SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
starlink
As SpaceX Goes Public, Iran Media Reports Musk Companies Are Legitimate Military Target
Iranian threats against SpaceX facilities came as the company had a record-breaking IPO.
Jun 11, 2026
While Elon Musk's SpaceX rockets have typically had no trouble exploding on their own accord, they could soon get some assistance from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Tehran's state-run Fars News Agency reported on Thursday that Iranian officials have added assets owned by Musk throughout the Middle East to their target lists, noting the US and Israeli military's use of SpaceX's Starlink satellite services in operations against Iranian infrastructure.
As reported by Forbes, SpaceX has Starlink ground stations in Qatar, Jordan, United Arab Emirates, and Oman that could be potential targets of future Iranian attacks. However, the Starlink facilities may not be the only targets, as Iran reportedly said it "reserves the right to strike all Musk-affiliated facilities in the region," according to Forbes.
Iran's threats to attack SpaceX facilities came as the private space exploration firm made an initial public offering (IPO) on Thursday that the Wall Street Journal reported broke the record for the largest in history.
According to the Journal, SpaceX sold $75 billion worth of shares during the IPO at $135 apiece, giving the company a valuation of $1.77 trillion.
The SpaceX IPO has come under criticism in recent weeks over revelations that the Nasdaq stock market exchange changed its own rules so that company can be immediately included in index funds without having to wait through the one-year “seasoning” period that used to be required for newly public firms.
Other critics have raised red flags about SpaceX's profitability, noting that it made only $19 billion in profits last fiscal year, giving it a valuation 54 times larger than its projected revenue multiple, a measure of its value based on expected future earnings.
SpaceX shares are set to begin trading publicly on Friday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Defending Democracy Starts With Your Phone Plan: Why I Cut Ties With T-Mobile
The most effective way to resist the authoritarian takeover of our democracy is to make it clear to companies partnering with authoritarians that there will always be consequences for such business relationships.
Nov 10, 2025
With everything that the Trump administration is doing to militarize our cities and neighborhoods, it can be easy to forget about all of the damage that Elon Musk has done, and continues to do. He and his Department of Government Efficiency minions destroyed the US Agency for International Development, resulting in incredible misery and thousands of deaths in countries around the world. They fired thousands of dedicated civil servants and embedded themselves in all major government agencies, and combined our personal data in illegal ways that make us all more vulnerable.
While Musk isn’t in the headlines as much now, he continues to use his vast wealth to subvert democracy both here and around the world, and will continue to do so unless we fight back. One of the pillars of his empire is Starlink, which leverages Musk’s relationship with President Donald Trump to help it acquire additional spectrum licenses and crush its competition.
The most effective way to resist the authoritarian takeover of our democracy is to make it clear to companies partnering with authoritarians that there will always be consequences for such business relationships. Earlier this year, T-Mobile became the first major cellular carrier to integrate the Starlink network, positioning T-Mobile customers uniquely to help counter Musk's influence.
I was a T-Mobile customer, starting in 2013. My whole family was on T-Mobile, and I had a business account as well. I develop a mobile application for iPhone and Android, so I needed multiple phone lines for software testing.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, I strongly encourage you to cancel your T-Mobile contract on the weekend of November 14-16 as thousands join me in boycotting T-Mobile.
After becoming active in the Tesla Takedown campaign, I learned about the dangers posed by T-Mobile's partnership with Starlink. I attended protests at local Starlink offices and wrote directly to T-Mobile's CEO to express my concerns about this collaboration.
T-Mobile's problematic actions extend far beyond this partnership. The company dismantled its diversity, equity, and inclusion program to appease the Trump administration while seeking approval for two major acquisitions. They now host Trump Mobile on their network and lobbied in support of Trump's budget bill—legislation expected to strip millions of Americans of healthcare while delivering tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires. Adding to this troubling record, T-Mobile has spent years employing aggressive union-busting tactics to prevent workers from organizing.
After a month with no reply, I began exploring alternative carriers. It’s important to research that carefully, since other carriers may be owned by T-Mobile directly (like Mint Mobile), or may use the T-Mobile network (like Ultra Mobile and Tello Mobile). To have the greatest impact, it’s best to move to a carrier with no connection to T-Mobile. You can find alternatives here.
After selecting a new carrier, I began moving lines, one by one. I was concerned about how difficult it would be, but it’s surprisingly easy. After moving the last line, the last step was to call T-Mobile and formally terminate my accounts.
