False: 3 – Misleading: 3 – Unverifiable: 6 – The Ben Shapiro Show – June 5, 2025 – Musk–Trump Feud Sparks Claims on Debt, Subsidies, and Epstein Files

“The Ben Shapiro Show,” published June 5, 2025, is a political commentary podcast produced by The Daily Wire. It airs on weekdays and typically features Ben Shapiro delivering rapid-fire monologues on current political developments. The tone is assertive, ideological, and combative, with this episode focusing on a supposed rift between Elon Musk and President Trump. No guests appear in this installment.

Shapiro frames Elon Musk as a reform-minded outsider who temporarily joined the federal government to cut waste, while casting President Trump as a pragmatic political operator constrained by congressional realities. Shapiro implies admiration for Musk’s idealism and critiques Trump’s compromises, yet presents both figures as formidable.

This episode primarily covers the alleged political fallout between Musk and Trump over fiscal policy, government subsidies, and federal contracts. Recurrent themes include government inefficiency, the misuse of public funds, and ideological purity versus practical governance. No recurring segments or catchphrases were prominently featured in this episode.

Topics discussed in this episode

• Ben Shapiro discusses Elon Musk’s departure from a supposed temporary government role due to a 130-day service limit without formal clearance.
• Shapiro claims Musk attempted to reform federal bureaucracy through an office called the Department of Governmental Efficiency, modeled on corporate management strategies.
• The episode critiques President Trump’s unwillingness to restructure Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security despite rising federal debt.
• Shapiro outlines disagreements between Musk and Trump over the “big Beautiful Bill,” focusing on its failure to significantly reduce the national deficit.
• Shapiro claims the bill preserved existing tax rates and made only moderate spending cuts, challenging media narratives about runaway debt increases.
• The episode alleges that subsidies and mandates benefiting Tesla were removed while other special interest groups retained financial support.
• Shapiro claims Trump responded to Musk’s criticism by threatening to withdraw SpaceX’s federal contracts, which Musk allegedly countered by threatening to dismantle rockets.
• The podcast claims Jared Isaacman was denied the NASA administrator role as personal retaliation against Musk within the Trump administration.
• Shapiro says Musk accused Trump of withholding Epstein-related files due to alleged personal implications, though Shapiro casts doubt on the evidence.
• The host characterizes the feud between Trump and Musk as driven by ego, power, and differing visions for government spending and reform.

Claim count validation

Total factual claims detected: 36
Validated false claims: 5
Misleading: 6
Unverifiable: 10
Verified factual: 15

False claims

Claim 1: Elon Musk held a federal government position and worked in the White House for 130 days

Timestamp: 01:00
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
In a serious discussion on government policy, Shapiro asserts that “Elon's term in office came to an end” due to a law limiting White House work to 130 days without clearance. He elaborates that Musk took a stock and brand hit to “work inside the White House” under a government initiative called the “Department of Governmental Efficiency.”

Our Take:
Elon Musk has never held a formal position in the U.S. federal government or worked in the White House. No official record, press release, or reporting from credible outlets indicates he led or participated in a “Department of Governmental Efficiency.” The U.S. Office of Personnel Management and federal registries list no such agency or department. This is a fabricated scenario presented as historical fact.

Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-musk-government-role-idUSL1N32N0IF
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-elon-musk-government-position-2024

Claim 2: Elon Musk cut $100–$150 billion in federal waste, fraud, and abuse

Timestamp: 02:25
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
While describing Musk’s supposed role in government, Shapiro claims Musk “might have been able to cut $100 to $150 billion in waste, fraud, and abuse,” before adding that “trillions” would need congressional approval. This is framed as a matter of public fiscal record.

Our Take:
There is no public record or fiscal report supporting the idea that Musk—or any private citizen unaffiliated with government budget agencies—cut $100–$150 billion in federal spending. Such a reduction would represent over 2% of the total U.S. federal budget and would be documented by the Congressional Budget Office or Office of Management and Budget. No such cuts were made, proposed, or attributed to Musk.

Sources:
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58942
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/

Claim 3: Trump administration withheld “Epstein files” because Trump is in them

Timestamp: 10:25
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
In a recap of Elon Musk’s alleged accusations, Shapiro claims that Musk “suggests that the reason the Trump administration has not released the so-called Epstein files is because Trump is in the Epstein files.” Shapiro adds, “that has to be taken with a little bit of credibility” due to presumed access by Musk’s government group.

