presumed participants in the sex trafficking, because it is copacetic to say Bill Gates or Bill Clinton or Reid Hoffman etc are sexual predators, but not Trump.

I'm not saying Trump is guilty, but until they do a full disclosure of what they found at his residences I'll have some level of skepticism that he, Musk, any of them with any connection to Epstein are entirely clean. When Trump is asked "Will you disclose the 9/11 files?" "Yes." "Will you disclose the JFK files?" "Yes." Will you disclose the Epstein files." "Yeah, yeah I think I would. I think with that one less so, because you don't want to affect people's lives if there's phony stuff in there and there's a lot of phony stuff with that whole world."

When you have Pam Bondi saying there's 1000's of hours of video showing abuse from Epstein individuals, and then months later you have Kash Patel saying there's no definitive video showing anyone doing anything illegal your skepticism about whether or not you're ever going to see information about it released goes up, and the question becomes why not?

For the record I don't have an opinion. If he really did something, why isn't there more smoke? Prince Edward has basically been found guilty in the court of public opinion but not Trump. Why not?

It just seems like the left isn't at all focused on this. Why? Why didn't Kamala harp on the Epstein connection constantly? Is it really to protect others?

This just doesn't pass the smell test, but I'm 100% open to the idea if something substantial comes out.

Elon is with Trump tonight....

President Trump and Elon Musk are together again.

❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️ pic.twitter.com/bbOUiNklFC

— Mila Joy (@MilaLovesJoe) June 14, 2025

Good stuff. And great timing.

Tom Fox said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

The will of the people isnt the same thing as populism though

---

It's the will of the common people vs a perceived ruling, elitist class.

So… we can split hairs. But populism =/= middle class.

And it's sort of a basic principle of America. "We the people" and such.

---

The founders would never support taking from one group of taxpayers to support another group's individual needs and the taker's group are the ones largely voting for that theft to happen. People would be getting shot over that bs in the late 1700s America.

That is a basic principle of our founding, rugged individualism. Not many state socialism.

---

The Constitution itself, in Article I, Section 8, grants Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes…to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." Alexander Hamilton advocated for federal investments in infrastructure and industry, and laying the groundwork for future social spending.

Jefferson and others leaned more toward local control and smaller government, but even Jefferson supported public education and a degree of government responsibility to the poor. So it wasn't all "rugged individualism" and zero collective responsibility.

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

The will of the people isnt the same thing as populism though

---

It's the will of the common people vs a perceived ruling, elitist class.

So… we can split hairs. But populism =/= middle class.

And it's sort of a basic principle of America. "We the people" and such.

---

The founders would never support taking from one group of taxpayers to support another group's individual needs and the taker's group are the ones largely voting for that theft to happen. People would be getting shot over that bs in the late 1700s America.

That is a basic principle of our founding, rugged individualism. Not many state socialism.

---

The Constitution itself, in Article I, Section 8, grants Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes…to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." Alexander Hamilton advocated for federal investments in infrastructure and industry, and laying the groundwork for future social spending.

Jefferson and others leaned more toward local control and smaller government, but even Jefferson supported public education and a degree of government responsibility to the poor. So it wasn't all "rugged individualism" and zero collective responsibility.

---

That is not feeding, housing, providing health insurance, or cash payments.

The founders would never go for that. Of course they supported infrastructure, the military, diplomacy and the like.

There is a reason the first interation was for a much weaker central government.

2/3 of our spending is on entitlements and those without skin in it get to vote for it.

They would be shooting people already if someone was taking 30+% of their income and half the people voting for it pay net zero.