Mobile carriers HATE when customers move. It costs money to acquire new subscribers, so they will try very hard to keep you. I explained to the service rep why I was cancelling my contract, and that I had sent a message to the CEO about my concerns. “He’s probably very busy,” the rep said. “Would you wait two more weeks before you cancel?” I explained that I had already waited for a month with no reply. She then offered me a $20 credit for staying. Without being rude, I explained that this wasn’t about money, it was about defending democracy.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, I strongly encourage you to cancel your T-Mobile contract on the weekend of November 14-16 as thousands join me in boycotting T-Mobile. Even better, you can sign the #BoycottTMobile pledge and actively join us. It’s probably easier than you imagine, and it’s an important step we can take to stop the pipeline that funds Musk and Trump. You’ll be glad you did.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump’s Chaotic Tariffs Benefit His Best Buddy Elon (As We Predicted)
Musk’s proximity to the White House and Trump’s innermost circle has provided him with powerful new leverage to push his businesses on foreign governments.
May 23, 2025
A series of internal government messages reveal how U.S. embassies and the State Department have pushed governments to clear regulatory barriers for Elon Musk’s Starlink. In the messages obtained by The Washington Post, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directs U.S. officials to push for permit approvals for the satellite internet service. Governments facing chaotic tariff threats have gotten the message and are rolling out the red carpet for Musk in the hope of avoiding costly tariffs.
This scandal has drawn widespread attention and condemnation, with dozens of members of Congress and senators calling for investigations into Musk and the government agencies that may have pressured countries on his behalf.
While this corruption is shocking, it’s hardly surprising. Before the “Liberation Day” tariff announcement, Public Citizen issued a report documenting how the tariff process in President Donald Trump’s first term enabled a quid-pro-quo spoils system that rewarded the rich and well-connected. We warned that Musk’s powerful and ill-defined role in the U.S. government could lead other countries to decide that giving special privileges to Musk’s companies would help them earn brownie points with the Trump administration.
U.S. Government’s Sales Pitch for Starlink
Elon Musk has been pushing for Starlink expansion across the world for years, but some countries have been wary of permitting the service to enter their markets for a number of reasons. For example, experts have raised concerns about threats to “data sovereignty,” a group or individual’s right to control and maintain their own data. To the extent that communications on the Starlink network are routed through the U.S., they may be accessible to U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
And it is not unreasonable for countries to consider that access to Starlink services could be weaponized and a nation’s internet access held hostage at the whim of a single man or wayward administration. Alarmingly, claims abound that the U.S threatened to withdraw Ukrainian access to Starlink if the country did not sign the U.S.-Ukraine minerals agreement (though this has been denied by Musk).
But now, Musk’s proximity to the White House and Trump’s innermost circle has provided him with powerful new leverage to push his businesses on foreign governments: the threat of Trump’s chaotic tariffs. For some countries weighing the pros and cons, the chance that approval for Starlink helps stave off tariffs has changed the equation.
Trump and his cronies have made it clear since Day 1 of his 2015 presidential primary campaign that he will bend public policy to benefit himself and his wayward inner circle of Yes Men.
The Washington Post exposé highlighted several diplomatic cables from various embassies commenting on foreign governments’ decision-making on the satellite internet service.
For example, a March cable from the U.S. Embassy in Cambodia explains it “has observed the Cambodian government—likely due to concern over the possibility of U.S. tariffs—signal its desire to help balance our trade relationship by promoting the market entry of leading U.S. companies such as Boeing and Starlink.” Leaders of the American Chamber of Commerce in Cambodia advised the Ministry of Economy and Finance to take “decisive action in offering concessions to the United States… recommending that Cambodia… expeditiously approve Starlink’s market entry request.”
Cambodia is facing a 49% Trump tariff rate.
Another cable from April highlighted that Starlink was pushing for a license to operate in Djibouti. State Department staffers noted Starlink’s approval would be an opportunity to open the country’s market and boost “an American company.” Embassy officials “will continue to follow up with Starlink in identifying government officials and facilitating discussions.”
Djibouti is facing a 10% Trump tariff rate.
The Pressure Is Working—At the Expense of Public Interest Policies
Sec. Rubio “encouraged Vietnam to address trade imbalances,” in an early March 2025 phone call with the nation’s Foreign Ministry. Shortly thereafter, the Vietnamese government laid out a battery of appeasements to the Trump administration, including a waiver of their domestic partnership requirements, enabling the launch of a five-year pilot program with Starlink. An unnamed source speaking with Reuters said this can be seen as “an olive branch” to Musk and his company, a “demonstration from the Vietnamese side that they can play the transactional diplomacy game if the Trump administration wants that.”
Vietnam is facing a 46% Trump tariff rate.
A Bangladeshi representative visited the White House in mid-February to offer concessions to stave off the promised tariffs and was brought to a surprise meeting with Elon Musk. Musk wanted to discuss the ongoing negotiations between Starlink and Bangladesh’s regulatory agency—the implication being that Bangladesh would not get favorable trade terms from the U.S. if Starlink wasn’t permitted. Early April saw Bangladesh’s Telecommunication Regulatory Commission issue what was described as “the swiftest recommendation” in its history for a Starlink license. When Trump announced a punishing 37% reciprocal tariff on Bangladesh, the export-dependent country wrote a letter to Trump requesting leniency and detailing the ways in which it was already taking action to benefit U.S. businesses—including its access for Starlink.