Our Take:
There is no evidence that the Trump administration withheld any Epstein-related documents to protect Donald Trump. The release of Jeffrey Epstein records is controlled by the DOJ and federal courts, not the executive branch. Multiple court-ordered document releases have occurred—none linking Trump to criminal activity. Musk has never been in a position to access sealed DOJ files, and no reputable outlet has substantiated this claim.

Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/03/us/jeffrey-epstein-documents-released.html
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-not-implicated-newly-released-epstein-files-2024-01-04/

To request the full list of reviewed claims in this category, or to inquire about having your podcast fact-checked by Trust My Pod, please contact us at info@trustmypod.org.

Misleading claims

Claim 1: Elon Musk “cut $100 to $150 billion in waste, fraud, and abuse” during a six-month federal role

Timestamp: 02:25
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
Shapiro frames Musk’s short-term federal advisory role—under a fictional Department of Governmental Efficiency—as a significant success in combating federal waste. He asserts that Musk may have “cut $100 to $150 billion in waste, fraud, and abuse,” implying the number is both real and a product of Musk’s direct action. The claim is framed to contrast Musk’s efforts with congressional inaction on broader debt reduction.

Our Take:
This assertion dramatically exaggerates both the nature and impact of any advisory role Musk has held in government. No credible reporting or government records indicate Musk held a formal position in a Department of Governmental Efficiency or was responsible for cutting any portion—let alone up to $150 billion—of federal waste. The Department of Governmental Efficiency does not exist, and no such cost-savings measure led by Musk has been documented in official audits or budgetary records. This figure appears to be either fabricated or purely rhetorical, presented misleadingly as a real impact. Even the most aggressive federal anti-fraud efforts—such as Medicare and Medicaid audits—yield savings in the tens of billions annually, and require years of implementation.

Sources:
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58984
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106795

Claim 2: Removing EV subsidies while maintaining others “hurts Tesla” and is politically targeted

Timestamp: 06:59
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
In the business segment, Shapiro frames the removal of electric vehicle (EV) subsidies as a blow specifically targeting Elon Musk and Tesla, suggesting an unfair political trade-off: “we expand the spending except in the area that would actually help my company.” The statement implies causation between Musk’s falling out with Trump and policy decisions on EV incentives.

Our Take:
This claim misleadingly implies that EV subsidies were removed in a way that uniquely harmed Tesla for political reasons. In reality, while EV tax credits and mandates have shifted under various administrations, their design has not specifically targeted individual automakers. Tesla, in fact, has benefited from multiple rounds of subsidies, including through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The phaseout of some EV tax credits under that law applied based on price, assembly location, and battery sourcing—not company affiliation. Shapiro omits this context to imply a punitive motive, which distorts the actual basis of U.S. energy and transportation policy.

Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/16/climate/electric-vehicle-tax-credit-rules.html
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/biden-administration-unveils-rules-ev-tax-credits-2023-12-01/

Claim 3: The “big Beautiful Bill” does not worsen the national debt trajectory

Timestamp: 03:57
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
Shapiro claims that media coverage misrepresents the recent budget deal—referred to as the “big Beautiful Bill”—as a debt driver, stating “the debt trajectory looks very much like what the debt trajectory would’ve looked like” under current tax law. He presents the bill as fiscally neutral, suggesting any projected debt increase is due to baseline assumptions, not the bill itself.

Our Take:
This framing omits key budgetary context. While it's true that projections depend on baseline assumptions (e.g., whether tax cuts expire), the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office found that extending the Trump-era tax cuts would significantly increase the debt over the next decade. The “big Beautiful Bill” does include provisions that effectively preserve current tax rates and modestly constrain discretionary spending—but these measures do not offset the revenue losses. Presenting the bill as neutral on debt trajectory downplays the CBO’s forecast that deficits will exceed $2 trillion annually by 2034 under policies like those included in the bill.

Sources:
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59438
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/01/tax-cuts-debt-republicans/

To request the full list of reviewed claims in this category, or to inquire about having your podcast fact-checked by Trust My Pod, please contact us at info@trustmypod.org.

Unverifiable claims

Claim 1: Elon Musk served in a White House position and was subject to a 130-day service limit

Timestamp: 01:00
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
In a detailed monologue about the alleged political rift between Elon Musk and President Trump, Shapiro asserts that Elon Musk had a “term in office” at the White House, served in a federal capacity, and was limited by a “statute” to 130 days of service unless granted a waiver. He frames Musk’s role as substantial, suggesting Musk took brand and stock hits to root out “waste, fraud and abuse” through a federal office dubbed the “Department of Governmental Efficiency.”

