Washington D.C. – The Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud became one of the most explosive internal conflicts within the Trump administration, culminating in the Tesla CEO’s shocking public declaration that called Gor “a snake.” This bitter dispute, which played out both behind closed doors and on social media, ultimately contributed to significant personnel changes and Musk’s eventual departure from his government role.
Origins of the Elon Musk Sergio Gor Feud
The Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud began brewing months before it exploded into public view in June 2025. Sergio Gor, serving as director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, held significant influence over thousands of executive-branch appointments. His role involved extensive vetting responsibilities, which frequently brought him into conflict with Musk’s preferences for certain candidates and positions.
As one of Donald Trump’s closest aides, Gor wielded considerable power in personnel decisions, a authority that increasingly frustrated Musk as the billionaire sought to influence key appointments within the administration. The Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud intensified as their fundamental disagreements over staffing strategies became more apparent.
The Snake Comment Controversy
In mid-June 2025, the Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud reached its explosive climax when Musk publicly called Gor “a snake” on his X platform. This unprecedented public attack on a senior White House official shocked political observers and revealed the depth of animosity between the two powerful figures.
The inflammatory comment came in response to reports questioning Gor’s own security clearance status. According to these reports, despite his high-level vetting responsibilities for thousands of government employees, Gor had allegedly not completed his own permanent security clearance paperwork and was operating under an interim clearance. The White House strongly disputed these claims, asserting that Gor had completed all necessary documentation and maintained active clearance status.
The public nature of Musk’s attack marked a new low in the Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud, demonstrating how personal and bitter their professional disagreements had become. The “snake” comment reverberated throughout Washington, highlighting the internal dysfunction within the administration.
Cabinet Meeting Confrontations
The Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud wasn’t confined to private disputes but spilled over into high-level government meetings. Reports indicate that Musk and Gor frequently clashed during Cabinet meetings, with tensions becoming so severe that Musk openly “chastised” Gor over personnel disagreements in front of other senior officials.
These public confrontations during official government business illustrated how the Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud was disrupting normal administrative functions. The spectacle of two prominent figures arguing in such formal settings raised concerns about the administration’s internal cohesion and decision-making processes.
The intensity of their disagreements during these meetings suggested that the Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud represented more than simple personality conflicts, reflecting fundamental differences in their approaches to government operations and personnel management.
NASA Nomination Controversy
The most significant flashpoint in the Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud centered around the nomination of Jared Isaacman to lead the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Isaacman, considered an ally of Musk, was initially nominated for the prestigious position but saw his nomination withdrawn just before the confirmation vote.
According to reports, Gor played a decisive role in derailing Isaacman’s nomination by providing Trump with a background dossier highlighting the candidate’s past donations to Democratic politicians. This strategic move by Gor effectively undermined Musk’s preferred candidate and further inflamed the Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud.
The NASA controversy represented a major victory for Gor in his ongoing battle with Musk, demonstrating his ability to influence Trump’s decisions even when opposed by the influential Tesla CEO. However, administration officials maintained that the final decision to withdraw Isaacman’s nomination rested entirely with President Trump.
This incident particularly enraged Musk, who viewed Gor’s actions as a personal betrayal and a deliberate sabotage of his efforts to place trusted allies in key scientific and technological positions within the government.
Musk’s DOGE Resignation
The Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud reached its ultimate conclusion in May 2025 when Musk resigned from his position as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). This role had tasked him with identifying opportunities to cut federal expenditure, a mission aligned with his business efficiency philosophy.
While Musk’s resignation was officially attributed to reaching the maximum tenure allowed for a special government adviser, the timing coincided with his escalating conflicts with Gor and his first major public clash with Trump himself.
The resignation followed Musk’s opposition to the administration’s flagship tax-and-spending budget bill, which narrowly cleared the Republican-led House of Representatives by just one vote on May 22. This policy disagreement, combined with the ongoing Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud, created an untenable situation for Musk within the administration.
Lasting Impact on Trump Administration
The Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud exposed significant vulnerabilities in the Trump administration’s internal dynamics and highlighted the challenges of managing strong personalities with competing agendas. The public nature of their conflict damaged the administration’s image of unity and control.
Despite Musk’s departure, Gor continued to wield significant influence within the White House, ultimately earning Trump’s confidence for the prestigious ambassadorial appointment to India. The resolution of the Elon Musk Sergio Gor feud through Musk’s exit demonstrated Gor’s political survival skills and his importance to Trump’s operational strategy.
The controversy serves as a cautionary tale about the complexities of integrating business leaders into government roles, where different priorities and operational styles can create irreconcilable conflicts that ultimately undermine administrative effectiveness and public confidence.