Bangladesh is facing a 37% Trump tariff rate.
Lesotho also granted a license to Starlink in April, despite local objections to foreign-owned businesses. Local NGOs called the licensing decision “a betrayal—a shameful sellout by a government that appears increasingly willing to place foreign corporate interests above the democratic will and long-term developmental needs of the people of Lesotho.” An internal State Department memo states, “As the government of Lesotho negotiates a trade deal with the United States, it hopes that licensing Starlink demonstrates goodwill and intent to welcome U.S. businesses.” Subtle.
Lesotho is facing a 50% Trump tariff rate.
Musk has infamously complained on social media over South Africa’s post-Apartheid reparations rules, claiming that Starlink is “not allowed to operate in South Africa simply because [he’s] not Black [sic]”—despite having never even applied for a license. The Washington Post noted that “the story about Bangladesh was making its way around political and business circles in South Africa,” and it’s assumed that approval of a Starlink license has become “a prerequisite for getting a favorable trade deal.” Legislators have introduced a controversial measure to exempt Starlink from the Black empowerment law.
South Africa is facing a 30% Trump tariff rate.
Musk has been looking to break into the Indian market for years—even launching, then retracting, services in 2022 without the necessary licenses. Around the time of the Bangladesh meeting, Musk also met with Prime Minister Narendra Modi near the White House. According to India Today, a “key agenda” item was Starlink’s pending approval in India. In May of 2025, India dropped two proposed security rules that Starlink had refused during earlier discussions.
India is facing a 26% Trump tariff rate.
In March of 2024, Starlink was prohibited in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, citing concerns from military experts who warned it could be misused by armed insurgent groups including M23. That ban was recently lifted, and Starlink launched in May 2025. This policy reversal comes at a time of mounting frustrations from Congolese civil society over secretive dealmaking with the United States. The resurgence of rebel group M23 has pushed President Felix Tshisekedi’s government toward a controversial deal that has the private military corporation Blackwater’s Erik Prince at the center. The deal would exchange U.S. security assistance for access to DRC critical minerals, not unlike the recent U.S.-Ukraine minerals deal.
The DRC is facing an 11% Trump tariff rate
The list goes on. Mali, Somalia, Namibia, and others are also considering regulatory approval of Starlink and facing varying degrees of resistance from civil society.
Namibia is facing a 21% Trump tariff rate, with Mali and Somalia at 10%.
The Blueprint
Paving the way for Starlink in other countries is just the tip of the iceberg. Trump and his cronies have made it clear since Day 1 of his 2015 presidential primary campaign that he will bend public policy to benefit himself and his wayward inner circle of Yes Men. Anything that can limit their personal gain is on the chopping block.
The attacks on other governments’ legitimate domestic policies aren’t just predictable, they’re predicted. In detail. Not just by Trump’s erratic speeches and TruthSocial policy changes, but across nearly 400 pages, readily available to us all at ustr.gov: the 2025 National Trade Estimate (NTE) Report.
This year’s report targets a litany of public interest laws and policies adopted by countries around the world to regulate the digital ecosystem. Notably, the 2025 NTE report calls out the satellite licensing and approval processes in Brazil, South Korea, and Malaysia, and points out that a number of countries impose import restrictions on certain types of internet and telecommunications equipment. Removing these would smooth regulatory hurdles for Starlink in those countries. The NTE report is also chock-full of other privacy, AI accountability, and competition policies that Big Tech companies want to get rid of around the world.
The report was drafted in large part based on comments submitted by corporations in October 2024 under then-President Joe Biden and before the presidential election. Given the Trump administration’s brazen willingness to openly push the agenda of his billionaire buddies, we can now expect even more extreme demands from companies like Starlink. For instance, in a submission to the Trump administration ahead of the “reciprocal tariffs” announcement, SpaceX complained about governments imposing “non-tariff” barriers impeding global roll-out of Starlink, including having to pay governments for access to spectrum—a standard practice in a number of countries, including the U.S.
As Trump wields his chaotic tariff threats to extract concessions in dozens of closed-door negotiations, we should not be surprised to see even more Big Tech giveaways and lucrative favors for Musk. It is imperative that Congress demand transparency in these trade talks and hold the Trump administration accountable for such inappropriate coercion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Probe Demanded Into Trump's 'Crony Capitalism' in Favor of Musk
Democratic senators said diplomatic discussions with numerous foreign governments about Elon Musk's satellite service appear to be "a textbook case of corruption."
May 15, 2025
Amid the news that billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk secured a new deal with Saudia Arabia for his satellite internet service just as U.S. President Donald Trump was visiting the Middle Eastern country, Democratic senators are intensifying their demand for an investigation into how Musk has directly benefited from the president's policies and actions since taking office.
Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) wrote to top Trump administration officials demanding a probe into what they called "a textbook case of corruption."
Musk, a "special government employee" who has led Trump's efforts to slash public spending via the Department of Government Efficiency, said at an investment forum in Riyadh Tuesday that Starlink, the satellite service owned by his aerospace company, SpaceX, had gotten approval to operate in Saudi Arabia.
The service has struggled to gain traction in international markets, relying on permits from foreign governments—but its trajectory has changed since Trump took office.
"Starlink has seen a rush of new countries permitting the company to enter their markets," wrote the senators. "Soon after President Trump announced tariffs, Lesotho 'awarded Musk's firm the nation's first-ever satellite internet service license,' and 'is far from the only country that has decided to assist Musk's firm while trying to fend off U.S. tariffs.'"
India, Vietnam, and Bangladesh have also agreed to work with Musk's company in recent weeks as Trump was threatening to impose tariffs.
On Thursday, ProPublica detailed some of the discussions the administration has had with foreign governments in recent weeks, about trade as well as foreign aid, with an apparent goal: "Get business for Elon Musk."
In Gambia, where Musk had tried for months to secure approval for Starlink, U.S. Ambassador Sharon Cromer—an appointee of former President Joe Biden—met with the country's top communications official, Lamin Jabbi, in February.
"We ask that the DOJ and the White House investigate whether any officials have pursued a quid pro quo exchange of Starlink access for tariff favors in violation of federal ethics law."
"The administration had already begun freezing foreign aid projects, and early in the meeting, Cromer... said something that rattled Gambian officials in the room," reported ProPublica. "She listed the ways that the U.S. was supporting the country, according to two people present and contemporaneous notes, noting that key initiatives—like one that funds a $25 million project to improve the electrical system—were currently under review."
Hassan Jallow, a top deputy to Jabbi, told ProPublica that the clear implication in Cromer's comments "was that they were connected."
Similar discussions have taken place between U.S. officials and the government of Cameroon—where leaders were told they could prove their "commitment to Trump's agenda by letting Starlink expand its presence there" and warned of the potential "impact of U.S. aid cuts and deportations."
In Lesotho, Starlink finalized a deal with officials after Trump imposed 50% tariffs on the landlocked country.
Kenneth Fairfax, who served as U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan, told ProPublica the conversations pushing countries to approve deals with Musk "could lead to the impression that the U.S. is engaging in a form of crony capitalism."
The Saudi deal announced Tuesday was finalized just as Trump secured a $600 billion investment deal with the country and agreed to sell the government a $142 billion arms package.
As Common Dreams reported last week, internal government messages have shown how U.S. embassies and the State Department have mentioned Starlink by name in numerous communications with foreign governments about satellite companies.
"Secretary of State Marco Rubio has increasingly instructed officials to push for regulatory approvals for Musk's satellite firm at a moment when the White House is calling for wide-ranging talks on trade," The Washington Post reported.
Warren, Warner, and Shaheen wrote that the Public Integrity Section at the Department of Justice (DOJ) "is responsible for investigating
potentially criminal conflicts of interest like this," and called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to initiate a probe.
"The White House's Designated Agency Ethics Official can similarly investigate potential ethics violations by White House officials," they wrote. "We ask that the DOJ and the White House investigate whether any officials have pursued a quid pro quo exchange of Starlink access for tariff favors in violation of federal ethics law."
The lawmakers also called on the State Department inspector general to investigate whether department officials "may be subverting the public's interests in favor of Mr. Musk's personal financial interests as they negotiate new tariff agreements—and whether they have been directed by Mr. Musk or President Trump to do so."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Scale of Musk's DOGE Conflicts of Interest 'Should Alarm Every American'
"The wealthiest man in the world is working to dismantle the very same federal departments and agencies tasked with overseeing and placing checks on his businesses," says Public Citizen in a new analysis.
May 08, 2025
Elon Musk, the world's richest person and de facto head of the Trump administration's so-called Department of Government Efficiency, "has had a direct business interest in over 70% of the agencies and departments targeted by DOGE since its inception," according to an analysis published Thursday by a leading U.S. consumer advocacy group.
The Public Citizen report, titled Duplicitous Oligarchy Grifting Endlessly, "maps out the entities DOGE has targeted and identifies which ones carry a known conflict of interest for Elon Musk's business entanglements" as the executive office leads the Trump administration's purge of federal agencies.
"The wealthiest man in the world is working to dismantle the very same federal departments and agencies tasked with overseeing and placing checks on his businesses," the report states. "He also now is adjacent to and could potentially access sensitive and potentially proprietary information from his biggest competitors in the various industries that have made him wealthy. He also has personal business interests that could shape what his DOGE project considers ripe for cuts."
