News
Why Trump could be interested in Elon Musk’s Mars mission
Of all the speculations being made about the plans Donald Trump has for the United States, this one may really perk up the ears of space fans in a good way.
“We choose to go to
the MoonMars, not because it is easy, but because it is hard and would be a huge deal for my presidency.”– Future President Trump speech
The future is anyone’s crystal ball with the Trump administration, but there are some credible breadcrumbs out there worth a second look and arguably optimistic conjecture about a Mars-Trump-Elon Musk connection.
Here’s the gluten trail:
- Elon Musk has joined Trump’s Strategic and Policy Forum, signaling Trump’s interest in his business expertise and his access to Trump
- Musk has had at least one meeting with Trump specifically, and had at least two recent visits to Trump Tower, further confirming Trump’s interest in Musk
- Musk has said positive things about being able to work with Trump towards energy technology goals and manufacturing in the U.S. (which would include SpaceX)
- Trump has recently met with historian David Brinkley who specifically cited Trump’s interest in President John F. Kennedy’s famous Moon speech and a mission to the Moon, signaling Trump’s interest in a “big” space goal
- Trump’s NASA transition team includes several pro-commercial spaceflight faces, SpaceX fans included
- Trump is interested in cutting discretionary spending, and commercial-government spaceflight partnerships would be an option in line with that path, especially using SpaceX’s lower cost rocket technology
- Musk’s timeline for SpaceX’s future missions to Mars means they could potentially occur during Trump’s presidency, notably close to reelection campaign season
That last one could be what could pull the lever if the decision came down to the Moon people vs. the Mars people.
It’s no secret that congressional space policy leadership favors the Moon as a stepping stone to Mars, and that itself has significant weight; however, SpaceX is already on the way to sending its Red Dragon capsule to Mars, 2018/2020 being the current launch goal, and redirecting NASA once again to focus instead on the Moon would likely take more time (and money) to do, leaving SpaceX to bask in red planet glory first during reelection season.
Trump has been listening to @elonmusk on Mars and Doug Brinkley on JFK's moonshot. Hmmm…. https://t.co/WkfpppBYIy
— Joel Achenbach (@JoelAchenbach) January 19, 2017
The political picture kind of paints itself, really. The presidential campaign is underway and Trump’s Moon mission, a place the public would possibly see as “been there done that”, is running over budget and likely not even happened yet. Meanwhile, Elon Musk and his SpaceX team have launched their Falcon Heavy cargo, possibly preparing for a second launch, and have either already landed on Mars or about to.
That’s not a pretty picture if you’re President Donald Trump arguing the case for how you’re making America great again.
It’s possible that Trump is really only interested in speaking with Elon Musk about the future of electric cars (maybe that subsidy situation that keeps getting harped on by certain groups on the right?) and/or the unique startup-to-success stories of Elon’s companies, but it would make just as much sense for him to be interested in a Mars mission to unite the country under his leadership. The work is already being done so in a way, Trump just needs to make a few of his famous “deals” to help things along to be able to plant his name on it.
In that light, a journey to Mars certainly looks like it could unfortunately just be a political decision rather than a grandiose vision thing for the President. After all, Trump hasn’t seemed very interested in our space program overall, choosing to focus on economic matters and non-NASA related national security. However, would it really be a bad thing for him to pursue a Mars mission for purely political motivations? Done right, it’s a win-win for everyone: Trump gets his political boost, humanity gets to celebrate the official beginning of becoming a multiplanetary species via the world of “new space”.
Only time will tell, and hopefully we will have more answers rather than questions in the immediate future.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
