Elon Musk Wins Exception to Black Ownership Rule in South Africa

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa plans to grant billionaire Elon Musk a deal with his Starlink internet network in an effort to smooth over their rocky relationship before Ramaphosa meets with Trump and friends on Wednesday. 

Ramaphosa is circumventing the country’s Black Economic Empowerment laws to bring Musk’s Starlink to rural regions, according to Bloomberg, which first reported the news. Musk has lumped the BEE initiative in with his false narrative of white genocide in South Africa, stating that “Starlink is not allowed to operate in South Africa, because I’m not black.” 

Even Musk’s own Grok AI took issue with this claim, writing in March that “Elon Musk’s claim about race based restrictions lacks evidence; the issue is regulatory compliance, not racial discrimination. Similar challenges have delayed Starlink in other African Countries like Cameroon.” This was before Musk forced Grok to reply to everything with claims that there is a white genocide happening in South Africa.

This deal comes before what is expected to be a tense meeting, as Ramaphosa has vehemently denied Trump’s claims of “white genocide,” which caused the administration to bring in 59 Afrikaner “refugees” to the U.S. this month. He may also challenge the Trump administration on its support for Israel’s actual genocide. “[It is] laughable that you can use the genocide word on South Africa, while on the other hand you’re looking the other way where the actual genocide is being committed,” a spokesman for Ramaphosa told The New York Times on Monday.   

Only time will tell if this Starlink deal—made on the tail end of another successful deal-making trip for Trump and Musk in the Middle East—will be enough to soften the blow. 

First there were “concepts of a plan,” then there were tariff trade “subdeals,” and now, per National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, there are trade deals “in principle.”

The Trump administration is running out of time on its self-imposed 90-day deadline to craft 90 trade agreements in the wake of Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff pitch. By mid-April, the administration claimed it had more than a dozen potential deals in the works with nations eager to sort out their trade arrangements with the United States. But since then, the White House has had practically nothing positive to show for its drastic economic overhaul.

“You told us even before ‘Liberation Day’ that you had 15 countries that were on the brink of making a deal. It’s been nearly two months and you’ve had one deal, so what is the holdup?” asked a reporter.

“There’ve been a whole bunch of deals,” Hassett laughed.

“I’m sorry, with what country?” the reporter pressed.

“So you don’t think the deal with China counts as a deal? The deal with the U.K.? We’ve got an agreement in principle with India,” Hassett said.

“Everybody—you could talk to Jamison Greer, Scott Bessent, Howard Lutnick—everybody has seen awesome deals that are on the table,” Hassett continued, shrugging, as he referred to the U.S. trade representative, the treasury secretary, and the commerce secretary, respectively. “Last week we were in the Middle East cutting trillions of dollars in deals with our Middle Eastern friends.… Now we’re closing the trade deals because the president is back in the country.”

Meanwhile, “governments from Seoul to Brussels” have taken notice of China’s turtle-pace winning strategy against Trump’s punishing tariffs and are seemingly deciding to slow down their own trade negotiations with U.S. officials, Bloomberg reported Sunday.

“This shifts the negotiating dynamic,” Stephen Olson, a former U.S. trade negotiator, told Bloomberg. “Many countries will look at the outcome of the Geneva negotiations and conclude that Trump has begun to realize that he has overplayed his hand.”

Some of those nations could be banking on the fact that the U.S. will be the first to feel the sting of Trump’s tariffs, forcing a policy change from within, before they have to show their own hands.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy sold potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars of stock just days before Donald Trump’s sweeping reciprocal tariffs went into effect, ProPublica reported Monday.

Duffy sold between $75,000 and $600,000 of stock on February 11, just two days beforeTrump first announced that he had instructed his trade advisers and federal agencies to examine imposing “reciprocal tariffs” on a “country-by-country” basis. Duffy sold $50,000 more the day of the announcement.

Duffy sold stock in 34 different companies, several of which were part of an ethics agreement he’d made to sell stocks where he might have a conflict of interest, according to disclosure records he filed with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics. Other companies he sold stock in include some that are projected to take hits as a result of Trump’s tariffs, such as Shopify and John Deere, which is expected to have a whopping $500 million in new costs as a result of Trump’s trade policy. Duffy also sold stocks in companies that are unlikely to be directly affected by the tariffs.

A Transportation Department spokesperson told ProPublica that Duffy “had no input on the timing of the sales” and that his transactions were “part of a retirement account and not managed directly by the Secretary.”

“The Secretary strongly supports the President’s tariff policy, but he isn’t part of the administration’s decisions on tariff levels,” the spokesperson said.