Elon Musk's DOGE has spent the last several months dismantling the departments & agencies that regulate HIS businesses. Our report found that Musk has a direct business interest in over 70% of the agencies & departments DOGE targeted. The conflicts of interest are endless.
— Public Citizen (@publiccitizen.bsky.social) May 8, 2025 at 11:46 AM
Elizabeth Beavers, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch, said in a statement that "it should alarm every American that the wealthiest man in the world has spent the last several months dismantling the same departments and agencies tasked with regulating his businesses."
"Musk's role as the most powerful person in government makes it highly unlikely that any regulator will crack down on his corporations and surely will make agency leaders look more favorably at Musk companies as potential government contractors," Beavers added.
The report considers Musk—who has signaled he will leave DOGE—to have a conflict of interest with a federal agency when one of his companies has received contracts or grants from the department, has an interest in its proprietary data, and is subject to its regulation or enforcement regime.
Public Citizen's analysis highlights interests with federal agencies including:
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which Musk wants to abolish, would be in charge of regulating a proposed payments processing partnership between Visa and Musk's social media platform X;
- Department of Justice, which is investigating electric automaker Tesla and possibly Musk as its CEO;
- Federal Aviation Administration, which regulates Musk's SpaceX;
- Food and Drug Administration, where some of the more than 1,000 fired staffers were reviewing Musk's Nueralink brain implants;
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration, which has awarded SpaceX approximately $15 billion in contracts;
- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which regulates Teslas, was hit with a 10% workforce reduction since President Donald Trump took office;
- Securities and Exchange Commission, which has ongoing enforcement actions against Musk, including fines as high as $150 million for failing to file disclosure forms regarding shares of Twitter, which he bought in 2022; and
- United States Agency for International Development, which was investigating whether Russia had improperly gained access to Musk's Starlink satellite internet system.
Musk—whose companies have tens of billions of dollars worth of government contracts—also has conflicts of interest with the departments of Defense, Agriculture, and Energy. SpaceX, for example, holds Pentagon contracts worth around $8 billion, including nearly $6 billion for the National Security Space Launch Phase 3 Lane 2 program.
Critics have laughed off the White House's assertion that Musk would self-police his conflicts of interest by recusing himself when DOGE and his business interests overlap.
"The report's findings make clear that this approach is deeply and incurably flawed—and that urgent action by Congress is required to safeguard the government from Musk's self-dealing and grift," Public Citizen said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Corruption Is Staggering': Trump Officials Push Tariffed Nations to Approve Musk's Starlink
"The glaring conflict of interest inherent in this pressure to preference a Musk-owned company is disgusting," said Public Citizen co-president Lisa Gilbert.
May 08, 2025
Trump administration officials have reportedly been pressuring countries facing U.S. tariffs to approve satellite internet services offered by Elon Musk's Starlink to help grease trade negotiations, further underscoring the conflicts of interest stemming from the mega-billionaire's proximity to the White House.
The Washington Post reported Wednesday that it obtained "a series of internal government messages" that "reveal how U.S. embassies and the State Department have pushed nations to clear hurdles for U.S. satellite companies, often mentioning Starlink by name."
"The documents do not show that the Trump team has explicitly demanded favors for Starlink in exchange for lower tariffs," the newspaper added. "But they do indicate that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has increasingly instructed officials to push for regulatory approvals for Musk's satellite firm at a moment when the White House is calling for wide-ranging talks on trade."
The Post points specifically to ongoing bilateral trade negotiations between the U.S. and India, where "government officials have sped through approvals of Starlink with the understanding that doing so could help them cement trade deals with the administration."
The Times of India reported Wednesday that Starlink, a subsidiary of Musk's SpaceX, "has been issued a Letter of Intent by the Indian government for satcom services."
The corruption is staggering. So brazen. www.washingtonpost.com/business/202...
[image or embed]
— The Tennessee Holler ( @thetnholler.bsky.social) May 7, 2025 at 4:01 PM
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the U.S.-based consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in response to the Post's reporting that "the glaring conflict of interest inherent in this pressure to preference a Musk-owned company is disgusting."
"The bottom line here is that tools of trade and government should be utilized for the benefit of the American public, not abused for personal tech bro profiteering," Gilbert added.
Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, called the revelations "a huge new scandal."
"Trump and Musk are using tariffs as leverage to get other countries to buy from Musk's companies. Working families pay
$4,000+ more a year so Musk gets new deals," Casar wrote on social media. "They get richer. Everyone else gets screwed."
Last month, U.S. President Donald Trumppartially paused the more aggressive tariffs he sought to impose on countries around the world while leaving in place 10% across-the-board import duties, which are already raising costs for American families.
The Post reported Wednesday that "at least two countries have explicitly discussed or moved toward adopting Musk's Starlink as a means of avoiding Trump’s tariffs and negotiating a better trade deal with the United States."
