Author: admin

The trial over OpenAI has begun, kicking off a showdown between Elon Musk and Sam Altman.

Elon Musk took the witness stand Tuesday afternoon after opening arguments. Sam Altman is also in the room, Business Insider’s Katherine Li confirmed.

At the heart of the case is Musk’s accusation that Altman and other execs deceived him into donating $38 million to OpenAI based on promises that it would remain a nonprofit dedicated to developing AI for the public’s benefit, and not for private gain.

The trial pits two of the most powerful tech titans against each other. Musk is asking for up to $134 billion in damages and for Altman to lose his job, among other potential remedies.

The world’s richest man talks student loans

In his walk down memory lane, Musk told the jury he had “$100,000 dollars in student debt” before being able to profit from his first company, Zip2. The jury likely knows the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX as the world’s richest man with an estimated net worth of around $780 billion, according to Forbes.

Musk tells the jury about his background

After setting the stakes for the trial, Elon Musk’s lawyer Steven Molo asked him about his childhood. The tech mogul grew up in South Africa and spent time in Canada before living in the United States.

“I was a lumberjack, I waited tables, I did some programming, contract programming of computers, and I went to Queen’s University in Canada,” Musk told the jury.

Musk says this case could impact other charities

After taking the witness stand, Elon Musk said laws governing charities are at stake in his legal fight with OpenAI and Sam Altman.

“It will become precedent, and it will give license to losing every charity in America,” Musk told the nine-person jury.

Elon Musk has taken the witness stand

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, has taken the witness stand as the first witness in his high-stakes legal battle with OpenAI and Sam Altman. Altman was in the courtroom for the testimony.

Musk sued Altman and other OpenAI executives in 2024, alleging that they intentionally “deceived” him into putting up tens of billions when they cofounded the company together in 2015.

Altman and his allies ” have been unjustly enriched to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars,” Musk’s lawsuit says.

Attacks on Musk’s AI are already starting

The crux of OpenAI’s case is that Elon Musk is trying to take down a rival. Musk is the founder of xAI, the company behind the Grok chatbot.

On Tuesday, Microsoft’s lawyer told the jury that Musk was suing because he had “fallen behind” in the AI race. “He launched xAI, and then he sued.”

In an effort to compete, Musk has poured billions into xAI, integrated Grok into X, and leveraged his broader tech empire to scale the platform quickly.

Musk could have called Nadella, Microsoft’s lawyer said

In some ways, Silicon Valley is a small community, and this case exemplifies that. Many of the parties were once friends, colleagues, business partners — or all three.

The lawyer for Microsoft, Russell P. Cohen, made a reference to this in his opening remarks: “Mr. Musk knows how to get in touch with Mr. Nadella,” said Cohen. “Mr.Musk never picked up the phone to say ‘you can’t do this.'”

Microsoft is also a defendant in the case

Elon Musk’s lawsuit alleges OpenAI effectively became part of Microsoft through the tech giant’s investments in the artificial intelligence firm, which began in 2019. Russell P. Cohen, an attorney representing Microsoft, spent his opening arguments trying to rip this logic apart. Microsoft wasn’t going to invest billions of dollars for “charity,” Cohen said.

“OpenAI retained control of its technology and control of the company, and you’re going to hear from Mr. Nadella that this is a win-win,” said Cohen, referring to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. “Unlike Mr. Musk, Microsoft never tried to control OpenAI.”

Who’s expected to testify?

Elon Musk is expected to take the witness stand as soon as today. He has been allotted six hours of testimony, Business Insider’s Laura Italiano reported last week.

The witness list in this case is a veritable who’s who of tech, although not everyone on the list will appear in person. Italiano’s story breaks down the key players and their potential roles, including Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, renowned computer scientist Ilya Sutskever, and Shivon Zilis, a director at Musk’s brain-computer interface venture Neuralink and the mother of several of his children.

Read full story

Musk tried to take control of OpenAI: Altman’s lawyer

Sam Altman’s attorney, William Savitt, told the jury in his opening statements that the evidence will show Elon Musk tried to take control of OpenAI.

Savitt said Musk “demanded control” of the AI firm and used his bankrolling of it to put “a financial gun to the head of other founders.”

Musk alleges he invested tens of millions in seed money to OpenAI over the years, only to be “betrayed” by Altman and other executives.

