News
Tesla’s Elon Musk gets cursed-out by CA politician who’s backed by Chevron
Among the adverse reactions to Tesla and Elon Musk’s stance on the ongoing shutdown of the Fremont factory, the most drastic would have to come from CA Assemblywoman Lorena S. Gonzales. The politician opted to give her two cents on the unfolding series of events this past weekend, and they were interesting, to say the least.
Instead of providing a formal statement of support for Tesla like Fremont Mayor Lily Mei, or an argument about why the factory should not reopen yet like former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, Gonzales decided to keep her points as succinct as possible. In a tweet, the CA assemblywoman simply posted a message declaring “F*ck Elon Musk.”
Gonzales would later add a couple more points in her initial “F*ck Elon Musk” message. In a series of follow up tweets, Gonzales accused Tesla of being a highly-subsidized company that has “always disregarded worker safety and well-being.” She also claimed that the company has “engaged in union busting” and that it “bullies public servants.”
The CA assemblywoman’s follow-up tweets contain usual talking points against the electric car maker. Accusations about worker safety, for example, mirror those of an alleged expose by Reveal magazine back in 2018, which Tesla has already responded to. Musk has also noted that Fremont employees are free to unionize, though organizations such as the UAW are not particularly popular among the plant’s workers considering the union’s failures during the facility’s days as the NUMMI plant.
Interestingly enough, a look at Gonzales’ page on politician-tracking platform VoteSmart shows that the CA assemblywoman lists Chevron, one of the world’s premier fossil fuel companies, as her third-biggest contributor for the 2020 cycle. A look at Gonzales’ fundings from top industries also reveals that she has received funds from the “Oil and Gas” segment.
There are many ways to express grievances against Musk and Tesla, though it is difficult to deny that Gonzales’ simple profanity-laden statement is a bit unusual for a government official. Off-the-cuff comments may be the trend nowadays with politics spilling over to online platforms, but it is still a bit off to see overtly aggressive posts such as “F*ck Elon Musk” coming from a CA assemblywoman. Such statements are common to the TSLAQ community and outspoken short-sellers, but one would expect an elected official to behave online differently.
Amidst the ongoing shutdown of the Fremont factory, Scott Haggerty, the county supervisor for the district in Alameda County, suggested to the New York Times that things would have been better had Musk not filed a lawsuit against the county. According to Haggerty, Tesla was poised to reopen the Fremont factory on May 18, but Musk wanted the factory to resume operations earlier. With Tesla filing a lawsuit against the county, Haggerty warned that things would likely be delayed further.
“We were working on a lot of policies and procedures to help operate that plant, and quite frankly, I think Tesla did a pretty good job, and that’s why I had it to the point where on May 18, Tesla would have opened. I know Elon knew that. But he wanted it this week.”
“It (the lawsuit) was only a threat, and as an elected official, I get threatened all the time. It does, at that point, slow down conversations between my contact at the plant and myself. He could have spent time enjoying his new baby and given me and my staff a couple more days, and his plant would have been open on May 18. Am I somewhat sympathetic with Tesla? Yes, I am. Am I sympathetic to the way Musk is treating people? No.” Haggerty said.
Other automakers in the United States are not on the same boat as Tesla. General Motors, Ford, and Fiat-Chrysler have stated that they will resume operations on May 18. Toyota intends to reopen its US plants on May 11. German automaker Mercedes-Benz has already resumed operations at its SUV plant in Alabama, as well as a van factory in South Carolina.
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla gives its biggest signal yet that Cybercab launch is imminent
Elon Musk challenges Tesla credit rating from Moody’s after SpaceX gets a higher one
