News
A closer look at Joe Biden and Elon Musk’s feud, and the US President’s potential miscalculation
For all intents and purposes, US President Joe Biden and Tesla CEO Elon Musk should agree on a number of things. Both men have worked hard to fight climate change, and both openly support electric vehicles. Yet for the longest time now, a feud seems to have developed between Biden and Musk.
It’s not a stretch to state that a lot of the feud is due to Biden — and it will likely be a gross miscalculation on the President’s part.
It’s easy to shoehorn Elon Musk as a villain. The man’s a billionaire; he’s stated that he is voting against Democrats in the coming elections; he has even traded sarcastic barbs with popular left-leaning politicians over the past months. But what is easily forgotten these days is that Musk has, for the longest time, been a supporter of Democrats, including Biden himself.
Musk said as much recently on Twitter when he noted that he voted for both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden in the last two presidential elections. Musk was also quite close to the Obama administration. So what really encouraged Musk to switch to the right, even if Biden’s administration has characterized itself as one that is focused on climate issues and sustainability?
Some would note that the Musk and Biden feud started with the US President’s overt support for unions, but things actually started before that. As early as February 2021, Elon Musk hinted at some of his disagreements with the Biden administration. Musk was lobbying for a carbon tax then, but the CEO noted that the Biden team believed that such an initiative “seems too politically difficult.”
Musk has noted recently that his shift to the right is in no small part due to Biden’s administration doing “everything it can to sideline and ignore Tesla.” Musk critics would easily disregard these statements as entitled whining from the CEO (cue the aged Elon Musk Simpson’s “weird nerds” meme), but he does have a point. Since rejecting Musk’s suggestion for a carbon tax, the Biden administration has barely acknowledged Tesla, focusing instead on more traditional automakers that are, for the most part, doing far less for sustainability than Tesla.
This happened recently following what appeared to be Biden’s latest zinger against Musk, where he wished the CEO “lots of luck on his trip to the Moon” when asked about Musk’s concerns about the US economy. Biden proceeded to promote Ford’s efforts to hire 6,000 workers while conveniently denying that Tesla had nearly hired 50,000 people worldwide in the last two years.
Overall, the Biden and Musk feud is downright strange. From an outsider’s perspective, it really doesn’t make sense. Every person who has followed Tesla and SpaceX over the years would know that Musk’s companies are practically a perfect match for politicians on the left. Yet Biden, for some strange reason, opted to antagonize Musk instead. Biden’s not alone either, as other high-profile Democrats have also joined in on the anti-Musk bandwagon — to varying degrees of aggressiveness.
Such a strategy, however, may cost Biden in the upcoming elections. Musk is a prolific CEO, after all, and his social media presence — even if it is likely padded by bots considering Twitter’s issues with fake and spam accounts — is notable. By constantly beating on Musk while ignoring Tesla and SpaceX, Biden and his administration may end up alienating a significant part of the left’s voter base. The upcoming elections would likely show if this would be the case or not.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
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.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
