Trump Does Informercial With Musk Highlighting Tesla
[guest post by Dana]
President Trump does an infomerical for a government advisor, uh, employee, er, “special government employee,” who just happened to have donated $288 million to his campaign:
It was an extraordinary scene at the White House South Lawn Tuesday. President Donald Trump effectively held a combination press conference and live Tesla ad outside the White House, accompanied by the company’s CEO and Department of Government Efficiency Head Elon Musk – all in front of a line of shiny Tesla vehicles.
The scene was all the more remarkable because Tesla shares have been in a sharp slump recently, erasing all their gains since Election Day as Musk’s increasing political profile and moves to slash the federal government have drawn a major backlash and Europe sales decline.
Tesla stock climbed on Tuesday, with Trump saying that he would label any violence against Tesla dealerships as domestic terrorism. As he spoke, Trump was holding what resembled a Tesla showroom pitch with a list of vehicle prices, according to Getty Images. “Teslas can be purchased as low as $299/month or $35k,” the note said.
Musk’s businesses are clearly intertwined with the White House and Donald Trump. Clearly, the President is not concerned with the poor optics. Why should he? He apparently can be as corrupt as he likes, and nothing much will happen.
More:
At the White House Tuesday, Trump said he would buy a Tesla and that he had bought a Cybertruck for his granddaughter.
“I think (Musk has) been treated very unfairly by a very small group of people, and I just want people to know that he can’t be penalized for being a patriot,” Trump said. . .
Trump had posted on Truth Social overnight he was “going to buy a brand new Tesla tomorrow morning as a show of confidence and support for Elon Musk, a truly great American,” calling boycotts against the company illegal.
It’s painful to see today’s Republican Party, under the leadership of a wholly corrupt grifter, in action:
He's an icon, He's a Legend, He is the moment. pic.twitter.com/G5VxwSmqyV
— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) March 11, 2025
—Dana
SMDH.
Dana (8a2d78) — 3/11/2025 @ 3:54 pm“Peace for our time.”
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/11/2025 @ 4:07 pmThe people of America and around the world have a different view. Even faux news can’t hide the people’s direct action against tesla driving musk stock down by half. Just saw meme of tesla dealership offering bullet proof vests and fire extinguishers. This is why businessmen should stay out of politics. Musk says he has no empathy ;but expects empathy in return? News reports of suicides by fired government workers. (DU)
asset (f813de) — 3/11/2025 @ 4:10 pmWrong thread; sorry.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/11/2025 @ 4:14 pmSuch President! So dignity! Very gravitas!
nk (f9124f) — 3/11/2025 @ 6:09 pmI don’t ever want to hear about any president in the future wearing inappropriate garb in the oval office. Oh, is President Fuzzwit dancing nude on the presidential desk in the oval offices? Well at least he isn’t flogging cars on the whitehouse lawn.
Nic (120c94) — 3/11/2025 @ 6:17 pm–Donald J. Trump, Christmas Day 2023
All it takes is a couple hundred million from an EV manufacturer, topped with a $100 million kicker, and Trump is talking like a resurrected Cal “EV” Worthington.
Go see Don!
It’s hard to fathom how pathetic and vulgarian this all is.
Paul Montagu (c1e896) — 3/11/2025 @ 7:09 pmSpeaking of lunacy, who is financing the rockets Elon keeps crashing?
nk (f9124f) — 3/11/2025 @ 7:18 pmThere’s not a lot of overlap between the circle of people who make purchase decisions based on Donald Trump and the circle of people who want to buy an EV.
But Trump tends to take credit for the success of anything around him and I wonder how much will react to Trump claiming that he’s responsible for every Tesla sale from here on out?
Time123 (774743) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:13 amSo, boycotts are now illegal?!?
Roger (5d0bec) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:46 am@10, Anything Maga doesn’t like is or should be illegal.
Boycotts of Tesla? Illegal
Time123 (394b36) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:59 amBoycotts of Chick Fillet? Illegal
Boycotts of Bud Light? Totally recommended.
Boycotts of twitter or the Washington Post? Illegal now, was recommended previously.