Inside the courtroom, from the tables to the dog

Here’s what the layout looks like in the Oakland, California, federal courtroom, according to a sketch from Business Insider reporter Katherine Li.

From the perspective of journalists and other members of the audience in the gallery, Elon Musk and his legal team have a big table on the left, and Sam Altman’s and OpenAI’s legal team sit on the right.

The lawyers are sitting on what is known in the legal parlance as “rolly chairs.” The courtroom is filled to the brim, and there’s a dog at the back of the room, near the entrance, keeping everyone safe.

Elon’s donation didn’t come with strings attached: OpenAI lawyer

William Savitt, representing Sam Altman and OpenAI, is spending his opening statement batting away Elon Musk’s claims that his $38 million in charitable donations came with conditions. Musk alleges Altman deceived him by taking the money and then transforming OpenAI into a for-profit enterprise.

“The question is whether OpenAI made specific promises to Musk when he made his donations,” Savitt said. “And the answer to that is no.”

Judge calls out Musk—Altman clash over case posts

Ahead of Tuesday’s opening statements, US District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers reportedly called out Elon Musk and Sam Altman, who were both in the courtroom, over their public sparring about the case a day earlier.

The judge begged the billionaire onetime pals to stop the online potshots.

“After they posted very publicly about this case, only then did I respond,” Musk told the judge, according to an X post from journalist Mike Swift.

On Monday, Musk and OpenAI traded barbs on Musk’s X platform about the case, with Musk referring to Altman as “Scam Altman” and OpenAI ripping Musk’s lawsuit as a “baseless and jealous bid to derail a competitor.”

OpenAI lawyer: ‘Musk never cared about OpenAI being a nonprofit’

In his own opening statement, William Savitt, representing Sam Altman and OpenAI, says Elon Musk brought the lawsuit because he’s losing the AI race.

“The evidence will show that Musk never cared about OpenAI being a nonprofit, he never cared about open source, he never cared about AI safety,” said Savitt, of the elite Wall Street law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. “The only thing Musk cared about is being on top.”

It’s a packed house

The line to get into witness the epic showdown was so long, it went out the front doors of the Oakland federal courthouse. Business Insider reporter Katherine Li waited in the line earlier Tuesday with lawyers, press, and what appeared to be members of the public, before getting inside just in time for opening arguments.

On Monday, the outside of the courthouse was overflowing with protesters, including a guy dressed in a robot suit with a sign that read: “Altman’s AI enslaver.”

Here’s what’s happened so far

• Elon Musk lawyer Steven Molo kicked off the trial with opening statements attacking Sam Altman.
• “The case isn’t about Elon Musk,” Molo said. “It’s about the defendants that helped Musk found a nonprofit charity OpenAI. And in the process, they have enriched themselves and breached the very principle the organization was founded upon.”
• The trial is now in recess. A lawyer representing OpenAI and Sam Altman will present opening arguments next.
• Elon Musk is expected to take the stand as soon as today.

OpenAI ‘broke every promise,’ Musk’s lawyer tells the jury

OpenAI, founded as a nonprofit AI research lab, “broke every promise” when it became “a for-profit operation for the good of the defendants,” Elon Musk’s attorney, Steven Molo, told the jury in his opening remarks.

Last year, OpenAI completed a major restructuring that shifted the company toward a more conventional for-profit structure. It’s now valued at over $800 million and is reportedly working toward an IPO that could take place this year.

Lots of boxes — what’s inside?

Already, this case has led to a treasure trove of private emails and other documents, including text messages showing Musk asking Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg to join him in an unsolicited bid for OpenAI’s intellectual property.

Earlier on Tuesday, employees at MoloLamken, a firm representing Elon Musk, were spotted wheeling boxes of documents into the Oakland courthouse.

Nine jurors will decide the case, but OpenAI’s fate will be up to the judge.

Nine jurors will be deciding whether OpenAI is liable in the trial.

If OpenAI is found liable, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will be deciding the remedies in a separate phase. As Business Insider has previously reported, Judge Gonzalez Rogers is considered tough but fair.

Musk has asked her to reverse the transformation of OpenAI’s for-profit arm and disgorge it of “ill-gotten gains.”