Cambodia, which is facing a potential 49% tariff rate, appears to be one of those countries. The Post obtained a U.S. embassy cable indicating that Cambodian officials have signaled a "desire to help balance our trade relationship by promoting the market entry of leading U.S. companies such as Boeing and Starlink."
"Another cable from April 17 reported that Starlink was pushing for a license to operate in Djibouti," the newspaper reported. "Embassy staffers wrote they would help Starlink as much as they could: 'Post will continue to follow up with Starlink in identifying government officials and facilitating discussions.'"
U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said the internal cables show "gross corruption." Congressional Democrats are already probing the White House's use of Starlink services.
"Surprise, surprise: another Trump move that directly benefits Elon Musk—the guy who spent $260 million to elect Donald Trump and has been given the keys to the federal government," said Van Hollen. "They are rigging the government for themselves."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems: Musk Should Go Immediately But Must Exit Trump Post by May 30
"In his short time in government, Elon Musk has done enormous harm to working Americans."
Apr 10, 2025
Dozens of House Democrats wrote to U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday "to make clear that you must remove Elon Musk from his government position by May 30th and to demand that you stop ignoring federal law and ethics rules to empower an unelected billionaire."
Musk, the richest person on Earth, is leading Trump's effort to gut the federal bureaucracy as the de facto chief of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency—but the billionaire is not the formal head of DOGE. Instead, Musk is a "special government employee," which lets him keep his financial disclosure form confidential.
The new letter to Trump, signed by 77 House Democrats, highlights that special government employees can only serve in their positions for 130 days in a year and demands "an immediate public statement from your administration making clear that Musk will resign and surrender all decision-making authority, as required by law."
"In his short time in government, Elon Musk has done enormous harm to working Americans," noted the coalition, led by Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas). "Musk's reckless destruction of government agencies has led to everything from seniors having challenges accessing Social Security to veterans losing access to care."
The billionaire's business ties include SpaceX and its subsidiary Starlink, the electric vehicle maker Tesla, and the social media site X, which is aiming to add a digital wallet feature. His companies have received tens of billions of dollars in government funding, including through contracts.
"While millions of Americans are suffering, Musk is continuing to enrich himself and break ethics laws," the lawmakers wrote. "Musk continues to cut funds from programs that support working people, while his own companies continue to rake in more than $8 million per day in contracts and subsidies from the federal government. Recently, your administration changed the rules of a broadband program to give even more money to one of Musk's companies. Musk held a car show on the lawn of the White House, where he illegally promoted his company's vehicles."
The letter continues: "Musk paid Wisconsin voters to support his preferred candidate in the state supreme court race. Any typical government employee would be held accountable for these actions, but Musk, who donated $277 million to your presidential campaign, has been allowed to keep his position of power in your White House."
"Once Elon Musk is removed from his post, he may not legally return to the federal government this year without divesting from his companies, including Tesla and SpaceX," the letter concludes. "For the good of the country, Elon Musk should be removed from his position immediately. Under the law, Mr. Musk cannot remain in his position beyond May 30th."
Politico reported last week that "Trump has told his inner circle, including members of his Cabinet, that Elon Musk will be stepping back in the coming weeks from his current role as governing partner."
The Hill pointed out Thursday that "the Tesla CEO has signaled he plans to wrap up his work in the allotted 130-day period. He told Fox News' Bret Baier last month that he expects to have accomplished most of his DOGE work in that time frame."
Still, the letter's signatories want to ensure that Musk actually leaves the government. Casar told Axios—which scooped the letter—that "we're making it very clear that the public pressure is only going to ramp up on Republicans between here and May 30."
Democrats "have legal tools at our disposal, political tools at our disposal," he said, as well as the "full force of public pressure."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Citing 'Considerable Red Flags,' Oversight Dems Probe White House Use of Musk's Starlink
Elon Musk's "dual position as the recipient of federal contracts and a White House adviser creates a troubling and obvious conflict of interest," wrote two Democratic members of the U.S. House Oversight Committee.
Apr 07, 2025
Two Democrats on the U.S. House Oversight Committee are seeking more information about the federal government's use of billionaire Elon Musk's Starlink, the satellite internet service operated by his company SpaceX, specifically at the White House complex and at the U.S. General Services Administration.
Reps. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), the ranking member of the committee, and Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) are looking for proof that new usage of Starlink technologies is "secure and will not enrich Mr. Musk in violation of federal ethics rules," according to a letter they sent Monday to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, White House Director of Office Administration Joshua Fisher, and Acting Administrator at GSA Stephen Ehikian.
The letter references March reporting from The New York Times, which stated that Starlink is now accessible across the White House campus, after Starlink "donated" the service. NBC News reported last month that GSA had adopted Starlink for its internet access at the request of Musk's staff, citing an unnamed source. Musk is also an adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump.