While it’s certainly not clear that Duffy was privy to discussions about Trump’s tariff announcement before it was made, he has credited himself for laying the groundwork for the transformative (i.e., destructive) trade policy through his work on a piece of failed legislation called the U.S. Reciprocal Trade Act during his time in Congress. Duffy has said that Trump’s current policy is the “cumulation” of the work he did on that bill.

Duffy isn’t the only Cabinet member to dump stock at a suspiciously convenient time. Attorney General Pam Bondi sold between $1 million and $5 million of her share in Trump Media on April 2, the same day the president’s “Liberation Day” tariff war announcement broke the stock market, according to reporting from ProPublica. Trump Media stocks specifically fell 13 percent that day.

More than two dozen people were killed by tornadoes across Missouri, Kentucky, and Virginia over the weekend—but come Monday, the White House and the executive agency responsible for the emergency response to natural disasters had not publicly addressed it.

St. Louis Mayor Cara Spencer told MSNBC Monday that the Federal Emergency Management Agency was “not on the ground” and that the area did “not have confirmed assistance” from FEMA, forcing local organizations such as the St. Louis Community Foundation to turn to crowdfunding to rebuild their community.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump made an appearance at the Rose Garden Monday afternoon, offering brief remarks during a bill signing focused on curbing revenge porn. Trump’s comments made mention of his wife, Melania Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin, a potential peace deal in Ukraine, and Texas Senator Ted Cruz but notably did not address the storm system that killed 28 people across three states (two of which voted for him in November).

And FEMA announced Monday that there was less than a week left to apply for federal aid for homeowners in Kentucky who had their properties damaged during storms in February. The deadline is May 25. Survivors of storms in April have until June 25, the agency advised in a press release.

It made no mention of potential aid application deadlines for survivors of the weekend tornadoes, though the state is reportedly in the process of seeking FEMA assistance, according to the Kentucky Lantern.

But getting the aid they need from the federal government is not a guarantee under the Trump administration. Last month, FEMA rejected North Carolina’s application for an emergency aid extension as the state grapples to recover from Hurricane Helene, a Category Four storm that killed 250 people in September. It was the deadliest hurricane in state history.

In a letter to North Carolina Governor Josh Stein in April, acting FEMA Administrator Cameron Hamilton said that the agency had determined that an extension with a full cost share was “not warranted.”

Like Kentucky and Missouri, North Carolina had also voted for Trump in November, but months into his presidency, residents of devastated communities are still begging the president to send relief.

Since Helene, Trump and his allies have spread unfounded conspiracies that the lead response agency has run out of money and that the Biden administration had diverted funds from FEMA to assist undocumented immigrants entering the country. (FEMA administrators have fervently and repeatedly denied this.) Conservatives, at the time, claimed that working with the White House to expedite disaster relief “seemed political” and even conspiratorially suggested that the hurricanes were a government manipulation.

Days after his inauguration, Trump pitched that it would be better to do away with FEMA altogether in favor of handing the money directly to the states, though that plan never seemed to gain traction.

Since then, Trump has actively worked to dismantle the agency. The administration has blocked states across the nation, including California and Michigan, from accessing preapproved relief. A coalition of Democratic-led states has sued the federal government, claiming that “hundreds of millions of dollars in FEMA grants” are still inaccessible.

A federal judge on Monday struck down the Department of Government Efficiency’s takeover of the U.S. Institute of Peace, saying that DOGE’s actions two months ago were “unlawful” and “null and void.”

In March, Elon Musk’s DOGE used law enforcement and private security to take over the USIP and its Washington, D.C., headquarters despite the fact that the think tank, created by Congress during the Reagan administration, is an independent nonprofit not controlled by the federal government. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell pointed out these issues in her ruling.

“The removal of USIP’s president, his replacement by officials affiliated with DOGE, the termination of nearly all of USIP’s staff, and the transfer of USIP property to the General Services Administration” were “effectuated by illegitimately installed leaders who lacked legal authority to take these actions, which must therefore be declared null and void,” Howell wrote.

The institute was shuttered without the authorization or consultation of Congress, “rushed through action” with “blunt force, backed up by law enforcement officers from three separate local and federal agencies” to carry out President Trump’s executive order, the ruling states.

Why did DOGE so blatantly target an organization that isn’t part of the executive branch and only receives congressional funding to prevent outside influence? The answer lies in the valuable real estate of USIP’s headquarters: a $500 million building in a prime location between the Potomac River and the National Mall.

DOGE installed its staffer, Nate Cavanaugh, as acting president of the USIP, and he was ordered to transfer the USIP building to the government’s General Services Administration in late March. Russell Vought, the head of the Office of Management and Budget and an author of Project 2025, also sought to have the building transferred at no cost. Now those plans have been blocked, and the public is wondering what DOGE and Project 2025’s intentions were for that building.

