Examining the 'mind meld' between Elon Musk and Jim Jordan That’s Impacting Capitol Hill
Musk has established a White House office and is gaining influence within various federal agencies. He has now also embedded himself within the House Judiciary Committee.
TroibNews 
Elon Musk has a key supporter in Congress as he aims to significantly reduce federal bureaucracy: Rep. Jim Jordan.
Since their introduction by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy shortly after Musk's Twitter acquisition in late 2022, Musk and Jordan have developed a close relationship. The two, who engage in conversations roughly once a month, have collaborated on various initiatives since becoming acquainted, according to a source familiar with their relationship, who spoke anonymously.
Their partnership is poised to aid both men in advancing their personal and political ambitions in Trump’s Washington.
For Musk, Jordan plays a crucial role in legislation that could facilitate more legal immigration in high-skilled sectors, aligning with Musk’s business interests. Additionally, Jordan's subpoena authority allows him to target Musk's detractors. For Jordan, connecting with Musk presents an opportunity to enhance his credibility among conservatives who view the Tesla founder as a pivotal figure.
“This guy, you could argue, was the single biggest — had the single biggest influence — on saving and protecting free speech and the First Amendment, for goodness’ sake,” Jordan said in an interview. “God bless Elon Musk.”
Following the election, Jordan and Musk met at least twice, once on Capitol Hill and again at Mar-a-Lago. During these discussions, they addressed issues related to social media platforms, Musk's proposed Department of Government Efficiency, and the Judiciary Committee's investigations into the Biden administration's Federal Trade Commission.
These meetings provided early insights into how their relationship could evolve as Republicans gained control of both Congress and the executive branch under President Trump. With Jordan's committee overseeing key areas of Musk's political and policy interests—such as immigration, deregulation, antitrust, and social media oversight—the opportunities for collaboration are significant.
As Musk prioritizes cutting spending and regulations, Jordan expressed his committee's potential role in those efforts: “We can be helpful.”
Jordan intends to utilize the Judiciary Committee to scrutinize entities and government officials allegedly suppressing conservative voices, including actions taken in Europe. Recently, Jordan sent a letter to the chief tech regulator of the European Commission, seeking clarity on how social media regulations will be enforced against American companies like X.
Although Jordan has historically taken a hardline stance on immigration, he has indicated a willingness to collaborate with Musk on legislation aimed at increasing high-skilled immigration opportunities, though they have yet to discuss the issue specifically. The topic of expanding “H-1B visas” has often created tension among conservatives who seek to support tech industries without appearing to displace local workers.
“[We’ve] got to secure the border first,” Jordan remarked in an interview last month. “Once you’ve demonstrated that the border is actually secure, then we can entertain questions about the other key issues … whether it’s H-1B visas or other visas.”
Neither Musk nor a spokesperson for DOGE responded to requests for comment. A Judiciary Committee spokesperson, Nadgey Louis-Charles, noted that the panel's work on free speech began years ago.
"The Judiciary Committee’s investigation into censorship, which started in the 117th Congress, is all about defending the First Amendment and protecting free speech,” she asserted. “We’re standing up against any effort to silence Americans, and we’ve shown conclusively how Democrats colluded with Big Tech to censor Americans."
Jordan has also defended Musk directly, such as when he called a Justice Department official to testify regarding the government’s lawsuit against SpaceX, which alleged discrimination in hiring practices. This request followed SpaceX raising the concern with Jordan’s office, according to a source familiar with the matter.
Additionally, their collaboration led to the dissolution of the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), a coalition created to combat “harmful” online content after the 2019 mass shooting in New Zealand. GARM came under scrutiny when advertisers reportedly scaled back their spending on X. Although Jordan claimed he was unaware of GARM initially, he initiated a Judiciary Committee inquiry after Musk expressed concerns about the organization.
A July 2024 staff report from the Judiciary Committee adopted Musk’s phrase, “GARM is Harm,” in its title, alleging that the coalition held “anti-democratic views of fundamental American freedom” and possibly coordinated to violate antitrust laws. Shortly thereafter, Musk's X filed a lawsuit against the World Federation of Advertisers for antitrust violations, resulting in GARM's swift dissolution, which maintained its innocence but acknowledged a depletion of resources.
“When they announced they were going out of business, I called Elon up and said, 'It all started with your one sentence — when you, Kevin [McCarthy], and I met — and you told me, ‘GARM is harm,’” Jordan recounted.
Rep. Gerry Connolly, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, expressed concerns regarding the Musk-Jordan alliance, highlighting Musk's lack of governmental knowledge and potential conflicts of interest.
“Elon Musk is an unelected, unaccountable billionaire with absolutely zero knowledge of how government works and rampant conflicts of interest,” the Virginia Democrat stated. “He should be the subject of congressional investigations, not a beneficiary of politically motivated investigations into his opponents and competitors.”
When asked why Musk's influence on Capitol Hill is appropriate, Jordan argued that Musk should be acknowledged as a leader in combating censorship and emphasized that Musk "has the confidence of the president of the United States."
"So I think that’s the key thing," he added. "The guy who got elected by 77 million Americans wants him in this role.”
Jordan and Musk's relationship reportedly evolved into a “mind meld,” as described by a former associate, soon after Musk purchased Twitter. McCarthy connected the two due to their shared concerns about perceived suppression of speech on social media. Jordan has long criticized “Big Tech” and its treatment of conservative voices, and Musk's acquisition of Twitter provided momentum to address these issues.
The momentum behind Jordan's pursuit of Musk's adversaries appears to be gaining traction, with plans discussed to collaborate with the State Department regarding entry restrictions for individuals and organizations known for suppressing speech.
