From green-energy poster boy to public enemy the moment he bought Twitter and showed the receipts. Now they’re promising payback.

Elon Musk was the green-energy mascot they paraded around like a prize pumpkin—electric cars, solar panels, saving the planet—one of the good billionaires who would nod along while they taxed everyone else. Then he bought Twitter, opened the books on the Hunter Biden laptop’s intentional algorithmic suppression, the COVID dissent blacklists, the “men can’t become women” thoughtcrimes, and the deplatforming of a sitting president.

Suddenly the same people who used to tweet heart-eyes at him decided the SpaceX rockets were actually Russian assets and the Tesla factory floor was a plantation.

So the lawsuits started stacking up like overdue library books. California’s Civil Rights Department spent years investigating Tesla’s Fremont plant for racial harassment claims—slurs, graffiti, the usual factory-floor chaos in a massive workforce—and treated every settlement or surviving claim as proof of systemic evil. Never mind that the big class action was later decertified because they couldn’t get enough workers to show up and testify. Just don’t do business in California if you value your sanity or your balance sheet. Or any blue state, for that matter.

Biden himself had already signaled the mood: there were “many ways” to look into Musk’s companies. Not a specific threat with a case number attached, just the ambient suggestion that the regulatory state had plenty of levers if the man kept talking. How did that manifest?

Then came the SpaceX case. The Biden Justice Department sued the company in 2023 for “discriminating” against asylum-seekers and refugees in hiring. SpaceX’s position was simple: rockets are advanced weapons technology under ITAR export controls, so certain technical roles are restricted by law to U.S. persons. The DOJ’s position was that asylees and refugees should still get a shot at the rocket factory anyway, and SpaceX’s job postings saying otherwise were illegal discrimination. Damned if you comply with the export rules, damned if you don’t. A federal judge later paused the administrative proceedings on constitutional grounds. The case was dropped in 2025 once the administration changed. But the same people are already talking about bringing it back. National security rules versus the civil-rights checklist—guess which one the previous DOJ prioritized, and which they will prioritize going forward.

Meanwhile Musk was catching reusable boosters with giant chopsticks, dropping the cost of orbit by an order of magnitude, wiring Neuralink so paralyzed people can interact with the world again, and pushing driverless cars that actually drive and cut accidents. That last part is inconvenient for the trial lawyers who fund the other side. The response from the permanent bureaucracy was not “interesting, how do we get more of that?” It was “file another complaint.”

The Democrats prefer the model where the state supplies the outcomes and private companies that outrun the agencies get managed. When someone demonstrates that private companies can build faster and cheaper, the answer is not competition—it is lawfare. Fines for launches, investigations into hiring practices that track federal export law, workplace claims that expand until the company moves its incorporation to Texas. And when they lose an election they start promising investigations and vengeance the moment they get the gavels back, as if the goal was never the rockets or the cars but permanent control over who is allowed to build them.

When he walked into DOGE with the stated goal of cutting federal waste and fraud, the reaction left the courtroom and hit the streets. Protesters showed up outside Tesla dealerships. Charging stations were set on fire. Cars were keyed and set ablaze. Drivers started sticking “I bought this before Elon went crazy” decals on their vehicles, hoping a bumper sticker would work like lamb’s blood on the door and keep the mob from hitting their property.

The stated reason was that cutting foreign aid attacked America’s “soft power”—Kara Swisher’s phrase. Soft power is one description. Another is that USAID functioned as a convenient vehicle for funding political causes abroad that the agencies could not pursue openly—fomenting color revolutions, pressuring governments, promoting DEI projects in places like Pakistan, and routing money to NGOs in Laos run by the wives of Biden administration officials that were involved in transitioning children. They know how to spend the money best. Once that money dried up, several recent elections in Latin America swung right. Whether you call that soft power or a thumb on the scale, the vandalism outside American dealerships did not wait for the argument.

And today these power-hungry Blue Team members are threatening to sue, destroy, and put in jail today’s Thomas Edison. I openly question them: not only are you working against the interests of our own country and its citizens, but ask the people using Neuralink who can finally respond thanks to Elon’s innovation—are you working against humanity as a whole?