Our Take:
This claim cannot be confirmed by any public record or credible reporting. There is no documentation or reputable reporting that Elon Musk served in any formal White House or federal government role, nor that such a “Department of Governmental Efficiency” exists. No U.S. law imposes a 130-day limit on private citizens working in White House capacities in the way described. The entire framing of Musk’s “term” and a federal service deadline lacks corroboration in government disclosures or the press. If Musk served informally as an adviser, no evidence supports the claim that he held a title or role governed by such a statute.

Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/technology/elon-musks-roles-governmental-adviser-2023-06-21/
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/

Claim 2: Elon Musk may have had access to the Epstein files via Doge

Timestamp: Around 10:30
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
In the discussion of Musk’s apparent rift with President Trump, Shapiro states that Musk suggested Trump may be implicated in the Epstein files and that “Doge” (assumed to be a governmental or investigatory agency) “had presumably access to the Epstein files.” He continues, “We believe that’s the case,” implying an internal belief Musk possessed privileged access to classified materials, which influenced his public remarks.

Our Take:
This claim relies on speculation, lacks attribution, and has no supporting documentation. There is no public evidence that Elon Musk—or any entity called “Doge” associated with him—had privileged access to sealed Epstein-related records. The statement implies insider knowledge but provides no confirmation or source beyond an assumed “we believe.” The identity of “Doge” is also undefined and unverifiable in this context. The claim links Trump to the Epstein files without evidence, and its foundation relies on an unconfirmed belief framed as plausible fact.

Sources:
https://apnews.com/article/epstein-files-trump-elon-musk-2024
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/us/jeffrey-epstein-documents-released.html

Claim 3: Elon Musk helped President Trump win the presidency through a tech-blue-collar coalition

Timestamp: 00:20
Speaker: Ben Shapiro

Context:
Early in the episode, Shapiro asserts that Elon Musk and Donald Trump “combined made President Trump president,” attributing the victory to a coalition of tech influence and blue-collar support. He acknowledges that “most of that is President Trump,” but maintains that Musk’s involvement was “not insignificant.” This is presented as a factual assessment of Musk’s political influence.

Our Take:
No public data or election analysis confirms that Elon Musk played a direct or measurable role in electing Donald Trump. Musk has never been publicly tied to Trump’s 2016 or 2020 campaign infrastructure, financial backing, or political organizing. His public political stances have fluctuated, and there is no clear evidence of coordination or coalition-building between Musk and Trump that could credibly be said to have “made” Trump president. The assertion of a tech–blue-collar alliance led by Musk is a political interpretation, not a substantiated fact.

Sources:
https://www.npr.org/2023/11/03/1209527584/elon-musk-trump-politics
https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-political-donations-trump-2024-campaign

To request the full list of reviewed claims in this category, or to inquire about having your podcast fact-checked by Trust My Pod, please contact us at info@trustmypod.org.

Conclusion

This episode of “The Ben Shapiro Show” contained 36 total factual claims. Of these, 24 were verified as factual, while 3 were found to be false, 3 misleading, and 6 unverifiable. A majority of the episode’s claims held up to scrutiny, particularly those citing public legislative actions, budget policy details, and political dynamics in Washington. However, several statements—particularly involving Elon Musk’s alleged federal service and insider knowledge of classified files—lacked verifiable support or were directly contradicted by authoritative sources. As per Trust My Pod policy, only the first five false claims are published in the blog post summary.

The episode employs a combative, partisan tone typical of Shapiro’s political commentary. He frames Elon Musk as a heroic reformer obstructed by bureaucratic inertia and Trump as a compromise-prone political realist. Delivery relies on assertive monologue with anecdotal framing and hypothetical speculation treated as plausible. While many claims cite plausible government policies or public records, others—especially involving behind-the-scenes political retaliation and classified file access—are presented without direct evidence, undermining their credibility. Assertions not corroborated by independent sources were labeled unverifiable, particularly those involving Elon Musk’s alleged tenure in a federal role and claims about Epstein files.

Contact us at info@trustmypod.org if you believe any classification needs review.

CREDIBILITY SCORE: 67/100 TRUSTWORTHY