"Donations such as this raise considerable red flags as to whether Mr. Musk is using his position in the federal government to benefit his companies," wrote the two Democrats.
A journalist at ProPublica observed this reported donation of Starlink resembles a tactic used by another company, Microsoft, during the Biden administration: offering free trials to get government locked in to using their technology.
"It doesn't matter if it was Microsoft last year or Starlink today or another company tomorrow," Jessica Tillipman, associate dean for government procurement law studies at George Washington University Law School, told ProPublica. "Anytime you're doing this, it's a back door around the competition processes that ensure we have the best goods and services from the best vendors."
In their letter, the two Democrats also highlighted that Musk's dual role as head of Starlink and "apparent leader" of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency—which reporting indicates could soon come to a close—"raises significant ethical, security, and regulatory implications that warrant immediate attention."
What's more, his "dual position as the recipient of federal contracts and a White House adviser creates a troubling and obvious conflict of interest, raising the risk of undue influence and potential misuse of federal contracts for personal or corporate gain."
This is far from the first time that concerns around potential conflicts of interests regarding Musk's businesses and his role in the federal government have been raised.
Last month, a group of Democratic senators sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and acting Inspector General at the Transportation Department Mitch Behm demanding an investigation into whether Musk's activities at the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have violated the criminal conflict of interest statute, citing reporting that Musk's Starlink is involved in upgrading a crucial communication system at the FAA.
In their letter, Connolly and Brown said they are also concerned that the recent installation of Starlink at the White House raises potential cybersecurity and national security concerns.
The pair requested a list of information and documents from the White House and GSA, including all documents and communications relating to the legal or ethical implications of the White House and GSA using Starlink given Musk's role in the federal government, as well as documents and communications regarding any security assessments related to the use of Starlink.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Calls Grow for Federal Probe Into Possible 'Criminal' Musk Corruption at Aviation Agency
"The public has a right to know that their tax dollars are being spent in the public's best interest and not to benefit a government employee's financial interests," according to a recent ethics complaint filed by the Campaign Legal Center.
Mar 17, 2025
The drum beat for a federal probe into whether billionaire and GOP donor Elon Musk violated conflict of interest law through his dealings with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration is growing louder following reporting that technology from Musk's Starlink, the satellite network developed by its company SpaceX, will be involved in upgrading the FAA air traffic control system.
On Monday, a group of Democratic senators sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Acting Inspector General at the Transportation Department, Mitch Behm, demanding an investigation into whether Musk's activities at the FAA have violated the criminal conflict of interest statute. The letter was first reported by The Guardian on Monday.
"We are concerned that Musk... may be using his government role to benefit his own private company," the senators wrote.
The letter, sent by Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) cites coverage from The Washington Post, which in late February reported that the FAA was considering canceling a $2.4 billion Verizon contract to upgrade the FAA's communication system "that serves as the backbone of the nation's air traffic control system" and award the work to Starlink, citing unnamed sources.
The letter follows an ethics complaint, filed last week by the nonpartisan legal group Campaign Legal Center (CLC) to Behm, also asking for an investigation into whether the FAA's business transactions with Starlink "are improper due to violations of the criminal conflict of interest law."
Both the letter from the Democratic senators and the CLC complaint cite a section of federal statute that prohibits government employees—including special government employees, which is Musk's designation—from "participat[ing] personally and substantially" in any "particular matter[s]" in which the employee, their spouse, their companies, or other business partners have any "financial interest."
"Public reports establish that the FAA began using Starlink services and considering contracts with the company in response to Musk's requests," according to the letter from CLC. "The public has a right to know that their tax dollars are being spent in the public's best interest and not to benefit a government employee's financial interests."
In early February, Musk—who has been deputized by U.S. President Trump to pursue cuts to government spending and personnel—said that his so-called Department of Government Efficiency(DOGE) will "aim to make rapid safety upgrades to the air traffic control system."
According to Bloomberg, a SpaceX engineer arrived at the FAA headquarters in late February to "deliver what he described as a directive from his boss Elon Musk: The agency will immediately start work on a program to deploy thousands of the company's Starlink satellite terminals to support the national airspace system."
"There is no effort or intent for Starlink to 'take over' any existing contract," SpaceX wrote on X in early March. The company said it is working in coordination with another prime contractor for the FAA's telecommunications infrastructure "to test the use of Starlink as one piece of the infrastructure upgrades so badly needed along with fiber, wireless, and other technologies."
Per Bloomberg, the FAA is already testing or actively using multiple Starlink terminals.
The CLC letter argues that reporting provides evidence that "the FAA's business relationship with Starlink is tainted by Musk's influence. Musk is a government official with broad authority who acts with direct support from the president. With this authority and support, he has openly criticized the FAA's contractors while directing the agency to test and use his company's services."
This "establish[es] a possible criminal conflict of interest violation, and an [Office of Inspector General] investigation is needed to determine whether the facts constitute a legal violation," per the CLC letter.