In the meantime, Jordan expressed his readiness to support Musk's initiatives.
“What he's done on … stopping censorship,” Jordan stated, “has just been phenomenal.”
Mark B Thomas contributed to this report for TROIB News
Since their introduction by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy shortly after Musk's Twitter acquisition in late 2022, Musk and Jordan have developed a close relationship. The two, who engage in conversations roughly once a month, have collaborated on various initiatives since becoming acquainted, according to a source familiar with their relationship, who spoke anonymously.
Their partnership is poised to aid both men in advancing their personal and political ambitions in Trump’s Washington.
For Musk, Jordan plays a crucial role in legislation that could facilitate more legal immigration in high-skilled sectors, aligning with Musk’s business interests. Additionally, Jordan's subpoena authority allows him to target Musk's detractors. For Jordan, connecting with Musk presents an opportunity to enhance his credibility among conservatives who view the Tesla founder as a pivotal figure.
“This guy, you could argue, was the single biggest — had the single biggest influence — on saving and protecting free speech and the First Amendment, for goodness’ sake,” Jordan said in an interview. “God bless Elon Musk.”
Following the election, Jordan and Musk met at least twice, once on Capitol Hill and again at Mar-a-Lago. During these discussions, they addressed issues related to social media platforms, Musk's proposed Department of Government Efficiency, and the Judiciary Committee's investigations into the Biden administration's Federal Trade Commission.
These meetings provided early insights into how their relationship could evolve as Republicans gained control of both Congress and the executive branch under President Trump. With Jordan's committee overseeing key areas of Musk's political and policy interests—such as immigration, deregulation, antitrust, and social media oversight—the opportunities for collaboration are significant.
As Musk prioritizes cutting spending and regulations, Jordan expressed his committee's potential role in those efforts: “We can be helpful.”
Jordan intends to utilize the Judiciary Committee to scrutinize entities and government officials allegedly suppressing conservative voices, including actions taken in Europe. Recently, Jordan sent a letter to the chief tech regulator of the European Commission, seeking clarity on how social media regulations will be enforced against American companies like X.
Although Jordan has historically taken a hardline stance on immigration, he has indicated a willingness to collaborate with Musk on legislation aimed at increasing high-skilled immigration opportunities, though they have yet to discuss the issue specifically. The topic of expanding “H-1B visas” has often created tension among conservatives who seek to support tech industries without appearing to displace local workers.
“[We’ve] got to secure the border first,” Jordan remarked in an interview last month. “Once you’ve demonstrated that the border is actually secure, then we can entertain questions about the other key issues … whether it’s H-1B visas or other visas.”
Neither Musk nor a spokesperson for DOGE responded to requests for comment. A Judiciary Committee spokesperson, Nadgey Louis-Charles, noted that the panel's work on free speech began years ago.
"The Judiciary Committee’s investigation into censorship, which started in the 117th Congress, is all about defending the First Amendment and protecting free speech,” she asserted. “We’re standing up against any effort to silence Americans, and we’ve shown conclusively how Democrats colluded with Big Tech to censor Americans."
Jordan has also defended Musk directly, such as when he called a Justice Department official to testify regarding the government’s lawsuit against SpaceX, which alleged discrimination in hiring practices. This request followed SpaceX raising the concern with Jordan’s office, according to a source familiar with the matter.
Additionally, their collaboration led to the dissolution of the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), a coalition created to combat “harmful” online content after the 2019 mass shooting in New Zealand. GARM came under scrutiny when advertisers reportedly scaled back their spending on X. Although Jordan claimed he was unaware of GARM initially, he initiated a Judiciary Committee inquiry after Musk expressed concerns about the organization.
A July 2024 staff report from the Judiciary Committee adopted Musk’s phrase, “GARM is Harm,” in its title, alleging that the coalition held “anti-democratic views of fundamental American freedom” and possibly coordinated to violate antitrust laws. Shortly thereafter, Musk's X filed a lawsuit against the World Federation of Advertisers for antitrust violations, resulting in GARM's swift dissolution, which maintained its innocence but acknowledged a depletion of resources.
“When they announced they were going out of business, I called Elon up and said, 'It all started with your one sentence — when you, Kevin [McCarthy], and I met — and you told me, ‘GARM is harm,’” Jordan recounted.
Rep. Gerry Connolly, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, expressed concerns regarding the Musk-Jordan alliance, highlighting Musk's lack of governmental knowledge and potential conflicts of interest.
“Elon Musk is an unelected, unaccountable billionaire with absolutely zero knowledge of how government works and rampant conflicts of interest,” the Virginia Democrat stated. “He should be the subject of congressional investigations, not a beneficiary of politically motivated investigations into his opponents and competitors.”
When asked why Musk's influence on Capitol Hill is appropriate, Jordan argued that Musk should be acknowledged as a leader in combating censorship and emphasized that Musk "has the confidence of the president of the United States."
"So I think that’s the key thing," he added. "The guy who got elected by 77 million Americans wants him in this role.”
Jordan and Musk's relationship reportedly evolved into a “mind meld,” as described by a former associate, soon after Musk purchased Twitter. McCarthy connected the two due to their shared concerns about perceived suppression of speech on social media. Jordan has long criticized “Big Tech” and its treatment of conservative voices, and Musk's acquisition of Twitter provided momentum to address these issues.
The momentum behind Jordan's pursuit of Musk's adversaries appears to be gaining traction, with plans discussed to collaborate with the State Department regarding entry restrictions for individuals and organizations known for suppressing speech.
In the meantime, Jordan expressed his readiness to support Musk's initiatives.
“What he's done on … stopping censorship,” Jordan stated, “has just been phenomenal.”
Mark B Thomas contributed to this report for TROIB News