@7, I’d forgotten how he defiled Christ’s teachings in his Christmas message…what a depressing man.
Time123 (394b36) — 3/12/2025 @ 6:01 amViolence? I thought it was just a boycott..
What has happened?
BuDuh (0526e3) — 3/12/2025 @ 7:05 amSo long as it’s organic, boycotts are fine. It becomes an issue when laws are broken to coordinate said boycotts.
And, yes, the optics of the President buying a Tesla in the Whitehouse’s front lawn from a mega-donor is simply awful.
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:24 amI don’t see that Trump’s little photo op is going to do much for Tesla sales. I think even Trump knows this. So what’s the play, here?
1. It suggests that Elon isn’t going under the bus just yet.
2. It tells foreign countries not to pick on Elon, or else.
3. It allows Trump to suggest that picking on Tesla dealerships is terrorism (as defined by him), not just arson
4. It makes Elon — who has shown Trump how to destroy government without breaking a sweat — happy. Trump still wants Elon happy.
I still cannot read the future. Some bad things I could not imagine have happened, and some of the predictable bad things have not happened yet. What astonishes me is that nobody seems to care about the very obvious corruption in this administration. They treat appearance of impropriety as an utter joke.
Appalled (d7681e) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:33 amDon Jr should start selling high dollar artwork so we can really find out about very obvious corruption.
BuDuh (0526e3) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:38 amBuDuh:
Don Jr is a better businessman but never got beyond stick figures. There is this, though:
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/donald-trump-jr/
Appalled (f24838) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:47 amAnyone who commits vandalism or violence should be held accountable for it based on law and precedent. Whether it’s putting rude bumber stickers on someone’s car or setting dealership cars on fire. Seems like a pretty obvious stance.
Time123 (0565b0) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:54 am@16 Both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump are corrupt, deeply corrupt. I don’t think either one should be president.
Time123 (0565b0) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:54 amBuduh at 13, some people are boycotting. Some people are burning down Tesla dealerships and charging stations.
There will be an attempt to use the bad behavior the latter to portray everyone engaged in the former as bad actors.
aphrael (0467ba) — 3/12/2025 @ 9:13 amNot another Jan 6th?!? Say it ain’t so!!
BuDuh (0526e3) — 3/12/2025 @ 9:42 am@21, I wasn’t aware that hundreds of tesla protestors had violently attacked the police, seized the US capital in an effort to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, become celebrities within their movement, and were ultimately pardoned by the man they attacked the US government for.
Oh wait, that hasn’t happened and you’re drawing a false equivalence? Nice trolling.
Time123 (b5f585) — 3/12/2025 @ 9:57 amMaybe you can take the quote from aphrael, insert your take on my comment, and see what the actual false equivalency is here.
Please remember to use his exact phrasing as you insert your text.
👍
BuDuh (4214e4) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:08 amWhat’s the equivalency, BuDuh?
I’m saying that the people advocating a boycott are not the same people as the people burning down the dealerships and that conservatives will try to say that they are.
Who are the people you think liberals were saying were the same people as the people who broke into the Capitol?
I know i’ve always been very clear to distinguish between the people who broke into the Capitol, the people who *rhetorically support those people*, and the people who claim the election was stolen.
So what’s the conflation you perceived?
aphrael (dbf41f) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:11 am@24 Not speaking for BuDuh… but, here’s my take.
I’m not seeing much on the conservative sphere making this point.
It’s like the BLM riots. We *know* most protestors aren’t the ones perpetuating the riots and we can make that distinction.
Were you living in a cave during the Biden years?
Did you not follow how most of the J6ers were over-charged? Especially those who simply trespassed?
Yet, you don’t distinguish between those who broken into the Capitol (the rioters and vandals) than the rest who simply trespassed?
Seems to me, the criticism that you’re levying against conservatives trying to link the boycotts, or even the vandals to the violent arson of the dealership…yet, you can’t see the same sort of criticism of the linkage between the violent vs non-violent J6ers?
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:24 amI don’t see that Trump’s little photo op is going to do much for Tesla sales.
