Tensions between Elon Musk and Donald Trump erupted Tuesday as the world’s richest man derided the president’s key piece of economic legislation in a startling rupture just days after exiting a controversial job in the White House.Musk was lauded by the Republican leader as he left his advisory role atop Trump’s “Department of Government Efficiency” last week, despite criticism over his failure to deliver on promises of radical spending cuts.”This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,” Musk posted on X as he followed its progress from the sidelines, in by far his most caustic remarks on Trump’s agenda.”Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong.”It was not Musk’s first comments on Trump’s so-called “big, beautiful bill” which is set to add $3 trillion to US deficits over a 10-year horizon, despite deep cuts to health and food aid programs.But Musk’s previous criticism was more restrained, with the Tesla and SpaceX magnate offering only that it undermined his cost-cutting efforts.On Tuesday he said the bill — being considered by Congress — would burden “citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt.”His post laid bare an increasingly tense relationship between the White House and Musk, who donated almost $300 million to Trump’s 2024 election campaign.Musk has become disillusioned, US media reported, as his goals for White House action that would benefit him personally have gone unrealized.The bill he was criticizing cuts the electric vehicle tax credit — bad news for Tesla — while Axios reported that Musk was rebuffed in his efforts to extend his role beyond the statutory 130-day limit. He also failed to have his Starlink satellite system used for air traffic control, according to Axios, and was angered by Trump withdrawing the nomination of Musk ally Jared Isaacman to be NASA chief.The normally pugilistic Trump has pulled his punches, aware of his biggest backer’s enormous influence over young, tech-savvy and historically apathetic voters — a key Trump constituency in 2024.”The president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill, it doesn’t change his opinion,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters in a rapid response to Musk’s tweet.The spat came with House Republicans set to pass legislation sent from the White House to enshrine into law $9.4 billion of DOGE’s cuts, mostly money destined for public broadcasting and foreign aid.House Speaker Mike Johnson called Musk’s comments “disappointing,” adding that he had walked the entrepreneur through the bill on Monday, and that he “seemed to understand.”- Burgeoning debt -As the world’s richest person bowed out of his role as Trump’s cost-cutter-in-chief, their relationship appeared on an even keel as the Republican hailed his fellow billionaire’s “incredible service.”Trump even insisted that Musk was “really not leaving” after a turbulent four months in which the South African born tycoon cut tens of thousands of jobs, shuttered whole agencies and slashed foreign aid.DOGE led an ideologically driven rampage through the federal government, with its young “tech bros” slashing tens of thousands of jobs.But its achievements fell far short of Musk’s original boast that he could save $2 trillion — more than the government’s entire discretionary spending budget for 2024.The DOGE website claims to have saved taxpayers less than a tenth of that total — just $180 billion — and fact checkers even see that claim as dubious, given previous inaccuracies in its accounting.Senate Democrats released a report Tuesday itemizing 130 examples of “unethical or potentially corrupt” administration actions they say have helped Musk dodge regulation and add $100 billion to his wealth.The report came as senators began what is expected to be a fraught month of negotiations on Trump’s mammoth policy package, expected to add between $2.5 trillion and $3.1 trillion to deficits over a decade.Trump said on Monday it was “the single biggest Spending Cut in History,” although he added: “The only ‘cutting’ we will do is for Waste, Fraud, and Abuse.”

