Elon Musk's appearance on Tucker Carlson's online show has ignited a firestorm of controversy after he made sensitive jokes about political assassinations, particularly regarding Vice President Kamala Harris. During the nearly two-hour interview, Musk expressed strong support for Donald Trump while disparaging the Harris-Biden administration.
According to Inquisitr, Elon Musk discussed a hypothetical assassination of Vice President Kamala Harris on a show, sparking significant criticism and leading to the retraction of his remarks posted on X.
The conversation, which covered a broad range of topics including politics, religion, and Musk's business ventures, veered into risky territory when assassination came up. Musk and Carlson not only discussed the improbability of such an attempt on Harris but also mocked the idea, questioning the point of targeting someone they considered a "puppet."
Musk's remarks were followed by a controversial post on X, where he stated that no one was attempting to assassinate Biden or Kamala Harris, suggesting it would be pointless. This post was quickly interpreted by some as incitement, prompting a wave of backlash that Musk perhaps hadn't anticipated.
Reacting to the outrage, Musk deleted his post and reflected on the incident. He admitted that the humor he shared in the insulated environment of the show did not translate well to the broader public on social media.
"I made a joke which, I realize, I deleted, which is like no one is even bothering to try to kill Kamala because it’s pointless. What do you achieve? Nothing. Just find another puppet,” Musk explained, clarifying that his intent was not to incite violence but to comment on political powerlessness.
Throughout the interview, Musk also discussed his concerns over the upcoming presidential election and the consequences of a Trump loss. He speculated about potential legal and personal repercussions he might face if the Democratic Party remained in power.
Musk's fears about his future were explicitly connected to the potential policies of the Harris-Biden administration, particularly regarding immigration. He believed that legalizing many immigrants could permanently tilt future elections in favor of the Democratic Party.
"If he loses, I’m f—ed. How long do you think my prison sentence is going to be? Will I see my children? I don’t know,” Musk said, indicating his stake in the electoral outcomes.
Further solidifying his political stance, just days after an attempted assassination at one of Trump's rallies, Musk officially declared his support for Trump. He argued that a Trump victory was crucial for avoiding a one-party state in the U.S., intimating a dire future for American democracy if the Democrats retained power. "My view is that if Trump doesn’t win this election it’s the last election we are going to have,” Musk emphasized, casting the upcoming election in a stark, existential light for democracy.
Musk also critiqued those who label Trump as a danger to democracy, countering that those accusers were themselves threatening democratic principles. “The people who are saying Trump is a threat to democracy are themselves a threat to democracy,” he asserted.
Following the backlash, Musk took a moment to consider the broader implications of his public statements. “One lesson I’ve learned is that just because I say something to a group and they laugh doesn’t mean it’s going to be all that hilarious as a post on X," he reflected, acknowledging how differently messages could be received across platforms.
This incident has sparked a wider discussion about the boundaries of political discourse, the responsibilities of public figures with large platforms, and the volatile nature of online speech.
In conclusion, Elon Musk's interview with Tucker Carlson notably impacted his public image and broader political conversations. His comments and subsequent retractions highlight the complex interplay between humor, politics, and the sensitivity required when discussing topics of violence, even hypothetically. The discourse around this event underscores the ongoing debate over the nature of political speech in an increasingly divided America.