Connect with us

News

Opinion: Fmr President Trump was wrong to call Elon Musk “another bullshit artist”

Credit: MINISTÉRIO DAS COMUNICAÇÕES, CC BY 2.0 , VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Published

on

Former President Trump was wrong to call Elon Musk, “another bullshit artist.” The former president held a rally in Anchorage, Alaska, where he claimed that Elon Musk had said that he voted for Trump. The former president is well known for weaponizing mistruths to mislead his base.

The former president said that he wanted to “stop left-wing censorship and to restore free speech in America.” Following that, he promoted Truth Social and then made the following comments about Elon Musk.

Advertisement

“I tell you what. Elon is not gonna buy Twitter. Where did you hear that before? From me.”

“He’s got himself a mess. You know, he said to me the other day, ‘oh I’ve never voted for a Republican.’ I said, “I didn’t know that. You told me you voted for me.’ So he’s another bullshit artist but he’s not going to be buying it. Well, he might later.”

The former president then instructed his base again to sign up for his social network, Truth Social.

 

Advertisement

Trump Is Wrong.

Many far-left talking heads are either mocking Elon Musk or celebrating this. However, Trump is completely wrong about Elon Musk, in my opinion. And his reasoning for not buying Twitter is, I think, due to the bot issues that plague the social network.

Twitter has a real problem with bots and fake accounts and doesn’t really seem to care about solving that problem. On the other hand, real accounts often get suspended for no reason. This happened to me in 2020 after Elon Musk responded to me about ventilators for Louisiana. This was before my account was verified. And I am not the only one who has had this happen.

Is Twitter worth $44 billion? I highly doubt it. Elon Musk was right to call out Twitter on its bot problem. He has been impersonated by both verified and non-verified accounts promoting crypto scams.

 

Advertisement

The Bot Attack On Elon Musk Before He Decided Against Buying Twitter.

What I haven’t seen the media address is the bot attack on Elon Musk right before he called off the Twitter deal.

Recently, Insider published an article breaking the story of Elon Musk’s new set of twins born last November. And strangely, that account’s tweet was supported by a lot of bots and fake accounts. We know this thanks to Andrea Stroppa, a contributor to the World Economic Forum, who shared research into the Insider account and its bots in a Twitter thread.

“Yesterday, an online media outlet published an article about Elon Musk’s personal life and a person close to him. These articles generated thousands of harassment, insults by some users, and malicious bots. Watch the video. Here’s what happened. A thread.”

 

Advertisement

Andrea Stroppa’s Thread

Andrea continued.

Advertisement

“ThisIsInsider, part of Business Insider, published the article. Business Insider tweeted It multiple times article and then created a Twitter thread. A user contacted me through DMs, sending me a screen of suspicious comments below the tweets.

“The tip was correct. Around 9.000 tweets posted by bots in a couple of hours produced insults toward Elon and a person close to him. It’s interesting because, as you can note, tweets have an additional random character. It’s a trick to bypass potential spam detection.”

“Many real users also tweeted insults, but the n° of tweets produced by bots are not comparable, even If some of these real users might have a more significant impact. In fact, with quick network analysis, we found that these accs belong to a specific political group.”

“As Elon said attacks against him and his companies have increased over the past months. But recently, these attacks have involved even his family and people close to him. And about that, I want to share a personal thought.”

Advertisement

“Elon Musk is a strong person. Yeah, of course, he’s not a robot. He has feelings, so sometimes, these attacks push him down. But it’s ok. It’s the pressure that a person like Elon is ok to face but let’s keep his family and children away from these things.”

“As the last tweet of this thread, I’d love to mention this wonderful verse “For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind…” Hosea (8,7).”

“To the people who insult the personal profile of a mother of two kids, we pity you.”

 

Advertisement

A Thought On Elon’s Evolving Political Stance.

This may seem random but I want to include a thought here. Elon Musk has gotten a lot of hate-fueled criticism from the far-left over his evolving political stance. I think that a huge part of the problem is also bots.

I’d share something on Twitter and the tweet would go viral. I’d get so much hate from accounts that were either new, had very few followers, or were old but very inactive with the exception of commenting on tweets about Elon Musk. Clearly bots or at least troll farms.

 

And these farms and bots, I suspect, are being used to make certain tweets more visible. And they amplify the sensation of a trend on Twitter. This includes Elon Musk. Combine this with the narrative of him being a far-right Republican being put forth and we have a hot mess.

Advertisement

Some of the accounts are also used to try to silence any truth cutting through the misinformation. For example, the tweet above is Elon Musk explaining why he chose to vote for a Republican for the first time. The hate that followed drowned out the truth itself.