The lawyer defending fallen Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein from rape and sexual assault charges called those testifying against his client “women with broken dreams” as he made his final pitch to jurors. A New York state appeals court had thrown out Weinstein’s 2020 convictions after irregularities in the presentation of witnesses at his original trial, forcing two victims of his alleged abuse to testify a second time.”If there is a doubt about their case, you gotta throw it out. These are the people they want you to believe, they’re all women with broken dreams,” defense attorney Arthur Aidala said of the women who testified against Weinstein at this trial.Prosecutor Nicole Blumberg fired back saying that “we are here because (Weinstein) raped three people — that’s why we are here.”  Her closing argument will continue Wednesday.Judge Curtis Farber will then give instructions to the jury, who will deliberate on a verdictWeinstein, the producer of box-office hits “Pulp Fiction” and “Shakespeare in Love,” has never acknowledged wrongdoing.The cinema magnate, whose downfall in 2017 sparked the global #MeToo movement, has been on trial again since April 15 in a scruffy Manhattan courtroom.He is serving a 16-year prison sentence after being convicted in California of raping and assaulting a European actress more than a decade ago.Two of the accusers in this case — onetime production assistant Miriam Haley and then-aspiring actress Jessica Mann — testified at Weinstein’s original trial.Their accounts helped galvanize the #MeToo movement nearly a decade ago, but the case is being re-prosecuted at a new trial in New York.His 2020 convictions on charges relating to Haley and Mann, and his 23-year prison term, were overturned last year by the New York Court of Appeals.The tribunal ruled that the way witnesses were handled in the original trial was unlawful.- ‘He didn’t listen’ -Some 20 years after the earliest incidents were alleged to have taken place, Aidala sought to cast doubt on the credibility of the accusers. He said it was not a question of whether his client engaged in sexual relations with the three women, but if those encounters were consensual. He described the encounters as “transactional” and “casting couch” scenarios involving young women who used their beauty and charm to make an older man open doors for them. Prosecutor Blumberg countered that “this is not a transaction, it was never about fooling around, it was about rape.”But Aidala insisted Weinstein was the one who was used, countering prosecutors who portrayed Weinstein as an all-powerful Hollywood figure.Aidala loudly reeled off metaphors to explain his version of events, seeking to win over the jury with jokes. He mimicked the victims to highlight inconsistencies, likening one of them to a child caught in a lie. The veteran defense attorney stressed that victims continued to associate with Weinstein after the alleged assaults, something they did not dispute, explaining that they feared jeopardizing their careers. Blumberg said “they knew it was necessary to stay on his side. They feared his retaliation, they buried (their) trauma as if nothing had happened.”During the trial, the three victims testified that their sexual encounters with Weinstein were not consensual.The retrial also heard new evidence from Kaja Sokola, a Polish former model who testified that Weinstein first sexually assaulted her when she was a minor at age 16.She said one occasion Weinstein pushed her onto a bed and forced her to have sex.”I told him to stop,” she said, “but he didn’t listen.”Weinstein has appeared daily in a wheelchair, physically subdued, but laughing and joking with his legal team.This time, hearings have received less media attention, taking place in the shadow of the highly anticipated trial of hip-hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs, on trial blocks away at federal court on charges of sex trafficking and racketeering.

The family of a man suspected of attacking a Jewish protest march with Molotov cocktails in the US state of Colorado was being held by immigration officials Tuesday, the government said.Kristi Noem, Homeland Security Secretary, said the wife and children of Mohamed Sabry Soliman had been detained.”We are investigating to what extent his family knew about this heinous attack, if they had knowledge of it, or if they provided support to it,” she said.Criminal investigations are typically carried out by the FBI and local law enforcement, not by the Department of Homeland Security.Soliman’s immigration status has been at the center of President Donald Trump’s administration’s response to the attack in the city of Boulder on Sunday, in which 12 people were injured.Officials were quick to say he was in the United States “illegally” having overstayed a tourist visa.But they also acknowledged he had applied for asylum and had been granted a work permit.Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday said his department would clamp down on “terrorists” in the United States temporarily.”All terrorists, their family members, and terrorist sympathizers here on a visa should know that under the Trump Administration we will find you, revoke your visa, and deport you,” he wrote on social media.The White House took to social media on Tuesday, appearing to taunt the family.”Six One-Way Tickets for Mohamed’s Wife and Five Kids,” the official account posted on X.”Final Boarding Call Coming Soon.” Soliman is expected to appear in court in Colorado on Thursday. He is expected to formally face federal hate crime charges, as well as state charges of attempted murder.He is suspected of throwing flammable liquid at a group of older people marching to raise awareness of the Israeli hostages still being held by Hamas after the October 7, 2023 attacks.Investigators said he had with him an improvised flamethrower made from a backpack weed sprayer filled with gasoline.In one video that purportedly shows the attack, a shirtless man holding bottles in his hands is seen pacing as the grass in front of him burns.He can be heard screaming “End Zionists!” and “They are killers!” towards several people in red T-shirts as they tend to a person lying on the ground.