I don’t think you understand the power of Trump branding. Sure, a lot of his voters will never buy an EV, but those who are considering it now have The Brand to favor.
If they have any brains [really? -ed] they will head over to the nearest Deep Blue town and snap up the cheap, lightly used ones that bluesters parked out in front to make up for their G-wagons.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:46 amIt is that simple. Nothing to do with Time’s hallucinations.
Nobody wants the wrong group persecuted. Remember everyone coming to the defense of the overwhelming amount of J6 protesters that didn’t engage in violence? Remember vociferously drawing the line that separated them from the actual “bad actors?”
I’m certain it happened that way. Consistency and all…
BuDuh (4214e4) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:49 amDid you not follow how most of the J6ers were over-charged?
The obstructing a proceeding charges were all thrown out due to a SCOTUS ruling. But anyone who watched that event live knew that when they went inside the building, they had crossed a line and it was not going to end well for them.
Yes, trespassing, but there are variations on that and this one was pretty likely to be treated harshly.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:51 amThe ones that beat on cops were treated MUCH more harshly that simple trespassers, once the bogus obstruction charges were removed. And then someone pardoned even those who attempted murder or planned to hang Congressmen.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:54 am@28
Exactly my point Kevin.
SCOTUS stepped in because the government took a novel interpretation of an law.
That’s the “over-charged” part.
I would’ve have had ZERO issues of they applied a robust penalty under the trespassing statute.
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:55 amI have harsh feelings for anyone who firebombs anything. Unless you are in a civil war, and we are not, there is no place for that. Had the J6 trespassers thrown Molotov cocktails into the Senate chamber, Trump would not have pardoned them.
Oh, wait, wasn’t that Obama’s friend who put an actual bomb — that exploded — into the Senate cloakroom and got away with it? I guess I could be wrong about leftists and firebombs.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:57 amSCOTUS stepped in because the government took a novel interpretation of an law.
That’s the “over-charged” part.
And that is why we have appellate courts, so that hanging judges can’t actually hang people.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:58 amWhy should we? Trump didn’t.
Time123 (394b36) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:04 amThe obstructing a proceeding charges were all thrown out due to a SCOTUS ruling. But anyone who watched that event live knew that when they went inside the building, they had crossed a line and it was not going to end well for them.
Yes, trespassing, but there are variations on that and this one was pretty likely to be treated harshly.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 10:51 am
I think the DOJ was looking from something worse then Trespassing but less then insurrection that didn’t have criminal element pertaining to motive to complicate the trial. But it’s a suspicion I can’t prove.
Time123 (394b36) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:08 amSo you aspire to be more like Trump, Time?
Nice moral high ground you have there.
BuDuh (4214e4) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:09 amQuestion: Why did judges allow prosecutors to use that financial crimes law against political protestors? Why did the news media threat them as normal, could-happen-to-anyone, charges? Justice Roberts’ opinion is scathing regarding the overreach involved.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:11 amBduh, that’s a good point. I should continue to differentiate between he peaceful protestors who just came there to support trump, the terrorists that attacked the US capital, and the terrorist sympathizers who encouraged them
Just because Trump considers them to be all the one group doesn’t mean I should
Time123 (394b36) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:16 am@33
Is that the rule?
Are you sure you WANT this rule?
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:17 am@34
Any DOJ official who thinks like that needs to find another job.
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:18 am@38, I already corrected my statement.
Time123 (394b36) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:20 amTrump can label the fire bombings of Tesla dealerships any way he wants, but there is no crime of “domestic terrorism.” The FBI has a definition; but there is nothing in the federal criminal code that punishes “domestic terrorism.”
Source
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:31 amYou are so close to apologizing for misrepresenting my 9:42am and calling me a troll.
How about it? You will feel better.
BuDuh (4214e4) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:32 am@36
Answer: Judges and Prosecutors are human, and are subjected to partisan pressures no matter how much they try to avoid.
Justice Robert’s lamentations that “there are no Republican Judges or no Democrat Judges” unfortunately runs hollow.
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:35 amLiberals Defeat Nazis By Painting Swastikas Everywhere And Torching Immigrant Businesses
BuDuh (4214e4) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:45 amTrump can label the fire bombings of Tesla dealerships any way he wants, but there is no crime of “domestic terrorism.”
I did not know that Trump had coined the term “domestic terrorism.” Thanks for the update Rip.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:46 amTorching Immigrant Businesses
Can you imagine if Musk was Jewish?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 11:48 amHe didn’t, but Trump (and his spokesman) implied that by labeling the arsonists as “domestic terrorists” would somehow impose higher penalties, when it won’t.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/12/2025 @ 12:29 pmI think that the term “domestic terrorism” is a DOJ investigative category. It distinguishes it from the more usual “international terrorism” and means they see no foreign connections or sponsor.
Which could seem to make Trump wrong when he says that the Tesla attackers are the same people involved with the protests at universities and colleges.
Except that they might be, in part, the same people. (Trump might actually be relying on actual facts here) They would probably affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America or something of that sort.
They do things on their own, for their own political reasons, (building loyalty through involvement in activity) and they also maybe got paid or got recruited by actual foreign agents. Being against Israel has become the most important position of the DSA – it’s no more economics.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/12/2025 @ 1:53 pmBuddy, If you were serious and not trolling then your comment ignored a number of important differences between the two events that justify a somewhat substantial difference in treatement.
Time123 (394b36) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:05 pmWhat project? The name itself could be a tell. This story is playing it light.
It’s apparently not an allegation but a simple fact, which Yale was oblivious to (the fact that the group had come under sanctions in October.)
She was a
The PFLP was originally a Soviet Communist organization founded about 1970. It is now, or was recently, split into two groups, one based in Syria. This one is based in Gaza and the West Bank, mostly Gaza and it is almost defunct.
https://www.dni.gov/nctc/ftos/pflp_fto.html As of July 2022, the PFLP, along with HAMAS and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, were taking steps to create a National Liberation Front in an attempt to address “internal divisions” and to cooperate with and to rebuild the PLO.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:12 pmI don’t understand why anyone who is not a good friend or close relative of a Trump supporter would want to discourage that Trump supporter from buying a Tesla.
“You can’t cheat an honest man. Never give a sucker an even break or smarten up a chump.”
nk (aed895) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:14 pmWhembly – no, I don’t want this rule.
But the alternative is unilateral surrender to abuse.
aphrael (0467ba) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:14 pmWhat percentage of trump supporters, at the Capitol that day, did not break any laws whatsoever compared to the ones who trespassed as well as the ones who committed violence?
BuDuh (4214e4) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:18 pmwhembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:24 am
Well, they say Biden, way before the election, held an event that featured practically every electric car maker but Tesla, presumably because Elon Musk is anti-union and the UAW doesn’t like him. (Musk apparently argued that Trump should make it up to him)
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/05/business/tesla-snub-white-house-event/index.html
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:23 pmnk (aed895) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:14 pm
They want to discourage anti-Trump people from buying Teslas.
It makes them feel they are doing something.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:30 pmAt what point does the driver of the getaway car at a bank robbery become liable for the shooting of the bank guard inside the bank even though he himself never left the car? In Texas, they are executed along with the shooter.
When the J6 rioters who “merely trespassed” entered the Capitol alongside the violent ones, they joined the same criminal enterprise and became jointly and severally liable for the criminal acts of all the members of that enterprise, subject only to prosecutorial discretion and the sense and judgment of the jury.
nk (aed895) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:50 pm@55 @56 Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:30 pm
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:53 pmThose are awful optics too.
Now let’s go one step back. At what point does the planner and mastermind of the bank robbery who was miles away at the hideout when the robbery and murder occurred become similarly liable for the murder of the bank guard?
There were five counts in the indictment which the Supreme Court addressed in the Trump impunity decision.
The fifth count involved Trump’s speech on the Ellipse. The Supreme Court, in so many words, left that question open whether it was protected as a Presidential act.
If you think the very broad language in Trump’s J6 blanket pardon was for the benefit of the rioters, think again. He wanted to make sure that he was covered too. You could even say that it was really a self-pardon disguised as a blanket pardon.
nk (aed895) — 3/12/2025 @ 2:58 pmI saw an interesting theory just now that the reason Trump is getting involved is that the collapse of Tesla’s share price is undercutting the value of the collateral used to secure the loans that Musk obtained when he bought Twitter, raising a risk that Twitter could get repo’d (or that Musk could be forced to repay the loans or generate new collateral on the spot)
aphrael (dbf41f) — 3/12/2025 @ 3:12 pm“You can’t cheat an honest man. Never give a sucker an even break or smarten up a chump.”
So, the best-selling domestic EV is a fraud? It has over half the market share. Or did. I remember not too long ago when Musk and Tesla were the leaders of the future. Biden didn’t like him though, because he didn’t let the UAW in, and snubbed him in public.
There must be some kind of classical tragedy in the making here.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:59 pmI saw an interesting theory just now
Sorry you are wasting time on that. Musk’s wealth comes from many places. When Space X goes public he will be a trillionaire.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:01 pmYou could even say that it was really a self-pardon disguised as a blanket pardon.
I have said that a pardon should, at minimum, state the crimes being pardoned. (Biden’s blanket pardons covered any acts from one date to the next. If Hunter murdered a Congressman it would be covered.) Trump was more specific, limiting it to acts involved in the events of J6, but you could be right.
However, his argument would have to go like this: to have the pardon cover him, then his exhortation would have to have been in support of the Insurrection. Would Trump allow his lawyers to argue this?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:08 pmThey want to discourage anti-Trump people from buying Teslas.
The owners of Tesla, at least before 6 months ago, highly correlated with anti-Trump people. They bought those cars as a political statement: “See, I’m Green, never mind my Maserati.”
Now, however, they hope the catch fire. They are a glut on the used market in Blueville. It is not possible to make more anti-Trump people shun Teslas than do now.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:13 pmLOL!
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:35 pm>They bought those cars as a political statement: “See, I’m Green, never mind my Maserati.”
That’s incredibly reductionist of you.
One of my housemates, a physicians’ assistant, bought a Tesla because she had a two hour a day each way commute which she could reduce to one hour each way if she bought a zero emissions vehicle (thereby getting access to the HoT/ZEV lane) and at the time Tesla was the best electric vehicle on the market.
She didn’t buy it as a political statement, and she owns no other vehicle. Nor could she afford a Maserati.
aphrael (dbf41f) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:40 pmPersonally, i’ve detested Musk ever since he responded to someone *other than him* successfully rescuing a kids’ soccer team who were trapped in a cave … by publically slandering the rescuer as a pedophile.
He’s a trash human being.
aphrael (dbf41f) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:41 pmWhy did this happen? It’s Joe Biden’s fault.
NYT: Why the White House Car Show Mattered to Musk
So, as tasteless as this might seem, Joe Biden did the same damn thing in 2021, but did not include anyone but the “Big Three” as they were once known. It’s probably how he thinks still. No Tesla, no Rivian, no Japanese, Korean or European EVs.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 9:28 pmHe’s a trash human being.
This seems more of a recent thing with most on the Left. It’s why they hide all the Teslas they used to showcase.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 9:30 pmThat’s incredibly reductionist of you.
No, it’s an observation. For people who were looking for an EV to save money, Tesla was at the bottom of most lists. Nissan and Chevy had much lower cost, and there were some excellent hybrids by 2021. I think you could get 3 Chevy Bolts or Nissan Leafs in 2021 for the price of a Tesla S.
Until Tesla came out with the 3-series they were all out of most people’s reach.
The S was utterly ubiquitous in West LA and Santa Monica, and those folks did not look at the price tag or much care about its utility when they bought it. It was a statement. I saw it over and over with my own two eyes.
That you can come up with a counterexample, well fine. But all those folks who bought a Tesla for show are trying to dump them now. WRONG statement these days.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 9:43 pmCommon theme is that he invited companies that use Union Workers to manufacture their vehicles….
clear tactical miss. Had Biden focused more on aligning with the super rich, and not the union workers that assemble the vehicles the Democrats might have won.
Time123 (bc0a3c) — 3/13/2025 @ 7:06 am