More than 50 of the 240 Venezuelan men that President Trump deported to the CECOT megaprison in El Salvador came to the United States legally, poking yet another hole in the Trump administration’s narrative that these are all dangerous Tren de Aragua gang members. 

“Cato published my review of the ~240 Venezuelans the US government renditioned 2 months ago to Salvador’s notorious prison,” wrote David J. Bier, director of immigration studies at the libertarian Cato Institute. “We identified FIFTY who came legally, never violated any immigration law, but are imprisoned at the US government’s request and at US taxpayer expense.”

Two dozen of the men were parolees who came in at normal ports of entry, 21 came through CPB One appointments, four were granted refugee status by the U.S. government, and one had a tourist visa, according to Cato’s review. The Trump administration still had them all deported on the grounds that they were gang members who had illegally infiltrated our precious country. He even went so far as to invoke the wartime Alien Enemies Act of 1798.  

“Well this is a time of war. Because Biden allowed millions of people, many of them criminals, many of them at the highest level.… Other nations emptied their jails into the United States, it’s an invasion,” Trump said at the time of the deportations. “These are criminals, many many criminals … murderers, drug dealers at the highest level, drug lords. People from mental institutions. That’s an invasion.”

We now know this is completely false. 

“DHS continues to slander & lie about [the migrants], calling them all ‘illegal aliens.’ When confronted with the lies, DHS lies more. For instance, it says Ricardo ‘entered illegally at a port of entry via the CBP One.’ It literally just describes a legal entry as ‘illegal,’” Bier wrote. “We found DHS labeling LEGAL immigrants gang members for tattoos: roses, clocks, playing cards covering up a scar from a childhood accident, a Puerto Rican song lyric, the Real Madrid logo, a callout to Call Of Duty videogame, many crowns w/ loved ones’ names like these on Andry [José Hernández Romero].” 

As Bier noted, the Trump administration could care less about the innocence of these men or about the authority of the Supreme Court to stop his deportation crackdown. Anyone getting in his way is simply a leftist, activist judge who is “sabotaging democracy.” The administration continues to spin tall tales of criminality while fathers, sons, brothers, and innocent men rot in a Salvadoran gulag.

The Trump administration is planning to pay the family of January 6 rioter Ashli Babbitt $5 million to settle a lawsuit.

The Washington Post reports that the family of Babbitt, who was shot and killed by a Capitol police officer while trying to climb through a broken glass panel of the barricaded Speaker’s Lobby doors inside the Capitol, reached a settlement with the Department of Justice earlier this month. The terms of the settlement had not been disclosed until two unnamed sources spoke with the Post Monday.

The settlement reverses a 2021 DOJ finding that Babbitt’s civil rights were not violated and it was reasonable for the officer who shot her to believe he was acting in self-defense or in defense of members of Congress.

U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd was also cleared by a Capitol Police investigation, which found that his actions “potentially saved members and staff from serious injury and possible death from a large crowd of rioters who forced their way into the U.S. Capitol and to the House Chamber where members and staff were steps away.”

One-third of the settlement will go toward the Babbitt family’s lawyers, which include the right-wing legal group Judicial Watch and Richard Driscoll, an attorney in Alexandria, Virginia. Conservatives, led by Trump, have tried to rewrite the narrative of January 6, 2021, minimizing the violence of the rioters, who sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election, and paint them as victims who were unfairly punished by the justice system for supporting Trump.

The president has in effect legitimized the rioters’ actions by issuing blanket pardons for everyone involved in the insurrection, including violent participants and hate group members such as the Proud Boys. He has also taken steps to punish prosecutors and federal law enforcement officers involved in investigating and bringing cases against the rioters.

The settlement with Babbitt’s family will appease Trump’s die-hard supporters who would be willing to commit violence on his behalf, and is an attempt to rewrite history by painting Babbitt as a victim and martyr rather than one of the many criminals on that day four years ago. It also sends the message that violence committed in Trump’s name won’t lead to punishment but to rewards.

Donald Trump offered his old pal Russian President Vladimir Putin an economic lifeline out of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine Monday, while Moscow once again refused to agree to a ceasefire.

The U.S. president wrote on Truth Social that a two-hour phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin had gone “very well” and signaled an emerging economic alliance between Russia and the United States.

“Russia and Ukraine will immediately start negotiations toward a Ceasefire and, more importantly, an END to the War. The conditions for that will be negotiated between the two parties, as it can only be, because they know details of a negotiation that nobody else would be aware of,” Trump wrote. “The tone and spirit of the conversation were excellent. If it wasn’t, I would say so now, rather than later.”

“Russia wants to do largescale TRADE with the United States when this catastrophic ‘bloodbath’ is over, and I agree. There is a tremendous opportunity for Russia to create massive amounts of jobs and wealth. Its potential is UNLIMITED,” Trump wrote.