For example, I find it odd that no mainstream media outlet commented or reported Senator Warren’s taking out Facebook ads against Elon Musk and literally spreading lies about him.

Yes, Elon has tweeted that he voted Republican for the first time. But many forget that he actually voted for President Biden. He also voted for Hillary Clinton.

And President Biden completely snubbed Elon Musk, Tesla, and even SpaceX. The current president even went on to claim that General Motors’ Mary Barra was the true leader of the EV industry when it is actually Tesla. And Tesla is still leading–unless you count hybrid electric vehicles as battery-electric vehicles.

Advertisement

The fact of the matter is that he actually called out both the far right and the far left. Elon Musk has been a bit harder on the left, I think it’s because he might feel as if the political platform betrayed him. He supported the left for the longest and now they are vilifying and jeering at him.

Advertisement

Many on this platform are making him the current thing to hate. Imagine having a platform you’ve believed in and rooted for suddenly make you their sworn enemy.

Advertisement

 

Conclusion: Trump Was Wrong Here.

Former President Trump is wrong to call Elon Musk a “bullshit artist” especially since the former president isn’t known for being truthful. I think Trump is doing the exact same thing the media, left-wing and right-wing politicians, and crypto scammers are doing. He is, in my opinion, using Elon Musk’s name to simply generate more views and media attention.

I also highly doubt that Elon Musk told the former president that he voted for him. Or that he spoke with Elon Musk “the other day.”

Advertisement

Johnna Crider is a Baton Rouge writer covering Tesla, Elon Musk, EVs, and clean energy & supports Tesla's mission. Johnna also interviewed Elon Musk and you can listen here

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators

A California regulatory filing just confirmed the exact battery size inside each Tesla Semi variant.

Published

on

By

A regulatory filing published by the California Air Resources Board in April 2026 has put official numbers on what Tesla Semi owners and fleet buyers have long wanted confirmed: the exact battery capacities of both the Long Range and Standard Range Semi truck variants. CARB is California’s independent air quality regulator, and it certifies zero-emission powertrains before they can be sold or operated in the state. When a manufacturer submits a vehicle for certification, the resulting executive order becomes a public document, making it one of the most reliable sources for confirmed production specs on any EV.

The document lists two certified powertrain configurations. The Long Range Semi carries a usable battery capacity of 822 kWh, while the Standard Range version comes in at 548 kWh. Both use lithium-ion NCMA chemistry and share the same peak and steady-state motor output ratings of 800 kW and 525 kW respectively. Cross-referencing Tesla’s published efficiency figure of approximately 1.7 kWh per mile under full load, the 822 kWh pack supports roughly 480 miles of real-world range, which aligns closely with Tesla’s advertised 500-mile figure for the Long Range trim. The 548 kWh Standard Range pack works out to approximately 320 miles, again consistent with Tesla’s stated 325-mile target.

Here is a direct comparison of the two versions based on the CARB filing and published specs:

Tesla Semi Spec Long Range Standard Range
Battery Capacity 822 kWh 548 kWh
Battery Chemistry NCMA Li-Ion NCMA Li-Ion
Peak Motor Power 800 kW 525 kW
Estimated Range ~500 miles ~325 miles
Efficiency ~1.7 kWh/mile ~1.7 kWh/mile
Est. Price ~$290,000 ~$260,000
GVW Rating 82,000 lbs 82,000 lbs

The timing of this certification is not incidental. On April 29, 2026, Semi Programme Director Dan Priestley confirmed on X that high-volume production is now ramping at Tesla’s dedicated 1.7-million-square-foot facility in Sparks, Nevada. A key advantage of the Nevada location is vertical integration: the 4680 battery cells powering the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, eliminating the supply chain bottleneck that had delayed the program for years.

Advertisement

Tesla’s long-term goal is to reach a production capacity of 50,000 trucks annually at the Nevada factory, which would represent roughly 20 percent of the entire North American Class 8 market. With CARB certification now in hand and the production line running, the regulatory and manufacturing groundwork for that target is in place.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla crushes NHTSA’s brand-new ADAS safety tests – first vehicle to ever pass

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla became the first company to pass the United States government’s new Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) testing with the Model Y, completing each of the new tests with a passing performance.

In a landmark announcement on May 7, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) declared the 2026 Tesla Model Y the first vehicle to pass its newly ADAS benchmark under the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).

Model Y vehicles manufactured on or after November 12, 2025, met rigorous pass/fail criteria for four newly added tests—pedestrian automatic emergency braking, lane keeping assistance, blind spot warning, and blind spot intervention—while also satisfying the program’s original four ADAS requirements: forward collision warning, crash imminent braking, dynamic brake support, and lane departure warning.