Read full story

Elon boosts New Yorker article on Sam Altman

Ahead of the trial’s opening arguments, Elon Musk boosted the visibility of a New Yorker magazine investigation about Sam Altman. The New Yorker story examined claims that Altman had been dishonest in business dealings and in running OpenAI — claims that dovetail with Musk’s lawsuit.

On Musk’s social media network X, formerly Twitter, a post from one of the article’s co-authors Ronan Farrow was labeled as “Boosted” and said, “This organic post was boosted by @elonmusk.”

Read full story

Without Musk, there’s no OpenAI, his lawyer says

In his opening statements, Elon Musk’s attorney, Steven Molo, explained how the Tesla CEO provided tens of billions of dollars for “OpenAI to get up and running off the ground.”

“Without Elon Musk, there will be no OpenAI,” Molo told the federal jury.

Musk helped found the ChatGPT maker in 2015, together with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and company president Greg Brockman, who is also a defendant in the case.

Case isn’t about Elon Musk, his lawyer says

The Musk v. Altman civil trial kicked off with opening statements on Tuesday, first led by Musk’s attorney, Steven Molo.

“The case isn’t about Elon Musk,” Molo told the nine-person jury at the top of his remarks as Musk looked on from the courtroom.

During jury selection, some jurors took issue with Musk, with one referring to him as a “world-class jerk” in a pre-trial questionnaire.

“It’s about the defendants that helped Musk found a nonprofit charity OpenAI,” Molo said. “And in the process, they have enriched themselves and breached the very principle the organization was founded upon.”

Elon Musk goes through security

Photogs have already captured Elon Musk, the world’s richest man and CEO of Tesla, entering the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building in Oakland, California, where his civil case is underway.

The lawyers will kick off the trial with opening arguments, followed by the witnesses. Musk could be the first witness in his $134 billion case against Sam Altman and OpenAI, which he helped start in 2015.

• OpenAI missed internal revenue and user targets, The Wall Street Journal reported.
• The report sent some tech stocks into the red on Tuesday. OpenAI called the article “clickbait.”
• Traders and scientists — including Jim Cramer and Gary Marcus — had different takes on the impact.

There’s a fresh batch of concern around AI’s future — and OpenAI is at the center of it.

On Monday, The Wall Street Journal reported that OpenAI missed internal revenue targets and fell short of last year’s goal of 1 billion weekly active users, citing people familiar with the figures. It also reported that CFO Sarah Friar had warned other executives that the company needs to grow revenue to keep up with its future computing contracts.

OpenAI called the report “clickbait” in a statement to Business Insider. The company said the business is “firing on all cylinders,” with enterprise demand stronger than ever.

Still, Wall Street’s reaction was immediate: Shares of companies tied to OpenAI — from chipmakers to infrastructure partners — flashed red on Tuesday morning. The Nasdaq composite was down more than 1% in midday trading.

Here’s what some of the industry’s smartest voices are saying.

Dan Ives, Wedbush’s managing director

Wedbush’s Dan Ives — a longtime AI bull — wrote on X that investors are misreading OpenAI’s growth.

“OpenAI has been tracking very high demand on both the consumer and enterprise front,” he wrote on Tuesday. “We strongly disagree with the notion that growth is weakening.”

He called the market’s drop a “way overreaction” — and included a target, gold trophy, and bull emoji for full effect.

Gary Marcus, NYU’s professor emeritus of psychology and neural science

On Tuesday, Gary Marcus, a professor emeritus of psychology and neural science at New York University, said Monday’s report was a flashing warning.

On X, he wrote that OpenAI has missed its “exponential growth” expectations and said the company could “someday be seen as the WeWork of AI,” referring to the failed office-sharing company.

“OpenAI, which squandered its tremendous lead and is now missing its projections, is in trouble,” he said. “There’s no two ways about it.”

Jim Cramer, CNBC’s host of “Mad Money”

Jim Cramer, the former hedge fund manager and the CNBC “Mad Money” host, blasted the Journal’s report as a “hit job” in a series of posts on X.

He said the story misses recent momentum around OpenAI’s agentic coding tool, Codex.

“The bottom line: they are short compute and Codex is on fire,” he wrote, meaning the company lacks enough data center infrastructure and processing power to keep up with user demand.

Cramer also said OpenAI has faced repeated concerns about its growth prospects, including the company’s December worries about AI competition from Google, but has continued to raise investment.

“Remember Code Red?” he said, referring to when the company had gone into emergency mode to fend off competitive threats. “All that has happened is that OpenAI has been able to raise more and more money.”