The U.S. president added that Ukraine could also get in on the action “in the process of rebuilding its Country.”

Notably, Russia is not subject to Trump’s sweeping reciprocal tariff policy. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested that Moscow had been spared from Trump’s tariffs because U.S. sanctions already “preclude any meaningful trade,” but the two countries conduct billions in trade every year.

After the conversation, Putin signaled that his government was prepared to work with Ukrainian officials on a “memorandum regarding a potential future peace treaty,” but he still hadn’t budged on requests for a ceasefire and still demanded that Ukraine address the “root causes” that led to Russia’s invasion, according the Kyiv Independent.

Putin and Trump’s nonstatements don’t indicate any seismic shift in negotiations, as Russia has attempted to prolong peace talks for months.

Just last week, Russian officials seemed far from ready to make nice, after Putin bailed on talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in Istanbul, as did Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who called the jilted wartime president “pathetic.”

During a meeting in Istanbul, both sides agreed to a prisoner swap, but one Ukrainian official said it was “unacceptable” that Russian officials continued to demand that Ukraine withdraw its troops from large swaths of its own territory to secure a ceasefire.

After getting off the phone with Russian President Vladimir Putin, President Trump told the world that Putin would “immediately” start negotiating a ceasefire with Ukraine. Putin told a completely different story.

“The U.S. president expressed his position regarding a cessation of hostilities and a ceasefire, and also acknowledged that Russia likewise favors a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis. We simply need to identify the most effective paths toward peace,” Putin said after the meeting, refusing to publicly commit to a ceasefire.

“We agreed with the U.S. president that Russia will propose and is ready to work with the Ukrainian side on a memorandum concerning a possible future peace treaty. This would outline several provisions, including a framework for resolution, the timeline for potentially concluding a peace agreement, and other relevant details, such as the possibility of a temporary ceasefire if corresponding agreements are reached.”

“At the same time, I want to emphasize that, overall, Russia’s position is clear,” Putin said after the call. “Our main objective is to eliminate the root causes of this crisis.”

From Trump’s angle, this looks like a kumbaya moment attached to a lavish deal.

“There is a tremendous opportunity for Russia to create massive amounts of jobs and wealth. Its potential is UNLIMITED,” Trump wrote on Truth Social after the call. “Likewise, Ukraine can be a great beneficiary on Trade, in the process of rebuilding its Country. Negotiations between Russia and Ukraine will begin immediately.”

Trump has given the Kremlin a financial out, allowing it to back Ukraine further into a corner with no commitment to any sort of deal—or even negotiations for a deal—and no accountability. And while these ceasefire talks fall flat, the Kremlin launched its largest drone attack on Ukraine to date, killing 11 people over the weekend.

Putin’s statement does not instill confidence in a Russian ceasefire. So much for ending the war on day one.

Walmart may be wading through dangerous waters with Donald Trump’s administration after announcing that the president’s tariffs would likely lead to price increases for consumers.

During CNBC’s Squawk Box Monday, co-host Andrew Ross Sorkin asked Tennessee Senator Bill Hagerty about the president’s recent outrage at Walmart. The mega retail chain’s CFO warned last week that consumers might start to see higher prices on products as soon as June.

“In the short term, if Walmart decides that they have to raise prices, do you think that that’s un-American, effectively?” Sorkin asked.

“I think Walmart’s gonna have to make some decisions; Walmart has the broadest base of American clients there is. I think they’re gonna be very careful about how they do this. I know that they’ve received some criticism from the president. I think they need to think hard,” Hagerty replied.

Walmart’s CFO had explained that Walmart imports a third of its merchandise and food from other countries, with China being the largest supplier, followed by Mexico, Canada, India, and Vietnam, making it vulnerable to supply chain disruptions sparked by Trump’s sweeping reciprocal tariff policy. He also said that it wouldn’t be easy to adapt to changes in demand sparked by fluctuations in pricing.

Trump had hit back at the retail corporation in an angry post on Truth Social Saturday. “Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain,” he wrote.

The president advised Walmart, which had made more money than it expected, to “EAT THE TARIFFS” and not increase prices on consumer goods. CNBC reported that Walmart had beat earnings estimates but fallen short on sales.

“I’ll be watching, and so will your customers!!!” the president warned.

On Sunday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was asked whether Trump’s “Eat the tariffs” line meant that he wanted American companies to be “less profitable.” Bessent confirmed that Walmart CEO Doug McMillon had told him the company planned to “eat some of the tariffs.” The rest would likely still fall on consumers.

Last week, the White House announced that it had negotiated a lowered tariff rate of 30 percent on Chinese imports to the U.S. for the next 90 days.