NHTSA administration Jonathan Morrison hailed the achievement as a milestone:

“Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in our efforts to provide consumers with the most comprehensive safety ratings ever. By successfully passing these new tests, the 2026 Tesla Model Y demonstrates the lifesaving potential of driver assistance technologies and sets a high bar for the industry. We hope to see many more manufacturers develop vehicles that can meet these requirements.”

Advertisement

The updates to NCAP, finalized in late 2024 and effective for 2026 models, reflect growing recognition that ADAS features are no longer optional luxuries but essential tools for preventing crashes.

Pedestrian automatic emergency braking, for instance, targets one of the fastest-rising causes of roadway fatalities, while blind spot intervention and lane keeping assistance address common sources of side-swipes and run-off-road incidents. By incorporating objective, performance-based evaluations rather than mere presence of the technology, NHTSA aims to give buyers clearer data on real-world effectiveness.

This milestone arrives at a pivotal moment when vehicle autonomy is transitioning from science fiction to everyday reality.

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and the impending rollout of robotaxis underscore a broader industry shift toward higher levels of automation. Yet regulators and consumers remain cautious: safety data must keep pace with technological ambition.

Advertisement

The Model Y’s perfect score on these ADAS benchmarks validates that current driver-assist systems—when engineered rigorously—can dramatically reduce human error, which still accounts for the vast majority of crashes.

For Tesla, the result reinforces its long-standing claim of building the safest vehicles on the road. More importantly, it signals to the entire auto sector that meeting elevated federal standards is achievable and expected.

As autonomy edges closer to Level 3 and beyond, where drivers may disengage more fully, such independent verification becomes critical. It builds public trust, informs purchasing decisions, and accelerates the development of systems that could one day eliminate tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths.

In an era when software-defined vehicles promise transformative mobility, the 2026 Model Y’s NHTSA triumph is more than a manufacturer accolade—it is a regulatory green light that autonomy’s future must be built on proven, testable safety foundations. The bar has been raised. The industry, and the roads we share, will be safer for it.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla to fix 219k vehicles in recall with simple software update

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is going to fix the nearly 219,000 vehicles that it recalled due to an issue with the rearview camera with a simple software update, giving owners no need to travel to a service center to resolve the problem.

Tesla is formally recalling 218,868 U.S. vehicles after regulators discovered a software glitch that can delay the rearview camera image by up to 11 seconds when drivers shift into reverse.

The affected models include certain 2024-2025 Model 3 and Model Y, as well as 2023-2025 Model S and Model X vehicles running software version 2026.8.6 and equipped with Hardware 3 computers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) determined the lag violates Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 111 on rear visibility and could increase crash risk.

Yet this is no ordinary recall. Owners do not need to schedule a service-center visit, hand over keys, or wait for parts.

Advertisement

Tesla fans call for recall terminology update, but the NHTSA isn’t convinced it’s needed

Tesla identified the issue on April 10, halted further deployment of the faulty firmware the same day, and began pushing a corrective over-the-air (OTA) software update on April 11.

By the time the NHTSA posted the recall notice on May 6, more than 99.92 percent of the affected fleet had already received the fix. Tesla reports no crashes, injuries, or fatalities linked to the glitch.

The episode underscores a deeper problem with regulatory language. For decades, “recall” meant hauling a vehicle to a dealership for hardware repairs or replacements. That definition no longer fits software-defined cars. When a fix arrives wirelessly in minutes — identical to an iPhone update — the term evokes unnecessary alarm and misleads the public about the actual risk and remedy.

Advertisement

Elon Musk has repeatedly called for exactly this change. After earlier NHTSA actions, he stated plainly: “The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update.” On another occasion, he added that labeling OTA fixes as recalls is “anachronistic and just flat wrong.”

Musk’s point is simple: regulators must evolve their vocabulary to match the technology. Traditional recalls involve physical intervention and downtime; OTA updates do not. Retaining the old label distorts consumer perception, inflates perceived defect rates, and slows the industry’s shift to faster, safer software iteration.

Advertisement

Tesla’s rapid, remote remedy demonstrates the safety advantage of over-the-air capability. Problems that once required weeks of dealer appointments are now resolved in hours, often before most owners notice. As more automakers adopt software-first designs, the entire regulatory framework needs to catch up.

Updating “recall” terminology would align language with reality, reduce public confusion, and recognize that modern vehicles are no longer static hardware — they are continuously improving computers on wheels.

For the 219,000 Tesla owners involved, the process is already complete. The camera works, the car is safe, and no one left their driveway. That is the new standard — and the vocabulary should reflect it.

Advertisement
Continue Reading