Joe Mazzola, Charles Schwab’s head of trading and derivatives strategist

Joe Mazzola, head of trading and derivatives strategist at Charles Schwab, who analyzes market sentiment, said in a note on April 28 that the OpenAI news is already weighing on AI-linked stocks.

He pointed to declines in Arm Holdings, CoreWeave, Oracle, Advanced Micro Devices, and Nvidia on Tuesday, and noted that “CoreWeave and Oracle both have large deals with OpenAI.”

That’s raising concerns about whether OpenAI can meet its previous multi-billion-dollar spending commitments, he said.

The uncertainty, he suggested, is starting to ripple into fresh concerns about other AI companies.

“One question is whether the issues are isolated to OpenAI or extend to competing AI developers like Anthropic — the maker of Claude — and Alphabet’s Google Gemini,” he wrote. “Demand is growing faster than the infrastructure needed to support it, frustrating some users.”

Noah Kenney, Digital 520’s founder

Noah Kenney, founder of AI consultancy Digital 520, told Business Insider the stakes go well beyond OpenAI itself.

“When the category leader misses on both users and revenue while underwriting roughly $600 billion in data-center commitments, the issue is not whether AI demand exists,” he wrote. “Those internal forecasts were the basis for contracts. A recalibration at OpenAI flows directly into their order books.”

Kenney said that OpenAI is unlikely to pull back from its massive buildout but needs to show “tighter discipline” in its current spending.

• I gave up sitting in traffic during my commute. Now I get to enjoy staring at the spring blossoms.
• When my family moved to Paris we decided not to bring our cars and rely on public transit instead.
• My teen quickly learned how to navigate the metro and all the walking has made me feel healthier.

I watch the pink-and-white-hued trees drooping under the weight of the cherry blossoms pass by the tram window. It is always a pleasure to watch them in spring. I enjoy watching vignettes of life flash by — people going about their day, while I admire Paris in its changing seasons.

Moving to a historic and leafy suburb of Paris from Pune, India, three years ago has transformed my life. I no longer own or drive a car.

Never in my life did I think this change would be possible or that I would actually enjoy it, but it has changed my life in the best way possible.

In India, driving was necessary but exhausting

Back in India, we had not one but two cars. My husband drove a Honda Civic, while I was happy with my petite Hyundai Santro. Door-to-door driving meant navigating the chaotic, unruly Indian traffic with little physical activity.

Public transport wasn’t always reliable, and connectivity could be an issue. It was a nightmare driving through India’s packed streets, where many other drivers seemed to have no problem breaking traffic rules.

Most evenings on my way home, I would be stuck in snail-paced traffic for hours. Constantly alternating between the clutch and the brake, and the frustration of wasting time in a gridlock was exhausting.

In Paris, I embraced a lifestyle built around public transport

Three years ago, we moved to the City of Light when my husband was relocated by his employer. Here, I discovered a lifestyle setup around the transit system — buses, trams, and the metro — that not only made getting around easier, but unexpectedly improved my health and quality of life.

Because of this, we made the conscious decision not to buy a car, a decision I haven’t regretted to date.

Now, the time I spend traveling to and from the office daily on public transport is my “me time.” My daily commute to work takes around 40 minutes, but during that time I get to enjoy scenic views and also track my steps as I change from a bus to a tram. I take time to crack the Wordle of the day, which my husband and I compete on by comparing the number of attempts.

While navigating buses and trams in Paris’s cold, rainy weather was initially challenging, I have since gotten used to it. There are occasional transport disruptions, but they are rare, and there are fallback options if needed.

During our weekend trips around the city, I actually get to spend time with my family. I’m not focused on navigating traffic, instead, we’re sharing a conversation on the bus or metro, where I can actually focus on the people around me.

This lifestyle has also given us access to some of the most beautiful metro stations in Paris including Arts et Métiers, Pont Neuf, Bir-Hakeim. I still haven’t grown tired of seeing the beautiful architecture, which continues to feel new and exciting to me.

Giving up our cars made our lives healthier

After moving to Paris at 13, our daughter quickly learned to navigate the underground maze of Paris’s metro system. She is far more independent now, switching between buses effortlessly to get to school. While our son, aged 21, complains once in a while and misses the four-wheeler back home, we have grown used to this way of life.