The requests to probe Musk's business connections to the FAA come as the U.S. has dealt with a series of plane crashes and accidents, which in some cases have been deadly, and has invited scrutiny of the country's air traffic control system.
John P. Pelissero, the director of a government ethics program at Santa Clara University, told the Post that it appears that "because of Musk's current position in DOGE and his closeness to Trump he and his company are getting an advantage and getting a contract," speaking of the potential Verizon contract cancellation.
"Who's looking out for the public interest here when you get the person who's cutting budgets and personnel from the FAA, suddenly trying to benefit from still another government contract?" Pelissero said, according to the Post.
Keep ReadingShow Less
How the GOP Spending Bill Would 'Hand a Blank Check to Elon Musk'
One top Democrat called the seven-month continuing resolution a "power grab" that "further allows unchecked billionaire Elon Musk and President Trump to steal from the American people."
Mar 10, 2025
House Republicans this week are aiming to pass a seven-month government funding bill that Democrats said would effectively preempt any congressional effort to rein in billionaire Elon Musk as he works in concert with President Donald Trump to eviscerate federal agencies and fire government employees en masse.
The continuing resolution (CR), which would avert a looming shutdown and keep the government funded through September, calls for increasing military spending while cutting or declining to fund key programs involving rental assistance, public health, and other critical areas.
Politico reported that the bill would boost military spending by roughly $6 billion and slash non-military funding by $13 billion.
"The bill, for instance, does not renew $40 million in fiscal 2024 funding for more than 70 programs that help children and families," the outlet noted. "Most had been requested by Democratic senators, but not all: Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith previously secured $250,000 for a group that works to prevent child abuse in her home state of Mississippi and GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski requested more than $5 million to help fund homeless shelters and prevent child abuse in Alaska."
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said in a statement that the legislation "is a power grab for the White House and further allows unchecked billionaire Elon Musk and President Trump to steal from the American people."
DeLauro continued:
By essentially closing the book on negotiations for full-year funding bills that help the middle class and protect our national security, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have handed their power to an unelected billionaire. Elon Musk and President Trump are stealing from the middle class, seniors, veterans, working people, small businesses, and farms to pay for tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations. They have made it harder for Americans to get their Social Security benefits; shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has saved American families $21 billion; fired 6,000 veterans and reportedly plan to make it harder for veterans to access benefits by firing an additional 80,000 VA employees; laid off hundreds of workers who build and maintain critical nuclear weapons; and shut down medical research labs. House Republicans' response: hand a blank check to Elon Musk.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, echoed DeLauro's criticism of the Republican bill, calling it a "slush fund continuing resolution that would give Donald Trump and Elon Musk more power over federal spending—and more power to pick winners and losers, which threatens families in blue and red states alike."
"Instead of turning the keys over to the Trump administration with this bill," said Murray, "Congress should immediately pass a short-term CR to prevent a shutdown and finish work on bipartisan funding bills that invest in families, keep America safe, and ensure our constituents have a say in how federal funding is spent."
In a fact sheet released over the weekend, Murray's office noted that full-year government funding bills typically provide "scores of specific funding directives for key programs and priorities" that constrain the executive branch.
But under the GOP continuing resolution, the fact sheet observes, "hundreds of those congressional directives fall away," giving the Trump administration broad discretion to "reshape spending priorities, eliminate longstanding programs, pick winners and losers, and more."
"Under this CR, the Trump administration could—for example—decide not to spend funding previously allocated for combatting fentanyl, the SUPPORT Act, and other substance abuse and mental health programs, or specific NIH priorities like Alzheimer's disease and vaccine research—and instead steer funding to other priorities of its choosing," the document states. "It could also pick and choose which Military Construction, Army Corps, or transit improvement and expansion projects to fund without direction from Congress."
A similar fact sheet released by DeLauro warns that the CR "provides a blank check to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the amount of $4 billion, enabling Elon Musk to direct contracts to Starlink and SpaceX (companies owned by Musk) at a time when unvetted and unchecked SpaceX employees have burrowed in the FAA (the same Federal agency that regulates SpaceX), with no requirement for public transparency, fair competition, or congressional approval."
"This continuing resolution is a blank check for Elon Musk and creates more flexibility for him to steal from the middle class, seniors, veterans, working people, small businesses, and farmers to pay for tax breaks for billionaires," said DeLauro.
The Republican bill is expected to get a House vote as soon as Tuesday evening. In a post to his social media platform on Saturday, Trump praised the CR as "very good" and demanded lockstep unity from his party, which has willfully ceded the power of the purse in the opening weeks of the president's second White House term.
Trump's call for "no dissent" from Republicans stems from the party's narrow majorities in the House and Senate. In the latter chamber, the bill will need at least seven Democratic votes to pass.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy