CLICK THE ARROW ABOVE TO LISTEN TO TOMZ'S ADVICE FOR ELON!
Elon Musk vows to defeat politicians who back Trump's megabill 'if it is the last thing I do'
We the People can NEVER have Representative Government Until we can VOTE OUT OF OFFICE those in Congress who betray us and do not represent the Will of the People. Today that is NOT possible and those voting on the BBB know it! That is why they are not cutting ANYTHING and protecting their Donors and Special Interests and denying the Will of the People!
by Bryan Metzger, Business Insider.com, July 1, 2025- Elon Musk is threatening to defeat politicians who vote for Trump's megabill.
- "They will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth," he wrote.
- Musk previously said he would scale back his political spending.
Musk, who previously said he would scale back his political spending, could theoretically use his immense wealth to fund primary challengers in districts across the country.
ELON MUSK:
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) June 30, 2025
“If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day.”
Elon Musk is calling for a new party to challenge BOTH Democrats and Republicans pic.twitter.com/ESYTKdtpoF
A spokesman for America PAC, the tech titan's main super PAC, declined to comment. Musk routed roughly $240 million through the PAC last year, the vast majority of it in support of Trump's presidential bid.
READ: 62% of Americans Favor a Third Party!
Musk also revived his call for a new political party, writing in an earlier post that because the bill increases the debt ceiling, "we live in a one-party country — the PORKY PIG PARTY!!"
Since his public feud with Trump earlier this month, Musk has been relatively quiet on the bill. That changed over the weekend, when Musk called the bill "utterly insane" in a post on X.
READ: We the People Convention Sends Letter (2021) Asking Trump to Destroy Both Corrupt Political Parties!
The tech titan has opposed the bill, saying it would add trillions of dollars to the deficit and eliminate federal subsidies for renewable energy projects.
Musk's missive on Monday — issued just hours before the Senate was set to vote on final passage of the bill — was his starkest political threat yet against Republicans who support it.
Would it Not be Better to Fund Grassroots Candidates to Primary Republicans?
How about Funding Independent Candidates to run against Republicans and Democrats?
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE NEWS AT THE BUSINESS INSIDER.COM
The Cynical Talk About a ‘Constitutional Crisis’
The problem is not with the Constitution - It's We the People!
by Mark Hendrickson, The American Spectator, July 5, 2025
Since Donald Trump resumed the presidency in January, there has been a lot of talk about his bold, aggressive actions creating a constitutional crisis. Alas, those complaints ring hollow. They are decades too late, and most of those jabbering about such a crisis have themselves been chronic mutilators of the very Constitution they now suddenly pretend to care about.
Let me be frank: I am a constitutional pessimist. Don’t get me wrong — I hold our Constitution in the highest regard; I revere it. It embodies the pinnacle of wisdom and enlightenment in a governing document. Nobody should blame the Constitution for our pathetic predicament of having a federal government that is $37 trillion in debt and leaders who can’t agree on an off-ramp for this fiscal insanity.
For generations, too many Americans have lacked the moral integrity to honor the Constitution and abide by the limits on governmental mischief that it imposes.
The fault is with “we the people,” not our Constitution. For generations, too many Americans have lacked the moral integrity to honor the Constitution and abide by the limits on governmental mischief that it imposes. The Constitution, as noble as it is, is not self-enforcing. It is simply a codification of principles and guidelines that are only as effective as American voters and politicians allow them to be.
Years ago, I wrote that the Constitution had become more or less a dead letter due to the insidious notion that it is “a living, breathing document” that can accommodate every whim of avaricious special interests and craven politicians willing to sell themselves to the highest bidders.
Among other evidence of the demise of the Constitution, I cited our acceptance of unconstitutional money; our rejection of the Tenth Amendment that was intended to keep the scope of government activity strictly limited; and the perversion of the “general welfare” clause, inverting its meaning from forbidding special interest politics to enshrining special interest politics as the new progressive modus operandi.
Another problematic clause in the Constitution has been the commerce clause. One of the rationalizations that progressive Supreme Court justices used to justify Obamacare was that if a person does NOT buy a product, that affects interstate commerce. Translation: under this creative interpretation of the Constitution, everything is interstate commerce, and there is no limit to the federal government’s reach.
Today, the Constitution is a hollowed-out husk. We honor it more in form than substance. The letter of the Constitution lingers — for example, we still elect a president every four years and members of Congress every two or six years. But the spirit, the soul, of the Constitution is long gone.
One of our last constitutionally faithful presidents, Grover Cleveland, in a veto message, stated a great truth — a central pillar of our original constitutional order — when he wrote, “Though the people support the Government, the Government should not support the people.” Our Constitution was intended to protect the property rights of all citizens equally, without favor to the rich or the poor. Far from protecting the sacred right of property, today’s version of government systematically nullifies property rights, blithely taking property from some and giving it to others (in exchange for their votes and campaign contributions, of course). The everyday activity of the federal government is something that would be categorized as the crime of theft if practiced by private citizens.
And now today we have people howling about an alleged constitutional crisis when Team Trump tries to claw back even the most egregious, nauseating examples of special interest profligacy. How ludicrous!
If the Constitution had been consistently upheld over the decades, the spending some now want to cut never would have been allowed because such spending lies outside the short list of the constitutionally enumerated powers of the federal government. Indeed, if earlier generations of Americans had heeded the Constitution, there would be no Department of Agriculture, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, etc., etc.
The Constitution does not say that a president can only expand the government’s scope, but not reduce it.
Those who assert that it is unconstitutional for the president to cut spending have a blatant double standard: Why is it constitutional for a chief executive (like Biden) to order bureaucrats to take positive actions and issue more economic directives, but unconstitutional for another chief executive (at present, Trump) to order bureaucrats to cease and desist from actions that are wasteful or serve as a partisan piggybank? The Constitution does not say that a president can only expand the government’s scope, but not reduce it.
This isn’t to imply that Trump is a great defender of the Constitution. For example, he totally defies the constitutional provision that setting the terms of international trade is the prerogative of Congress by threatening to massively discombobulate the global division of labor and myriad supply chains by unilaterally threatening to impose whatever tariff strikes his fancy on a particular day.
While I understand that Trump feels he needs to act quickly and aggressively to succeed in shrinking even a small portion of the federal leviathan — a goal that I endorse — I worry that Trump may end up centralizing even more power in the presidency. Elements on the left today accuse Trump of being a wannabe dictator. As is so often the case with progressives, they project their own inner desires on their opponents.
The real threat will be after Trump leaves office and a progressive ideologue occupies the White House. Picture the national debt finally triggering a financial cataclysm that shakes our republic to the core and precipitates an unprecedented national emergency. That would provide the expedient pretext for a progressive president to wield the newly expanded powers of the presidency in truly dictatorial ways. At that point, everyone will finally realize that our long-moribund Constitution is a dead letter and that the American experiment in freedom is over.
I desperately hope that my analysis is wrong. Unless, however, there is a nationwide awakening — a constitutional revival — we Americans are going to have to go through some drastic post-constitutional upheavals.