I feel far less stressed than I did driving in India’s traffic. Most days, I reach 8,000 steps by the evening, and the day is not even over yet. Letting go of my car didn’t take anything away from my life — it gave me a better one.

• Taylor Swift recently spoke to The New York Times about her songwriting process and career.
• Swift said she worried people would grow tired of her after she found success as a teenager.
• “The entertainment industry love-bombs women,” Swift added.

When Taylor Swift was 22, she wasn’t feeling 22. At least not in the way her iconic song describes.

In reality, she sat alone in a hotel room and doom-spiraled about her career trajectory.

“It sounds ridiculous, but at 22 years old, I felt completely washed up,” Swift recently told The New York Times. “I felt like maybe the only thing that made me special was that I was this, like, ‘teen phenom,’ whatever I was looked at as.”

As is her custom, Swift wrote a song about these feelings. In the chorus of “Nothing New,” she sings, “How can a person know everything at 18, and nothing at 22? And will you still want me when I’m nothing new?”

“When I was 18, I had the ‘Fearless’ album come out, and I had my first international No. 1s, and everybody was like, ‘Oh, this writing, it’s so true, it’s so honest. It feels like she deserves to be here,'” Swift explained. “And then there was this big upheaval of, ‘No, she doesn’t. No, she doesn’t. She sucks, actually.'”

“Nothing New” was originally left on the cutting-room floor. Swift later rerecorded it as a duet with Phoebe Bridgers and released it on “Red (Taylor’s Version)” in 2021. Swift is the only songwriter credited.

Swift shared these recollections with The New York Times for the paper’s list of The 30 Greatest Living American Songwriters. Swift is featured alongside legends like Stevie Wonder, Dolly Parton, and Bob Dylan, as well as contemporary stars like Mariah Carey, Kendrick Lamar, and Bad Bunny.

In a filmed interview, Swift reflected on her two-decade career — and how the whiplash of fame has informed her songwriting process.

“Somebody was like, ‘Oh, you’re 22 years old, and you’re saying, ‘Are you tired of me? If you’re not yet, are you going to get tired of me?’ Because it’s usually something that you would sing about later in life,” Swift said. “But the entertainment industry, I’ll tell you, there’s 10 years for every year you’re in it. But it’s fun.”

Swift, now 36, has released several songs about the pressures, perils, and double standards that come with a life in the public eye, especially as a female entertainer. On Swift’s newest album, 2025’s “The Life of a Showgirl,” she invokes the memory of Elizabeth Taylor to illustrate this tension — and to honor the woman who persevered through exploitation and scrutiny.

On 2024’s “The Tortured Poets Department,” the predecessor to “Showgirl,” Swift included a song named after Clara Bow, who was known as the original “It Girl.”

In the first verse, the narrator — a powerful, presumably male Hollywood executive — tells an aspiring starlet, “You look like Clara Bow in this light, remarkable,” promising to give her a bright future in the industry. In the second verse, the pattern repeats with another young woman hoping for her big break.

“That was me that sat down opposite that desk, right? I sit down at a record label, and they’re like, ‘You look like Stevie Nicks. We’ll make you the next Stevie Nicks,'” Swift told the Times. “And basically, you learn that like, you’re in this machine and they’re trying to make you into a woman that they just idealized and then discarded. The entertainment industry love-bombs women.”

In the final verse of “Clara Bow,” the cycle continues: “You look like Taylor Swift in this light, we’re loving it / You’ve got edge she never did.”

Swift previously discussed her fears about aging out of show business in her 2019 documentary “Miss Americana,” which premiered when she was 29.

“It’s a lot to process because we do exist in this society where women in entertainment are discarded in an elephant graveyard by the time they’re 35,” Swift said at the time. “Everyone’s a shiny new toy for like, two years. The female artists that I know of have reinvented themselves 20 times more than the male artists. They have to. Or else you’re out of a job.”

• Sam Altman showed up in court as jury selection began in a civil trial between him and Elon Musk.
• Some potential jurors offered unfavorable views about AI — and Musk.
• Musk sued OpenAI, Altman, and OpenAI president Greg Brockman two years ago.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman made an unexpected appearance in a California courtroom Monday as jury selection in his high-stakes legal feud with Elon Musk kicked off.

Altman, who wore a dark-colored suit and white shirt, was spotted inside the Oakland courtroom, where some potential jurors shared unfavorable views about artificial intelligence — and Musk, the world’s richest man.

Musk was not in attendance during day one proceedings of the federal civil trial between two of the tech industry’s most powerful billionaires. Since it is a civil trial, the parties are not required to appear unless they are testifying. Up until now, Musk and Altman have largely left the matter to their lawyers, aside from the occasional online jab.

The Tesla CEO sued OpenAI, Altman, and OpenAI president Greg Brockman two years ago, alleging that they intentionally “deceived” him into cofounding the company with them in 2015.

The lawsuit seeks more than $100 billion in damages, along with sweeping changes to the structure of the $850 billion company behind ChatGPT. The case comes as OpenAI is reportedly preparing for an initial public offering.

Earlier Monday, Musk and OpenAI traded barbs on Musk’s X platform about the case, with Musk referring to Altman as “Scam Altman” and OpenAI ripping Musk’s lawsuit as a “baseless and jealous bid to derail a competitor.”

Musk is expected to testify in the weeks-long trial, along with Altman and other tech execs like Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella.

Musk alleges in his lawsuit that he poured tens of millions into OpenAI to support its founding mission as a nonprofit dedicated to developing AI for the public’s benefit, only for that mission to later be abandoned, in part, through the company’s partnership with Microsoft.

Microsoft is also named as a defendant in Musk’s lawsuit.

• Donald Trump owns his own social media company.
• But Truth Social isn’t where to go if you want a lot of people to see you attack Jimmy Kimmel.
• So Melania Trump made sure her demand that ABC do something about Kimmel appeared on Elon Musk’s X, too.

Melania Trump says ABC should “take a stand” over Jimmy Kimmel, because she doesn’t like a joke the talk show host made last week.

First things first: The first lady calling on a media company to do something about its employee because she doesn’t like what that employee said is a bad thing. It’s an attempt to use the power of the White House to silence speech that the White House doesn’t like.

And it’s just as worrisome as it was last September, when Brendan Carr, Trump’s pick to head the Federal Communications Commission, told ABC owner Disney to “take action, frankly, on Kimmel” because Kimmel had made a joke about Trump supporters and Charlie Kirk. Disney suspended Kimmel for a few days and then reinstated him after public outcry.

There is a difference between Carr’s demand and Melania Trump’s demand on Monday, since Carr is a regulator with direct oversight over parts of Disney’s business, and Melania Trump doesn’t have any formal power over … anything. But she’s still using the power of the White House to try to control speech, and that should alarm anyone with any common sense. (I’ve asked her office for comment.)

Let’s see how new Disney CEO Josh D’Amaro responds to this one.

Much less important, but still interesting to me: The first lady’s choice of platform to make her demand/threat. Melania Trump used Elon Musk’s X, the site formally known as Twitter, to post her thoughts on Monday, using both her official First Lady of the United States account and her own personal account.

Trump also posted the same statement on Truth Social, the social media site owned by her husband. But that one seemed obligatory. Not in the way it’s literally obligatory for Donald Trump to post at least some of his thoughts on his own social platform before he puts them anywhere else. But in the way you’re supposed to tell your significant other you think they make the best pasta, when what you really crave is Olive Garden.

The numbers make it clear why Melania Trump chose to use X to make a splash: Her post on that platform has 230,000 likes, and that number is skyrocketing. Her Truth Social post has 6,500 likes and is traveling at a much more leisurely pace.

All of which is a reminder that while Truth Social is the Trump-owned Twitter alternative Donald Trump uses, it remains a minor-at-best platform. One that won’t tell you how many users it has, and one that managed to lose more than $700 million on revenue of $3.7 million in 2025.

None of that is news, nor does it seem to matter to Trump, who still owns a company worth nearly $3 billion, even after a stock plunge and the departure of its CEO — perhaps because the company’s current plan is to merge with a nuclear fusion company.

It also doesn’t matter where Donald Trump truths or posts or spouts off — he’s the president of the United States, so just about anything he says that’s noteworthy gets instantly transmitted through the global media ecosystem. Like what happened on Monday afternoon, where he piggybacked on his wife’s post and explicitly called on Disney and ABC to fire Kimmel.

But for the rest of us — including the first lady of the United States — where you post a message matters. Which is why she’s using the one that helped her husband get into the White House in the first place.